Jump to content

partington

Advanced Member
  • Posts

    2,195
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by partington

  1. 4 hours ago, Kenny202 said:

    I dunno if it's real or not. I tend to agree with others it is a form of brain washing by the perpetrator and the rest is done in the mind of the victim. I did have some experience myself, not so much in any consequences of such actions but a girl I lived with her for sometime left a little "care" package in my safe. Consisted of a little brass figurine of some sort of monster riding a penis...a few either tarot or temple cards....a gnarled old tooth and strands of hair weaved into a small donut shape. Must have been there for at least 2 years after she left, I never noticed it. The girl in question was a total lunatic. train wreck of a life but heard her tell peoples fortunes on several occasions and she was eerily correct. She was always talking about other women doing black magic with me after we split. Was a huge thing for her, something she talked about often. Like I said I am not sure it brough me any bad luck etc, not that I have had a great deal of that since coming to live in Thailand. Took photos of the items and promptly threw the lot in the bin. My girl showed some of her relatives the photos and they reeled back in horror.....said I should have taken the stuff to the temple and had it properly destroyed by the monks. 

    1602634033760.jpg

    This is a simple variation of a Chinese Zodiac charm available  on market stalls in Hong Kong and elsewhere (even Etsy) and F all to do with "black magic"!!

     

     

    Screenshot 2022-08-25 at 12.54.57 pm.png

  2. 27 minutes ago, Seppius said:

    What really constitutes "living" here. You are given in most cases 90 days' permission to stay.

     

    How long would you need to be here before the UK Gov decides? you could just be taking a year's break . UK home address and pension into UK bank important I would think, 10% rise coming next April

    This is not a matter of any doubt at all, and a question that no-one needs to ask since the UK government has published a step by step flow diagram of the residence test rules which enable everyone to work out whether the UK government consider them resident or not.

     

    The test is clear (though not simple) and it does not concern itself at all with whether any other country considers you tax resident. Here it is, just do it and you will know:

     https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/rdr3-statutory-residence-test-srt/guidance-note-for-statutory-residence-test-srt-rdr3

    • Thanks 1
  3. 34 minutes ago, samtam said:

     

    Appreciate your advice. So, here's breakdown:

     

    681381445_Screenshot(595).png.5fdc9beda0b16cc7ae0fbf6a7b03fad4.png

    1691942577_Screenshot(596).png.204fc4499adc080eb6d312d3daeef042.png

     

    ...and accordingly, I should pay and additional GBP2,444.00

    (GBP795.60 + 824.20 + 824.20)?

    Should I get confirmation from NI DWP?

    You do need to pay 4 years if you have not yet paid anything for tax year 2021-2022.

     

    It would be worth clicking on the "details" section for years 2015-2016 (? maybe won't count to increase pension), 2016-2017, 2017-2018  (earlier years won't count) to see if it says you can make up the shortfall  by paying any of these years, as it is just possible they may be cheaper, so it might be worth choosing these years to pay instead of the later ones .

     

    I would definitely get confirmation from DWP on what you plan to do, in case I am wrong!

    Added in edit: specifically I may be wrong about paying for the year 2015 to 2016 - this may not actually increase your pension.

     

    As far as I can see paying for these 4 years at ~£3270 will earn you about £1100 extra each year you are paid a pension, so it will only be 3 years into your pension before you break even and everything after is pure profit.

    • Like 2
  4. 30 minutes ago, samtam said:

    OK, got it. I will find out how many years I need to pay.

    Just confused why  contributions jump from 30 years to 35 years to 40 years.

     

    Firstly pay a lot of attention to chickenlegs posts, as you can end up paying for years that will not increase your pension at all even though they are unpaid years.

    Usually these are any years before 2015.

     

    Why it changed for you from 30 to 35 to 40 is roughly this:

     

    Before 2015 the maximum number of years you needed to contribute for a full pension was 30. I was paying mine (voluntary contributions) by direct debit. When it got to 30 years  [in about 2012] they said you have enough, and stopped taking my direct debit.

     

    BUT in 2015 they changed the number of years needed for a full pension to 35. So now to get a full pension I had to pay 5  more years - I fell into the transition period group. [Anyone starting work after 2015 just has to pay 35 years, but people in the transition group can pay more years than 35  if necessary to get the full pension.]

     

    However the new pension rules for transition people meant that they started from a "basic starting amount" earned by 30 years' contributions, which could then be added to by paying more years.

     

    if you had already paid the full 30 years' contributions before 2015  [that would have entitled you to a full pension before 2015], then even if you had unpaid years before 2015, paying  for them would not add anything, because you had already reached your basic starting amount.

     

    Instead you have to pay years after that to reach the full pension. Each extra year you pay for adds about £4.50 per week to your pension. For transition people sometimes getting to the maximum current  pension amount requires more than 5 years, given that 5 years only adds £22.50 (figures very rough can't remember exactly) to your weekly amount. Therefore transition people, but no-one else, are allowed to pay more than 35 years NICS if it brings them to the maximum current amount, so that they don't lose out if 5 years isn't enough to reach that amount.

     

     

    • Like 1
  5. I do not believe this.

     

    I find it impossible to believe any intramuscular injection is undetectable by any normal human.  Only if they are so drunk already that they are semi-conscious could this even be conceivable.

     

    I think this is a popular urban myth and drugging is 99%-100% oral, by drink spiking. However once these myths get into the news and social media they are adopted as likely explanations for any unusual experiences and become a positive feedback loop.

     

    Or you might have received a Covid vaccination unawares while sitting at a bar...

