Highlandman

1 minute ago, connda said:

The problem being is that the marketing departments of large multinational pharmaceutical corporations, grant seeking education institutions, and the main-stream media still have an economic incentive to keep "The Zombie Apacalype" narrative alive. There is still money to be made!
Virology 101:  virus pathogens become less virulent (less likely to make you really sick or kill you) as they become more contagious (everyone eventually gets the virus leading to herd immunity).  And by now most of the 8 billion people on the planet have antibodies, including latent B memory cells.
The same people who profited immensely off of creating irrational levels of fear within the population also profit by being natural immunity deniers and denying efficacy of B memory cells, instead convincing members of the public that they will die for sure unless they keep Covid antibodies in their blood stream forever with Covid shots.  There is no profit, no selling 3000 THB Covid shots if people understand that their immune system once exposed to Covid can now handle these weakened "variants."  If exposed to a variant, your B memory cells wake up, flood your system with antibodies, and mount an immune attack - most people now come down with a cold or mild flu.

This has become really tiresome and unnecessary.  Constantly publishing the numbers of Covid cases and "Covid-deaths^TM" and listing all of the scary new variants.  👻 "Boo!" 
Yeah Covid was a "novel virus" and probably made that way, yeah it was pretty nasty in late 2019 though early 2021 and it had the potential to kill of the elderly and others with weakened immune system - but it has evolved.  Most people can fight these new variants off with immune systems now wired to do just that.  Covid can join the ranks of other annual respiratory viral infection.  Let's give the hyperbole a rest.

There was no Covid in 2019.

The first news of this came out on January 1, 2020, referring to what was claimed to be a "novel coronavirus" first "detected" on December 31, 2019.

The first country to do surveillance and impose restrictions (although very minor and involving no more than form filling) other than China was Thailand and this occurred on January 3, 2020 on flights arriving from Wuhan.

3 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

True story coming up...   At one of the US airports a common complaint came up - the wait for baggage was too long.

A 'marketing genius' at the airport resolved the issue by moving the 'arrival gate' further from the baggage area, the baggage arrived at the same time, but as people had a longer walk, they waited less for the baggage and complained less. 

 

I find the 'baggage handling' and timing at Suvarnabumi airport pretty decent, I get fast-tracked through Immigration etc with Thai Elite so am usually one of the first waiting - I'm therefore well aware of the 'wait times'.... 

 

Now that there is a satellite terminal, 'some' will take longer to arrive at the baggage hall and be incredible impressed at their reduced wait time because they've taken an extra 10 mins to get to there. 

 

Thus - the solution to your 'waiting for baggage' is not to fly business, but to travel economy, sit at the back of the plane, you won't have to wait for your baggage !!... 

 

 

Realistically: I'm often in the Baggage hall in less than 10mins from the air-craft doors opening - so a 10-20min wait for baggage is quite reasonable, certainly no worse than many other Airports IMO. 

 

I know Suvarnabumi enjoys a bashing from many on this forum, but travelling around a lot, its one of the better airports, and if the regular Immigration queues which have blighted arrivals can get resolved, this will make a huge difference for many. 

 

It's good to see AOT concentrating on the right thing.

 

Its also good to see the 300 Baht tourist charge not being added, as this was potentially going to cause further choke points unless they could achieve a way for streamlining that and avoiding choke points. 

 

Now they have to address the 'insurance' issue with so many tourists arriving without health / emergency insurance (travel insurance) and their hospital bills are not covered - it would be good for Thailand to find a way in which arrivals can either show they have insurance or purchase cover that ensures they get treatment without the controversy and negative optics that we see in the news.

 

Travelers need to exercise personal responsibility, not be forced to buy things.

While travel/medical insurance is a good idea, I don't think it should be forced.

Myanmar aside, which still requires Covid/medical insurance at least to apply for a visa, all other regional countries have scrapped insurance requirements. Why would/should Thailand impose such a requirement when even Singapore doesn't? 

Tourists would stop coming to Thailand and visit Laos/Cambodia/Vietnam instead.

3 hours ago, kevozman1 said:

 

Opposite to what I experienced.. Always had good experiences in Don Mueang (prior to 2006) and I am not going to lie the overall experience in Thailand was so much better then that maybe I do have some negatives I gloss over, but also I do tend to remember notably negative events and places.. and my land border crossings experience which is only Poipet and Mae Sot-Myawaddy were very drab and not worth talking about. Not sure why you would go into comparing minor land crossings with international airports but hey I guess we all have different ways of reasoning. 

 

Actually I went away for a little while and still struggle to remember many hiccups or delays back then... Did I and everyone I know get lucky or was there similar problems back then with arrivals and departures? I must admit my memory is not the greatest.

Whether we're talking land borders or airports, both are entrance points into the country where you have to pass immigration. There really is no difference and thus it IS very relevant to talk about.

