Oye at Home

2 minutes ago, ubonjoe said:

They should do one but I am not sure. 

You could make an appointment to get the re-entry permit at CW. Reports of it only taking a few minutes that way.

See: https://extranet.immigration.go.th/qrepsonline/online/queue/REPSAction.do?cmd=term

Thanks for this.  My first plan is to try to get it done at CW Immigration, if there's time to do both the extension application and the re-entry permit in one day. 

But if the Immigration Officer doesn't finish until too late to get the re-entry permit (as happened last year), I'll ask what they think about getting it done at the airport.

Will Immigration at the airport grant re-entry permits during the 30 day waiting period before an annual visa extension is approved?

My apologies for asking if this has already been covered or is obvious. I've always applied for re-entry permits at Immigration, not the airport. But this time I have to travel during the 30 day waiting period before my visa extension is approved.  Given the current all day waits at CW Immigration to apply for annual visa extensions, I don't want to go back a second day just to get a re-entry permit if it can be avoided

17 hours ago, ubonjoe said:

That will not be accepted by immigration.

Immigration requires it to be in a savings or fixed deposit account that allows the funds to be withdrawn without delay or any penalty other than loss of interest. 

Thanks ubonjoe, that's what I suspected.

Can funds held in a Thai Retirement Mutual Fund be used as the "bank deposit" for a retirement visa/visa extension? 

Is this announcement of criminal charges against individual "IFAs" a first? Are criminal charges against other "IFAs" to follow?

Bangkok, July 6, 2015 – The SEC filed a criminal complaint with the Economic Crime Division of the Royal Thai Police (ECD Police) against (1) Professional Portfolio International Ltd. (PPI), (2) Eric Jordan or Eric Jack Jordan as PPI director and personal capacity and (3) Gary Bradford for jointly operating securities business without license....

....The said actions were subject to an imprisonment from 2-5 years or a fine from 200,000-500,000 baht or both and a further fine not exceeding 10,000 baht for every day during which the violation continues. The SEC therefore filed a criminal complaint with the ECD Police in this matter for further proceedings. At this regard, any person suffering damage from investment with such company or persons should contact the ECD Police at 0-2237-1199 for the benefit of litigation....

Vasant Thienhom, SEC Deputy Secretary-General said, “At present, scammers use a variety of technics to lure investing public; for instance, offering unreasonably high returns and principal guarantee, quoting foreign currency as reference with fixed exchange rate, falsely claiming as foreign companies’ business alliances and being overseas investment needed no permission from the SEC. There were lots of victim falling into such pitfalls these days. The SEC has issued investor alerts in this matter and further placed emphasis the need for the public to exercise caution. As such, if being soliciting to invest in securities or derivatives such as shares, gold or crude oil, you can check credibility of such claim by visiting the SEC website (www.sec.or.th) under “License Check” banner. In addition, any persons who come across suspicious unlicensed activities persons can report the matter to the SEC at 1207 for further investigation.”

http://www.sec.or.th/en/Pages/News/Detail_News.aspx?tg=NEWS&lg=en&news_no=86&news_yy=2015

Hi LaReina,

It depends on the night you go to La Rueda. It is packed with Bangkok's "salseros" on Thursdays and Saturdays. On Fridays many people go to Fogo Vivo. On Wednesdays and Sundays I think people go to Noreigas, but haven't been there myself.

Oye

Well, shaving ones head bald is always an option

Heh heh! Demi Moore and Sinead O'Connor I am not...

http://www.moviegoods.com/movie_product.as...&MGAID=6QJA1296

"Anyway, I'm with HarryHerb on this one, makeup, hair and relationship topics are much easier to deal with, and usually solvable problems, as opposed to this one "

Ah SBK, you've never seen my hair!

Okay, I posted something on the General site. Never particularly liked Mr. Thaksin, but I do respect that politicians as a group can be less than savory. Still, I have had a lot of respect for certain ones, including former PMs Prem, Anand, and Chuan. Sadly, I think PM Thaksin has really blown an opportunity--so much wealth, he could have done a lot of good. If he must still enjoy status, why not set up a "Thaksin Foundation," a la Bill Gates? Even if the only purpose is to stroke his ego and keep his kids employed, it could do a lot of good. Special project: Thai education.

From what I can tell, it's not Thaksin's recent activities that were illegal (i.e. children selling company through SET and not having to pay tax). All that is fine legally--at least technically. The illegalities involve having undeclared assets, undeclared transfer of assets, and violations of SEC regulations of neglecting to make tender offers following nondeclared transfer of assets. Some of these activities Thaksin was actually found guilty of in 2000, but the court decision was later overturned following his first landslide political win.