     

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/its-catching/202202/the-british-needle-spiking-panic

    Psychology Today:

    KEY POINTS

    • Claims of syringe attacks on British women may be an urban myth.
    • Despite over 1300 'attacks' in the past 6 months, there is yet to be a single confirmed case or conviction.
    • To inject someone with a needle at a nightclub while out with friends - and without anyone realizing -defies credulity.

     

     

    • Like 1
  6. On 7/5/2022 at 1:23 AM, Everyman said:

    Unless you are moving huge amounts of money, they’re not going to care. They’ll just be drowning themselves in data. 

    This statement is completely baseless!

     

    The CRS allows countries in which you have tax residence to find income that you may be trying to hide by stashing it abroad.

     

    For retired expats the major point of the CRS is so the country you are FROM can tax you, if you still have tax residence there as well. The US is the only developed country that taxes on the basis of citizenship rather than residence - all others do not tax non-residents on money they earn outside the country.

     

    Thus someone with a tax residence in the UK who, say, lives in Thailand  six months of the year and earns money there could hide it from the UK tax authorities by stashing it in a Thai bank and not declare it on their tax return. The CRS will take this evasion option away.  

     

    As Thailand do not, for example, currently tax money earned abroad but not brought into the country in the year it was earned (let's call these savings), the mere information from the UK via CRS that you earn a UK pension will not suddenly render you eligible for taxation of that pension unless they can prove the money you bring in is the current year's money.

     

    This is so difficult to do and easy to avoid it would be unlikely to be implemented in my opinion.

    • Like 1
    • Love It 1
  7. 1 hour ago, Gaccha said:

    This drug appears to almost solve that. It converts the alcohol before it is converted into acetic acid by the liver, avoiding most of the damage to the body. 

     

    Of course, this won't prevent drunks from being complete pratts. 

    The metabolic product of ethanol that causes most of the damage within the body is actually acetaldehyde rather than acetic acid.

     

    That aside, this 'drug' is actually a preparation of bacteria which the  subjects took for an entire week before drinking.   This introduces a population of bacteria into the gut that can metabolise some of the alcohol into carbon dioxide and water before it is absorbed into the body.

     

    However the subjects in the study were only given 0.3 g alcohol per kg body weight, which is a tiny amount, equivalent to a 75kg man drinking a single pint of lager. Blood alcohol concentrations were therefore tiny even to start with, and dropped about 50-70%  in those pre-treated for one week with the bacteria.

     

    To me this looks unlikely to have any effect on a major binge drinking session. If these bacteria can only metabolise about half the alcohol in a pint of beer they are unlikely to have any significant effect at all on someone who drinks enough to get a hangover. In effect they convert drinking say six pints of beer into drinking five and a half pints.  This could be three pints if the bacteria are able to sustain the same rate of conversion however fast you drink -but this does not appear to have been demonstrated in the publication.

     

    Further studies necessary I think...

     

    Ref to paper: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35769391/

    • Like 1
  8. On 6/4/2022 at 2:18 AM, placeholder said:

    A Ukrainian investigative team called Proekt found a very ingenious way to look into the credibility of these rumors. Because the couldn't access intelligence reports, instead they started tracking doctors because hospital records are public. They found that teams of doctors specializing in cancer would be periodically called away and would show up in whatever locale Putin happened to be.

    Anyway, the information is offered in great detail. Just follow the link:

    https://www.proekt.media/en/investigation-en/putin-health/

    I dunno- the whole thing seems dumb and untrustworthy with stupid graphics, curlicued fonts, childish layout and pictures...not like responsible journalism at all. It's hard to check the actual truth of most of the claims made here independently.

     

    Ukrainians have a vested interest in believing Putin will die soon, and I hope he does, but this does not convince me.

  9. Just to point out "tax residency" in any country is not determined by whether you owe any tax or have any income in that country, but by a set of more or less simple regulations mostly determined by the amount of time you spend in that country in a year. It defines whether you are considered resident.

     

    Whether you owe tax or not is completely irrelevant to determining tax residency!

     

    Moreover your tax residency in one country, say country X, is not affected in the slightest by whether you are considered a tax resident of country Y. The laws of country Y don't apply in country X and vice versa, so country Y's views cannot determine country X's views.

     

    You can be tax resident in two or more countries and you cannot argue that because country Y considers you a tax resident, that proves you are not a tax resident in country X.  If you meet the legal definition of tax residence in country X then you are a tax resident of country X as well.

    • Like 1
  10. You are using the wrong terms. The "validity" of a visa refers to the period during which you are allowed to use it to enter the country. This is a separate issue from the permission to stay period which is attached to the visa entry.

     

    So:  an OA visa obtained on, say,  1st November 2021 is valid for 1 year, that is, it can be used to enter the country on any day between 1st November 2021 and 1st November 2022.

     

    Each time you enter the country between those two dates you are given a one year permission to stay. So if you enter on 1st November  2022 you are given permission to stay until November 1st 2023.

     

    The only reason you would need a re-entry permit  is if you leave the country again after 1st November 2022. This is because, although you have been given permission to stay until 1st November 2023, your visa (permission to enter the country) is invalid any time after 1st November 2022.

     

    So to be allowed to re-enter the country any time after 1st November 2022 with that one year permission to stay until 1st November 2023 you have been given kept intact, you need a permission to enter the country that replaces the visa. This is called a "re-entry permit", and allows you to enter and stay until 1st November 2023.

     

    You need insurance for the whole period of your stay as far as I am aware.

    • Thanks 1
×
×
  • Create New...