Bday Prang

Only the stupid people are affected, everybody else is perfectly capable of making their own alternative arrangements,

and a "ladies drink" at that

is there any other reason ? those who claim to do it for the taste are fooling nobody

Yet it seems to be the sad home alone drinkers who moan the loudest about this, every single time

duh ! you can drink it but not buy it or sell it . not difficult

Somewhat off topic but has anybody else noticed the huge reduction in crazy, methed up, psychopathic, minibus drivers nowadays . I think it reached its maniacal peak a few years before covid , Tailgating and undertaking was taken to a whole new level ,and I guess visa runs made up a large percentage of the offenders but not so much of it about anymore What happened ?

Well as I said before, a link to the law is one thing and will no doubt exist somewhere , but a link to an official announcement as to how the law might be applied , especially regarding repeated entries , along with any unofficial guidelines about limits is unlikely to ever surface it will remain "up to them"

Well I live about 10 minutes from a relatively quiet land border crossing 15 minutes in and out would be about normal and that would get me 60 days, I also live about 5 minutes from one of two local immigration offices which is also never busy so a 30 day extension is no problem at all, then back again to get 60 more days to visit the Mrs 150 days would be possible with careful timing, and around 2 -3 hours spent every 5 months would not be particularly onerous as far as I am concerned. Along with no money in the bank to worry about either, or indeed any 90 day reports or home visits, consideration periods, mountains of paperwork with endless signatures , etc etc To be honest it sounds a bit too good to be true so it probably is It might be troublesome for those who need a residence certificate for any reason or for those who crave a pink id card and yellow book, I really don't know People will complain about anything on this forum but I am always amazed that many people don't consider things like the location of the nearest immigration office or border crossing when planning where to live, especially considering the monumental impact it seems to have on some peoples lives. To be honest I didn't give the matter any thought either, I just dropped lucky

That requirement for online visa applications is a real pain, having to show a return flight within 60 or even 90 days even when extensions are available and one intends staying longer invariably involves changing flights which can be quite costly I try to mitigate such costs by purchasing a std outbound ticket and a flexible return ticket , but some / most airlines will happily sell you the more expensive flexible ticket , but a check of the terms and conditions will often reveal a well hidden clause that the restrictions attached to the most restrictive ticket will apply to the entire booking Qatar and Emirates passengers take note ! Last time I checked Etihad were the only airline not operating the scam I've never been asked by an airline to show proof of a visa or an onward flight but i was once asked if I had visa no need to show it

Well despite what the woke brigade would have us believe, most people have a natural inbuilt distrust of foreigners, in fact as a child we were told not to trust people who were even just strangers, let alone foreigners , in fact anybody that we didn't know. Sound advice that most normal people would agree with, and something that tends to stick in the mind, to this day I tend not to trust people I don't know, I wonder if in these enlightened times, parents are still legally allowed to issue such a simple, born out of common sense piece of advice to their children ? Or do they have to include some sort of inclusivity clause to avoid being accused of some currently trending phobia? Anyway regardless of what immigration were told about foreigners as kids , its their job to distrust them, although I see no need for them to be unpleasant about it , does it really matter whether they are smiling or frowning as they stamp you in or indeed deny you entry? Their facial expression is irrelevant at the end of the day To be honest it must be an awful job , not much different to a checkout girl at a supermarket, but with a higher percentage of idiot customers,many of whom are impolite, often the worse for wear, cannot even form an orderly clue, or prepare there documents before approaching the counter, I'm not surprised some of them are miserable, in fact it's a mystery how most manage to maintain their composure I bet the end of the shift can't come soon enough

What are you talking about ? There was no "snide remark" I was simply emphasising how unlikely I think it will be that back to back visa exempt entries will be tolerated as a way to live here permanently, married or not, to somebody who seemed to have already decided it was a viable option Contrary to what you think many people seem to have great difficulty understanding the most basic aspects of immigration policy , one only has to skip through this forum to confirm that however that has nothing to do with my post, I was replying to another member who seemed to be deciding not to maintain his 12 month extensions, based on this article , In my opinion its a bit premature to consider trying to stay here permanently using back to back visa exempts as an alternative to a marriage or retirement extension When I said "I couldn't care less" I was stating my attitude towards other peoples visa arrangements, which are nobody's business but their own , There are others on here who feel differently (There's your answer ok? ) I also don't really care how long you've been here on extensions, or how many people you know who will welcome this new policy, seriously I really don't understand why you bothered quoting me other than the fact that you got upset by what you mistakenly considered was a "snide remark" and even though it wasn't directed at you , your sensitivities were triggered and you" just had to" say something, from behind the safety of your keyboard of course

And horror of horrors, grown adults indulging in sexual activity in resorts, according to the article the vast majority of people are well behaved, makes one wonder if a "crackdown" is actually necessary. Could it be perhaps that Mae Hong Son is just starting to feel a little bit left out of the current trend, A tourist resort can hardly be considered a true tourist resort without a few stories of badly behaved tourists so they are just updating their profile

