Christie Paul

If they have already made enough money to retire. Part of that planning process should have been legal status and if their chosen destination is Thailand, that equation should include the cost of the Thai Visa Elite Card.

I had been planning for the past 7 years to 'retire' here and waited until I was 50 and planned for my partner to have the TVE card.

Why I would avoid the Elite card : Thai immigration have a habit of changing the rules and regulations on a continuous basis , The elite card is a lot of money to invest in a Visa that could change at any time , without notice

That's a straw man argument. What you're really saying is that you don't want to spend the money. Fair enough.

The fact that they do change the (enforcement of the) rules regularly is a great reason to enroll in the program. I'd bet dollars to donuts that any existing members will either be grandfathered in, or their enrollment fee will be refunded if they ever do, in fact, cancel the program. They aren't going to hose their "preferred" guests- the ones that have demonstrated spending power.

Long stay backpackers and shoestringers to whom they have made no promises- sure. Thailand owes them nothing, and their ability to enter and leave the country -and under what terms- is subject to the whims of the current government in power at the time. But not the high rollers who have had promises made. Because after they've been hosed once, there's no taking another bite... And those are the guys they want to keep as guests.

You are attempting to use morality and logic to predict how a government will act. Yet, these two attributes have no bearing on policy.

This should be watched carefully.

Government debt is imploding all over the world.

Long term paper is being dumped for short term.

Governments never pay - they just roll the debt, but as the economy turns down their income will fall.

So they'll increase taxes and the economy will turn down even further.

If you want promote and legitimise something, ban it.

The degree to which the legitimacy of leadership will be tested, will be linear to the degree the economy turns down.

If the economy is growing and people are prospering, most people would't care if the place is being run by toothless lady boys.

But when the economy turns down - the legitimacy of a God won't be enough to keep the peace.

The problem is that regardless of how much planning, propaganda, force, coercion, seduction and appeals to reason are made; the people in the final analysis are only interested in one thing - economic progress.

And as the authorities miss opportunities, bludgeon organic growth, mangle and mismanage the economy, they will confront an increasingly restive population. This leads to a natural dilemma for the focus of leadership.

Which is better, to be loved or to be feared?

I love the way that the junta lovers cry that "they were not in power, as they dissolved parliament" which ironically was what many were calling for, including all those on here who continue to say that they were not kicked out of power because they had already dissolved parliament as they were demanded to!!!

I am sure someone with more energy than me, could go back on people like Bill767 etc and find many a post calling for them to dissolve parliament!

In most western democracies, a government that passed a bill so blatantly self-serving and corrupt that it was rejected unanimously by the Senate and caused huge public protest, would have resigned out of shame. Yingluk and company dont understand the concept.

"In most western democracies, a government that passed a bill so blatantly self-serving and corrupt that it was rejected unanimously by the Senate and caused huge public protest, would have resigned out of shame." Since you know this, please supply TV with the instances that you know of. Otherwise, what to think, what to think of your opinions.?

There are no "Western" democracies", although Switzerland might come close. The US, UK, EU and the rest are violent oligarchies with a thin veneer of respectability that fools no one, who has the most rudimentary comprehension of history, or for that matter current reality.

An arsonist who burns your house down, is still and arsonist when he makes a pathetic attempt to extinguish the blaze.

When there is no vision, no plan and no strategy for the future, which engenders natural support, rulers resort to blind loyalty, to stay in power.

Everyone know where this is going. Increased oppression, brutality, crackdowns, propaganda and nepotism.

Capital, talent and entrepreneurship are packing their bags.

Whilst not having any sympathy for for the Thaksin brigade of thieves, exposing one's brutal, autocratic and determined hand beyond all reasonable civil norms will leave a bitter aftertaste in the mouths of even those not supportive of Yingluck.

The message is that this government will get whatever they want. And given that they are not very smart, competent or progressive is not very encouraging.

If you are an ambitious young entrepreneur with skills and can make a contribution to the economy - this is not the place for you.

From top to bottom, the system will work against you.

He's so far in the bubble that he thinks he can appeal to the elites in western countries, not knowing that they find military dictatorships noxious. It also could be he genuinely believes what he is doing, I think not, but it is a possibility.

I don't disagree with the bubble bit.

But "Western" elites do not find military dictatorships noxious. They love them. They lay awake at night, their hearts pounding at the thought of somehow becoming a dictator. Just the passing thought of dictatorial power is like a mega dose of Viagra.

Both macro and micro capital is attracted to pragmatic leadership, in which economic progress is a priority. It doesn't care much about politics, human rights or what name is given to the system of government. It has no particular loyalty and it is generally on the verge paranoia.

A dull autocratic leadership, that has no economic plan scares prospective capital away. If and when this is combined with blatant mismanagement of core income streams, indigenous capital starts unwinding and packing its bags.

They'll blame the "shorts" for betting against the economy, but they aren't the real culprit. It will be the "longs", that have quietly left the market place and moved assets out of harms way.

In all likelihood, Viet Nam, Cambodia, Philippines, Laos and to a lesser degree Indonesia will move ahead of Thailand in virtually every economic metric.

Interesting how "capital outflows" gets only a light mention, yet its effects can be way more devastating than trade etc.

