mfd101

Lovely photo of Farage & Junkers. Says it all about politics, integrity, morality ...

But of course these people were, by one means or another, voted for by The People to be the people they are.

I'ld be careful. Sounds like a bit of a lottery to me.

Persuading your pension people to enter the C21st could be useful ... It can be done, and mostly is in my experience in the case of the Australian equivalents. They even accept digital signatures these days. Heavens! what is the world coming to?

On the rare occasions when a letter comes (invariably airmail) from Oz, it generally takes about 2 months to arrive here in Surin ...

2 minutes ago, kannot said:

its  always been mad

True, but we wouldn't have been told about it 50 years ago, with or without the gruesome details.

20 hours ago, happy chappie said:

I can't see why she has to go to Australia.shes safe here and I don't know why ol big jokes laughing as it was him and his team that cocked it all up in the first place.

Haven't you just answered your own question?

2 hours ago, nontabury said:

In the run up to the people’s 2016 referendum, the Government sent a leaflet to every household, setting out the facts, and recommending that the electorate vote to remain in the E.u.

Unfortunately for the establishment in 2016, the people remembered how they had been lied to and deceived  in the run up to the 1975 referendum, when we were assured that we would be only joining a trading block.

They then took to social media, and filled their minds with as much information as possible, and consequently used this knowledge to vote to leave this so called union.

 This has lead to the impass we now have in our halls of government, with the people who we wrongly thought were are representatives, working against the people. But not to worry, come the next G.E many of them will be collecting their P45, courtesy of their electorate.

OK, I guess I'm used to the Oz constitutional referendum situation (which happens about once a decade or 2, and almost always fails because of the very high threshold for success - "a majority of votes in a majority of the States"). The way it works is that the Electoral Commission - not the politicians - puts out a brochure to all households with the facts, the pros & cons etc. And it's neutral on which way to vote - the pollies do that bit separately. Seems to work pretty well. The failures of constitutional change come from the 'smaller' States (WA, SA, Tas), always suspicious of change which they see as being imposed upon them by those horrible people in The East or on The Mainland ...

Under Oz law, that's the only thing that can be called a 'referendum'. Anything else is just a popular vote or plebiscite (eg the vote on gay marriage 18 months ago) and has political force but no force of law.

2 minutes ago, JAG said:

Whoa! 

 

The whole point of a democracy is that it is based on the universal franchise. That means that everyone has the vote, one person one vote. The only limitations should be age (18 in the UK), and possibly a few disbarred: in the UK prisoners serving a sentence after a conviction, members of the House of Lords and (I think) the insane. As soon as you introduce any subjective qualification, educational attainment. religious convictions, political views, race, income threshold, owning property, perceived intelligence, anything really, you no longer have a universal franchise, you no longer have a democracy.

 

 

To return to my first point, as soon as you start to rationalise that because someone disagrees with you they must be a fool, and too stupid to be entrusted with a vote (a not uncommon argument on this forum lately) you have ceased to practice democracy.

I wasn't suggesting ANY of that. This is the C21st not the C19th.

I was merely suggesting that political & other leaders have a moral (non-partisan) duty to ensure that, to the extent possible, every voter is well-informed of issues, consequences & related facts so that the voters can make (one hopes) rational decisions BEFORE they vote. Something that was apparently NOT the case in the Brexit referendum.

32 minutes ago, lvr181 said:

Well, I am not gay but my boyfriend is. I'll get him to vote.

 

TIC

Yes, I'm not gay, I'm homosexual and both my b/f (Thai) and I find men - of ANY description - dressed up as women both ridiculous and a complete turnoff.

2 minutes ago, Snow Leopard said:

In case you didn't know it. Democracy involves listening to the people who are going to vote for you.

 

Problems and issues have a way of sorting themselves out in the long run. 

I should have thought that any half-intelligently run democracy requires the voters to have a clear knowledge and understanding of current issues BEFORE they vote so that the collective outcome can be at least half rational ...

Headline is a classic example of clumsy English syntax.

Will it allow me to consider extension of stay on the ground of marriage (as opposed to my current retirement extensions)?