One area I haven't seen widely discussed is how did all that wealth get offshore, and when? I really don't buy the excuse that Ample Rich was necessary for a NASDAQ listing. The rumours in the capital markets at the time was that Thaksin moved his money just prior to the baht's flotation, and was one of several politicians who may have been the "straw that broke the camel's back." You need special Bank of Thailand permission to move sizeable sums offshore, and good reason to do so. If Thaksin benefited from his timing while helping to bankrupt the country (i.e., moved money offshore at Bt25/US$ exchange rate, baht floats, country goes through major financial turmoil, now he brings it back onshore tax free at an exchange rate of Bt40/US$--hmmmm..... of course, Thaksin was able to blame it all the country's economic troubles on the Democrats, and the IMF....

I do wonder why some of said Democrats aren't going after that angle. Maybe they too have skeletons in the closet?

Oh you just want to have more fun. Sorry I misunderstood! Thought you were trying to avoid committing infidelity, physical abuse, and a drinking problem. No doubt you and your maid will have lots of fun!

If all families had a maid that also was 'tossing the guys sallad' reguarly every morning/night, would there be more or less infidality? More or less physical abuse? More or less men with drinking-problems?

I can imagine it now, getting up, having a shower, getting my breakfast server; juice, sandwich, fried egg, and a stroke of the salami, then start with the days job in a relaxed mood.

Well, TAWP, you can solve all of your problems with a little DIY. What's the need for a maid?

It's slightly off topic to this debate anyway, but i often hear women remark on the fact that the male reaction to their partners infidelity often seems to be even more pronounced, in general, than feales'. There is a biological explanation for it, which is somewhat more compelling than the 'men are more immature, selfish, and prone to double standards' line of reasoning that i have observed on other threads in this sub forum. Just like there are biological explanations for individuals polygynous urges.

Which brings us to the point of the topic, 'what constitutes cheating?'. By definition, if you have a contract or agreement with another individual and then renege on your word, you are cheating that individual. The problem arises when some individuals are forced to make promises that run contrary to their nature. Can you expect to hold such an individual to their word? I can well believe that it must be an unsettling situation for some, and the whole situation is not always as simple as someone making a conscious decision that from now on they will abide by a certain code of conduct regardless of circumstances.

If the reaction to a partner's dishonesty differs from person to person, it may be because the trade-off is different. An example: In general, more women then men tend to depend financially on their partner's income. Therefore, the consequences of reacting violently or kicking the man out could be more severe in these cases. The woman may be willing to trade having an honest relationship for financial security....

People aren't forced to do anything--they make CHOICES. They can choose not to agree to an exclusive relationship. They can choose to agree to one, and then later change their mind. When they change their mind, they can tell their partner, or they can lie. What tends to work in a relationship between two people who care for each other: Honesty. What tends to work in a relathipship between two people who care for each other, AND are physically attracted to each other: Honesty and Exclusivity. Sure, you can try Honesty, and Nonexclusivity--but the odds of this working in a relationship that includes mutual phyical attraction aren't good.

What's the difference between fantasizing about someone else, and acting on the fantasy? The former involves just one person, the fantasizer. The latter involves two people, the fantasizer, and someone else. That makes all the difference! Although I would also add, that fantasizing about someone you don't know is a better bet. When you fantasize about someone you know, you run the risk of confusing your fantasy with reality. That can cause a lot of problems.

That's about it for me on this one, too!

As for women cheating on their men, what's their excuse ? I could turn a blind eye on some occasions if the age difference was an issue or giving some leeway to a relationship about to explode because it being too exclusive. Would those women be as much "immature" as the men because of their little lies and "occasional" deception ? or are they just being cute because they are women "occasionally" chasing men ? I am sure your response will be different. I think you are biased in this regard as you see "most" men being potential "cheaters" because of their physical needs and natural "dishonnesty", while you would see women are just "exploring" their internal sensuality through different sexual partners. I hope I am wrong. So how woud you rate them ? How women who cheat on their men should be rated ? maybe it's a better question to find out what is the real meaning of cheating.

Dishonesty is dishonesty, and there's no excuse, whether your a man or a woman. A liar's a liar--what's "cute" about that? You want to "explore your internal sensuality" than don't pretend to be in a committed relationship.

That's where the elevated responsiveness to vasopressin and elevated levels of testosterone in males, come into the picture once again. These are associated with an increase in posessiveness and territorial behaviour. That's why it is not rare for males to become agressive and violent when faced with such transgressions, and not rare for people to end up getting killed.

The male and female sexual drive is not the same, the biochemistry involved and subsequent experience are different. When a woman uses her emotional experience of her sexual drive as a reference point when considering male sexual behaviour she is doomed to misunderstanding.