Foreign capital is already avoiding the place and smart money here is discretely packing its bags.

I think it was Milton Friedman who said:

"If you give a government a desert, within two weeks there will be a shortage of sand".

Sometimes the only hope is that somehow their incompetence will result in their inability to implement plans to destroy the economy.

A fairly relaxed border policy has resulted in enormous accumulative investment, trade and stimulus to the economy.

Why anyone would want to interfere with a policy that results in so much employment, trade and inbound investment stuns the intellect.

Perhaps the only reason for it, is that officials are quite unaware of what they are actually tampering with and its diverse and cascading affects on the economy.

At a time when the global economy is shrinking and competition is heating up, we are seeing what would seem to be an endless parade of policies that are hell bent on discouraging economic activity.

off topic little bit , but i wanted add this to your post ... just to agree what you wrote....

http://www.siam-legal.com/thailand-law/restricting-foreign-ownership-amendments-to-the-fba/

Interesting.

I subscribe to a number of international investment newsletters, that keep excellent tabs on opportunities and warn of risks.

Not so long ago, Thailand was considered to have some real potential. These days its just one discouragement after another and way better options elsewhere.

Unless some sound economic bias is cultivated and displaces what can only be described as self defeating, politically based manoeuvring, we are looking at a generation of economic decline and unnecessary misery.

A fairly relaxed border policy has resulted in enormous accumulative investment, trade and stimulus to the economy.

Why anyone would want to interfere with a policy that results in so much employment, trade and inbound investment stuns the intellect.

Perhaps the only reason for it, is that officials are quite unaware of what they are actually tampering with and its diverse and cascading affects on the economy.

At a time when the global economy is shrinking and competition is heating up, we are seeing what would seem to be an endless parade of policies that are hell bent on discouraging economic activity.

To draw attention to such a matter is beneath the dignity of a PM.

But then to rail against outsiders and hoist up the tattered flag of nationalism is entirely out of place.

The PM is in need of a skilled PR department, who should counsel and advise, so that he does not come across as a thin skinned immature autocrat.

Those usually dead eyes of George Soros must be flickering - as more brilliant schemes to slow down the economy are hatched almost on a daily basis.

Maybe it will be time soon, to short the Baht again and pick up some lovely assets for pennies on the dollar.

The punishment and cure for economic incompetence awaits.

Just a few more crackdowns...

Not being productive or having any experience in running a business, most governments and bureaucrats never realise how things actually work. They can only think in linear terms and cannot comprehend the exponential and diverse cause and effects, which arise from their policies.

Close down full moon parties to stop drug use:

Great, tens of thousands of backpackers go elsewhere. Budget accommodations businesses close, unemployment increases, retail shrinks, demand for transportation is reduced. A problem that could have been solved with a few million baht on policing, just cost the economy hundreds of millions, with future projections into the billions.

Crackdown on visa runners, because of concerns around people working illegally:

Very good, rental values sag, downward pressure on real estate and the accommodation business, retail takings reduced and slowdown in money velocity. More unemployment.

When you consider what these border runners are allegedly "stealing" against the overall inbound investment and economic activity which arises, from a more or less open border policy, it's another case of blowing tens of billions of revenue, to solve a problem that when one examines it in economic terms, is barely a problem at all.

Another little boost to the economy...

...of Cambodia.

Mamma noodles, cheap alcohol and cheap women ?

Real estate is booming, retail is flourishing, no capital controls, easy visas, easy USD bank accounts, easy company set ups, spectacular internet infrastructure and yes, very cheap (French) booze.

Another little boost to the economy...

...of Cambodia.

The pictures are very similar.

Except for the eyes, ears, width of face and shape of mouth.

The founding fathers of the United States condemned democracy in numerous letters and articles. They hated it and believed that its implementation would lead to oligarchy. They stood for the "republic", sharing the opinion of Plato. Nevertheless, democracy had its start in the Greek city states and that didn't end well - unless you think imploding and burning to the ground is a good thing.

I'm surprised at how few Westerners understand what a republic is and what a democracy is. Common opinion would it seem, reflect the triumph of propaganda, in which an idea that clearly yielded the very best of results in terms of economic progress, justice and egalitarianism has somehow been jettisoned and replaced with an idea, which has produced nothing but misery, endless war and horrendous injustice, yet is held as something of great merit, something worth attaining.

I would guess that most posters have the very best of intentions for both the West and Thailand - but the ferocity of their arguments are somewhat disconnected to reality, which leads us to an inevitable truth, of the road to hell being paved with good intentions.

I hope that de Maistre was wrong when he said " Every nation gets the government it deserves", because if that's the case we are all a little screwed.

Reading this thread reminds me of a joke between a psychiatrist and his patient.

Dr : So you claim your brother thinks he's a chicken ?

Patient: Yes.

Dr : So have you attempted to point out to him, that this is not the case ?

Patient : No.

Dr : Why not ?

Patient : I would, but we need the eggs.

Q. ) So the people of the West voted for continuous war, ever increasing taxation, the evisceration of individual rights, spectacular corruption in high places and everything being owned and controlled by a dozen corporations.

A. ) Yes, that's democracy.

Q. ) Then what's the difference between democracy and oligarchy?

A. ) Shut up.