Poipet is in Cambodia so your experience there isn't relevant to Thailand unless you are referring to Aranyaprathet. 

Mae Sot I found less friendly about 10 years ago but they improved after around 2015 once that unfriendly immigration lady I often encountered was transferred to another location. Mae Sot is irrelevant nowadays to us farang as we can't cross there now. It's for Thais and Burmese only.

Don Muang prior to 2006 - nope, didn't strike me as being friendly. Most of the time officers would be grumpy, stamp your passport and place it down on the table with no smile, no welcome or sawatdee krab/ka.

I have encountered the occasional friendly officer at Suvarnabhumi though. In the immediate post Covid period, late August 2022, the lady immigration officer I had was a gem. Very polite and engaging.

43 minutes ago, BKKBike09 said:

A few days ago I was amazed to watch a foreign bloke, masked up (N95, of course), eating a meal at a mid-Sukhumvit pub. Sitting outside. Did not remove mask, simply lifted the bottom enough to insert grub into gob and then back down again. Repeated until meal finished. Performance art? Mental illness? It appears some people are prisoners of an irrational fear.

I still see plenty of Thais do that but haven't observed a foreigner/expat do that. 

6 hours ago, Misty said:

 

And back to the original point, that LTR is not a NonImm visa.  That was what we were talking about.

Of course the LTR is a non-immigrant visa! It's certainly not an immigrant visa and offers no pathway to citizenship or permanent residency.

4 hours ago, madmitch said:

There's quite a lot of information missing such as how many will gates be installed and who will be eligible to use them. It wouldn't surprise me if, at least initially,you will still need to queue for a stamp in the passport. Thailand loves stamps.

 

I was recently surprised to encounter these e-gates at Tirana Airport in Albania. Through immigration in seconds. 

Nonsense. E-gates don't do passport stamps and there's no need for one if you use one.

4 hours ago, Mike Teavee said:

It also doesn't make sense for them to allow people to bounce in & out of the country getting 180 days each time & effectively getting a Visa where they can live in Thailand for 5.5 years when they're charging people 900K for the same thing + a few rounds of golf. 

 

What makes the most sense is it's a Visa that allows you to spend up to 180 days in Thailand every year for 5 years with the option of extending this for another 180 days in year 6.

 

But This is Thailand & western logic just doesn't apply so who knows which way it will go 

It doesn't make sense to your western mind but it might just happen.

There are different requirements for this visa compared to the privilege visa.

On 5/30/2024 at 6:44 PM, Pattaya57 said:

Currently Cambodia  and Laos have free entry under bilateral agreements (which includes unlimited entries). Both will change to 60 day visa exempts from 1 June which does raise the question about only two visa exempts allowed by land per calender year (maybe bilateral agreements stay in place as well?)

LoL!!

Cambodia and Laos will continue to enjoy unlimited entries by land or any transportation method they choose of course.

There is no way a 2 entries per year restriction could be enforced for them. There would be riots.

No way it's happening. 

Funny you even believe this would be possible when so many come and go nearly every day of the year. I'm laughing over my coffee now.

On 6/7/2024 at 12:57 PM, Misty said:

 

LTR is not permanent, but nor is PR. However, LTR visa does not require the recipient to return to Thailand every year. The PR does.

 

 

Permanent residency IS permanent.

It's designed for residents of Thailand, not for people to obtain and then live abroad. Duh!

Whereas an LTR visa is more like a glorified tourist visa or a mix of a restricted work/investor visa + privilege visa all rolled into one.

4 hours ago, wensiensheng said:

Arrivals? Where did you read that?

 

That comes under future plans, so don’t hold your breath.

I read mid year for arrivals but by the time it actually happens it will probably be end of year or next year.

I understand Singapore and Hong Kong passport holders have been able to use e-gates on arrival for years now.

3 hours ago, bluemoon58 said:

Can't see those of us on extensions of stay ever being able to use the arrival e-gates if and when they're ever up and running! You know what the jobsworths are like for their paperwork. We'll probably have to have our usual entry stamp with a handwritten date on it! 

I know you're being sarcastic but in actual fact, eventually all this passport and stamping stuff will become obsolete. Even Thai bureaucrats will be forced to change and of course they will do so quite quickly once they can start virtue signaling that they're the first in the world to implement some sort of new dystopian surveillance technology to "combat crime" or something.

2 hours ago, Peterphuket said:

If no more fingerprints, it is possible to give someone else with a little corresponding face your passport, I am thinking of a brother or sister, for example.
Spectacle wearers also have several options, at immigration, I have to take off my glasses, in contrast, there is no such need at automatic verification.

It's completely random. Some officers ask you to remove your glasses, others don't. Or it depends on the border. Some border crossings don't care others do.