Oh dear, looks like Mum'nDad are going to continue to live in the same house even though they sleep in separate rooms. Meal times are a pain.

My b/f and I are off to VN in April. We've done my (Oz) visa thru the tour company we & some Oz friends are using. I just sent them a copy of my p/p & they do the rest. Travelling freely (without tour company) your approach looks right. Just follow the instructions on the internet - if I were you, I would prefer to follow the VN government site rather than the various agents' sites where you will pay a bit more for the privilege ...

Thai partner no sweat (ASEAN).

7 minutes ago, fforest1 said:

Wrong wrong......Just from 4 countries...

Time will tell.

1 hour ago, rossco1 said:

They are making it harder for people to move here 

do they not want foreigners to live in the country 

No, they just want to make sure that everyone who comes here to live longterm really does have enough income on a continuing basis to live comfortably.

2 hours ago, wonder6281 said:

I receive my Superannuation pension fortnightly. 

 

I make 26 transfers annually. 

 

Divided by 12 months gives me my average monthly income. 

 

If this fails to meet the new requirements then nothing will and I'm out of here. 

 

Some Common sense does reside here I hope. 

So why can't you organize yourself to do just 12 transfers a year? Is that so hard?

2 hours ago, zydeco said:

I hope you are correct. But how do we explain all this to someone at Chaeng Wattana who has no idea of Labor Day or how SS processes payments early for holidays?

Perhaps they just wanna see ze monee in ze bank every month, not on ze same day every month.

48 minutes ago, Justin Side said:

The UK State Pension is paid into my Thai bank every 28 days.

Not monthly.

One month a year there is 2 payments.

So? You'll be ahead of the game!

47 minutes ago, uwe_rayong said:

That is an important question. 
If I transfer money I use most times a provider like transferwise.com as it is cheaper, faster and the conversion rate is often also a little bit more.
The difference is, if I receive a direct deposit from the EU it is declared as a "foreign currency deposit", if the transfer is made by transferwise it looks like a domestic transfer.

So I doubt that immigration will accept the domestic transfers, as otherwise it would be pointless.

If they would accept a domestic transfer, I could just give a 3rd person the amount in Thailand to deposit it into my account..????

 

So the questionis :


Does the monthly transfer have to originate from outside of Thailand?

 

 

YES.

If you want to use TW for the transfers (as I do), use BKK Bank.

48 minutes ago, Poppin said:

Does anyone know for definite that the 400,000 and 800,000 is still available for long term visa.

it is just crazy to send your money monthly as it obviously incurs transfer costs and a poor exchange rate from your bank if you have to send the money in Thai Baht.

would greatly appreciate a definite answer or somewhere to get it

You DON'T have to send the money in baht. You send it in your home currency & the receiving bank changes it into baht. You just have to make sure that, with moving xrates, you send enough of your home currency to ensure change to 65K+ in Thailand.

17 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

The new change for Americans, Brits, Aussies and Danes relying on the monthly income method is...

 

Before, you had to claim the monthly income, but it didn't have to be imported into Thailand.

 

Now, it HAS to be imported into a Thai bank account apparently from a foreign source, and probably be done on an every month basis (pending how the forthcoming translations clarify that matter.)

 

That's a not insignificant change, particularly for those who don't need to spend 65K per month every month in Thailand, and/or prefer to keep their funds in higher earning investments in their home countries.

 

And that differs from what I said in what way? The basic fact is that all the previous options are still there PLUS a NEW option to meet the circumstances created by the 4 Embassies' change of policy.

2 minutes ago, wgdanson said:

My UK pension is paid WEEKLY.

So? My Australian federal superannuation is paid fortnightly. What's the problem?

From last month I now transfer 65K+ once every month via TW to BKKBk account. Otherwise continue my previous practice (because cheaper) of atm withdrawal with Citibank debit card.

Everyone's running around in circles like headless chooks. Stand back and look at the overall picture. Basically the same options are still there as before. And, in addition, is a new option for those like me lucky enough to have an honest bureaucracy running its embassies.