"hel_l hath no fury..." so the saying goes. Aggressive and violent? Sadly, I've seen it here on more than a few occasions, and two where a fair amount of blood was drawn--in these cases, the man's blood. Although I'm sure either man or woman is capable of being aggressive and violent--what they do will depend on whether they think they can handle the consequences....

Women are just as able to separate love and sex as men are. We just prefer not to, given a choice. Some men seem unable to combine the 2 effectively, or at least it takes some learning for them to, while for women it comes quite naturally.

Sadly I don't believe combining love and sex comes quite naturally to women as a group. IF indeed women have a tendency to combine the two more then men, I think it's a learned response. How and why this came to be is an interesting study indeed!

But regardless of how they choose to conduct themselves, neither sex wants their attractive & loved partner to sleep around...

From dialogues that i have engaged in i have to say that i, and most of my male friends, find it easy to separate love and sex. Basically (even if some of them are not consciously aware), this is because the two are not one and the same, but rather it is generally regarded that the two are different emotion-motivation systems which sometimes interact to produce one of the most pleasurable emotional experiences available to us.

Yes, of course it's easy for men to separate love and sex, when they are referring to themselves. (Actually, women can do the same thing, as long as they truly don't think they'll be any consequences).

But as a man, would you go for this: You have a committed relationship with a woman you both really care about, and are really attracted too. She has an ex-boyfriend she no longer loves, but still find very hot. The ex-boyfriend comes over, and you "wink and smile" (as someone so eloquently put on another post) and leave her to it with the boyfriend, while you go shopping? A lot of men want to say, sure, no problem, I can separate love and sex--but in practice--this doesn't work out too well!

I commenting on loosing face generally in Asia a subtlety I have noticed particularly in China and Korea is that if you were found doing something wrong you lost more face not for what you did wrong ,but for being stupid or incompetant enough to get caught ,ie you were not able to save your face . The actual deed or thing you did wrong would be the primary judgement in the west followed by being caught .

Any body else a similar observation

Yes, I have to say the case of Korean biomedical scientist Hwang Woo-Suk would seem to be an example of what you've noted.

From what I've witnessed, desiring respect from others is a basic human motivator. Asians call this motivator "face." What constitutes a loss of respect (or face), may differ, depending on the person's culture or upbringing. But definitely, all humans--yes, westerners included--desire respect.

Whaddaya need an excuse for?

They KNOW what you're doing. You know the consequences of your actions, and they're not that bad (or you wouldn't do it.) Enjoy yourself-- Have a great time!

"I do make salary three times as much her salary, but in no way is she financially dependent on me. "

I do apologize! I thought you had stated that you were the "breadwinner?" Just what DO you mean by "breadwinner," then?

"You can say all you like about control factors and the like, but who are you to judge what love means to us or anyone else in Thailand...I'm no slave trader and in no way forced her to be/stay with me. She knew my past/character before she got involved and chose/chooses to look past that. "

Again, I apologize! And I'm sure she'll still be there if you stop being the breadwinner, and while continuing to sleep around...because.... she really cares about you? Well, whatever it is she's getting from you, if the trade-off works for the two of you, be my guest!

"This is Thailand, not your happy Farang land in a box..where one life is expected despite the dynamic human nature of the heart. "

No, it is not happy Farang land in a box, where-ever THAT may be. But it's not about being in Thailand, or about the human heart being dynamic. It's about consequences. There are none for your sleeping around, or at least none that you can't deal with. There are consequences if she sleeps around that she cannot deal with. Therefore, you sleep around, she doesn't. It's that simple!

And believe me, women are just as tempted as men. Those who do not sleep around, don't because of the consequences (and it may be a different set in each case). And women who are physically attracted to the men they care about really DO care if they sleep around.

Greenwanderer108,

"However, if our roles were truly reveresed, and she in fact was the bread winner, made vital/final decisions in our living, was head of the household, proved herself to be a responsible adult who was able to fend for herself without dying of solitude, and was in a position to take responsibility for her actions---good or bad

then yes I would obliged to accept her 'adult' decision to do as she pleases"

LOVE IT! I.e., I guess there are no consequences to your behavior as long as you have economic control--but there are consequences to her behavior--ie, you'll kick her out if she cheats--consequences she cannot live with, so she doesn't cheat. But if she doesn't care if she gets kicked out (i.e., she can pay her own way) you'll let her stay, even if she cheats.

Neither of you actually cares about the other--You're in it for the control, and she's in it for the money. AN ABSOLUTELY CLASSIC TRADE-OFF, and so clearly stated!