Why are you asking me? I don't make the rules, and I'm all in favour of circumnavigating them if possible, It will no doubt be useful for people who travel a lot , I couldn't care less if somebody expects or intends to stay here full time on visa exempt entries , its none of my business, and no skin off my nose, I'm actually all for it. but I think they could well be setting themselves up for a bit of disappointment

Sure some of them are fine but I genuinely doubt that they are officially told that "ensuring our comfort and safety" is the prime objective' despite what it says on the large vinyl posters with the happy smiling cartoon images of immigration officers

In your dreams

What are you talking about, There are many options available for criminals and fugitives to enter Thailand , many visas require no criminal record checks including the "elite" privileged entry visa. Why do people always seem to think that criminals struggle with access to money, generally speaking they don't , despite what you may have been told, crime, in many cases actually does pay and often pays very well. You and people like you seem to have difficulty in distinguishing between professional "career criminals" who generally endeavour to keep a low profile and avoid drawing attention to themselves and as such there presence has little impact on society, and the badly behaved low class scum who have no Idea how to behave outside of the council estate they were born and raised on, it is they who are the usual subjects of the negative media reports . and there are no visa regulations that will discourage those type of people many of whom have no criminal record

I doubt its part of their job description

Whilst there will be an official announcement regarding any change in the law, there will never be any official notification as to how the new laws will be interpreted by the individual officers or how it will be applied in practice, that side of things is generally "at their discretion" it will probably be a while before the officers themselves have worked out how they can best abuse the law in their own interests

rubbish

If they really wanted people to stay 180 days in order to tax them why would they limit the vsa to 60 days ? These visa exempts are intended for tourists, few of which will stay as long as 180 days , I personally doubt back to backs will be encouraged, A tourist could stay here for 180+ days , even if he was theoretically required to file a tax return it would not be due until the following March by which time he could have simply returned home , never to return

In theory I guess the answer is yes , but this is Thailand and you think too much

Well don't get too carried away , remember unlimited visa exempt entries have always been available , theoretically at least, at the airports , but there have been countless reports of people being denied entry or at least being given a hard time, sometimes they were serial border-bouncers others pulled over on just their second time, None were breaking the law all were hassled purely on the whim of an awkward immigration officer. A common reason for denying entry is a suspicion that one is abusing the system and misusing the visa exempt scheme to effectively stay here long term there are many reports of people being told to "get the right visa next time or else" sometimes even writing remarks in passports indicating that a tourist visa is required. I have been asked in the past why I was entering visa exempt when my previous stay had been extended to visit wife, she stamped me in but it ruffled her feathers a bit I know many don't consider the immigration officers to be the sharpest pencils in the box , but I'm pretty sure that somebody who has been living here for years on marriage extensions and now suddenly changes to back to back visa exempts will be easily recognised, and may suffer a similar experience. I'd certainly wait as long as possible and check for any negative reports before giving up a marriage extension and reverting to visa exempts. They recently imposed financial requirements for multi entry Non Os from Laos, as people were using them to avoid tying their money up in the bank for a few months, so that gives some indication as to how they feel This is Thailand after all and one never knows how things will pan out, If it all turns out as we hope , a married guy could theoretically stretch a single visa exempt entry to 150 days (with a 30 day extension and a 60 day extension to visit the wife) whether the immigration authorities will cheerfully encourage this , is in my opinion doubtful and whether they allow it at Aranya is another matter entirely I wouldn't rely too much on what the officers at the local immigration tell you, The officers at the border are a law unto themselves It would be bad enough getting denied entry and sent home at an airport, imagine the hassle at some remote cambodian border crossing when they wont let you in, and send you back to cambodia 5 minutes before the border closes, at least at some there's a casino

Doesn't make them unsavoury at all, and many truly unsavoury characters have no trouble laying their hands on the money required

They are not voted in to represent others, An MP has a very short and concise job description, it consists of only 3 words "maintain your seat" that is it, there is no obligation for them to help or represent anybody living in their constituency at all. In fact the only reason they ever agree to do anything is when they feel their actions will help towards the prime objective of maintaining their seat. As long as they keep their seat they are fulfilling their sole purpose to their party, they are pretty much untouchable and little short of a prison sentence would see them sacked. There are no qualifications required for the job at all and few restrictions on who can put themselves forward, The only quality they must possess if they intend to win their seat is the ability to ingratiate themselves with their chosen electorate by any means , False Promises, Fake Denials and Downright lies are all acceptable methods and totally justified by any success They don't need to be educated, or to have any experience , or any special skills, They don't need to be diverse either, You can only be speaking for yourself if you think people expect their MP's to be more intelligent than themselves or rest of society. The last one we had was a complete retard, kept her seat for years though They certainly should not be selected to stand for election on the basis of their sexuality or ethnicity it should be forbidden to mention such things, the only thing they should be permitted to promote is their parties manifesto, then once the election is over they could all pretty much be sacked

People were different in those days the pathetic health and safety gestapo had not yet managed to kill the human spirit of adventure, taking risks was perfectly acceptable, and every loss of life was not considered a tragedy. Its not kings you need to convince these days its insurance companies that decide what is allowed to happen