56 minutes ago, SpanishExpat said:

At least it’s a minor change in the right direction. I always use the E Gates in Malaysia and Singapore and it’s such a smooth experience. 
 

Sure Thailand has more tourist arrivals, but you can’t keep the stone age immigration system forever.

 

I still don’t like the new government, still they are miles ahead of the Prayut era and try to innovate.

They're doing what they've been told to do. As with other global initiatives, countries are required to meet certain goals and deadlines. 

The eventual elimination of manual passport checks is the goal and in time there will be no more passport stamps or even passports at all. It will all be biometric and dystopian. 

Sure, it might take countries like Thailand another 10 or 15 years to get there but it will happen in the not so distant future. Singapore is in the early stages of allowing passport free travel now. Already happening at land border entrances for Singaporean passport holders. Must use a QR code and register in advance.

21 minutes ago, Cabradelmar said:

It's a start. Departure passport control checks are the easier of the 2. Full passport control automation on arrival is a bit tricky. I think Singapore is probably the only one doing so for ALL arriving passengers.

Not all arrivals. Apparently only if you've registered and from certain countries. Last year I was processed manually as I came with my family. 

I'll also get myself processed manually in the future even if I arrive on my own as I don't like this dystopian egate stuff.

Australia is the country where on departure only the infirm and disabled get to be processed manually. All others, including families with small children and babies are processed using the e-gates. If you complain, they won't flinch. You'll still be forced to use the e-gates.

4 hours ago, kevozman1 said:

 

For international arrivals I don't think anything is changing, which is the real problem. Worst I have queued for departure is maybe 30 minutes. Worst queue on arrivals over an hour in a cattle grid after a long flight to be 'welcomed' by a grumpy member of staff at passport control who will barely acknowledge my existence. A far cry from arriving all those years ago in Don Mueang (when it was the main international airport) and being greeted by happy smiling staff at passport control after queuing for 30 seconds.. I can't help but be nostalgic on a regular basis thesedays. 

Firstly, I've often waited longer at departure immigration than arrivals and departures is time critical because you still need to make your flight and preferably not by running to the gate.

I once missed a flight at Don Muang (before the opening of Suvarnabhumi) because departure immigration processing was too slow and that was after I decided to cut the queue.

Don Muang arrivals was always very slow and the worst part was how long you'd have to circle to come in for a landing particularly for evening arrivals. It was always at least half an hour of circling before landing, unlike at Suvarnabhumi where that only happens during inclement weather.

As for friendliness of the officers - I don't recall Don Muang being any better than Suvarnabhumi. 

If you want friendly officers, go to a quiet border crossing such as Nan or Chong Sa-ngam.

Very friendly officers at both.

Busier ones such as Nong Khai and Hat Lek occasionally have chatty and friendly officers as well.

On 5/31/2024 at 10:19 PM, Misty said:

 

Mike I've checked both my old LTR e-visa from 2022 (a paper copy all in English from NY consulate) as well as the new LTR HSP visa stamp in my passport from this year.  Neither says anything about "Non Immigrant". 

 

But my old Nonimmigrant B visa stamp did say "Non Imm."  So clearly that was Non Immigrant, according to Thai Immigration. I would say the LTR program isn't the same.

 

So a rose by any other name?

 

Note that PR isn't necessarily "permanent" despite its name. If you stay outside of Thailand for more than a year, it gets cancelled as we saw happened to some unfortunate folks during the pandemic.  An LTR visa wouldn't have been cancelled in the same circumstances. So LTR could be more "permanent" than PR.

Nonsense.. 

What proof do you have an LTR visa wouldn't have been canceled under those circumstances?

A PR visa is permanent but it's for residing within Thailand. Nearly all countries cancel permanent residency visas if the holder spends an extended period (usually 1 year or more) outside of the country.

Thailand PR holders stuck outside of Thailand during Covid restrictions found their PR status was extended to allow them to come back later, I think they had 2 years rather than the usual 1 year.

An LTR visa isn't permanent and does NOT provide a pathway to residency or citizenship. 

6 hours ago, Pattaya57 said:

Currently Cambodia  and Laos have free entry under bilateral agreements (which includes unlimited entries). Both will change to 60 day visa exempts from 1 June which does raise the question about only two visa exempts allowed by land per calender year (maybe bilateral agreements stay in place as well?)

Lol! Obviously Lao and Cambodian passport holders will continue to be allowed to do unlimited border runs. There is no way 2 visits per year could be enforced for them as they're a neighboring country. 

I'm confused about the supposed addition of Laos and Cambodia to visa free entry into Thailand. For almost 20 years, nationals of both countries have been able to enter Thailand visa free, so the insinuation, based on the info graphic that these 2 countries are only now being afforded visa exempt entry into Thailand is highly misleading. 

So far, Laotians have been permitted unlimited 30 day visa free entry, while Cambodians have been receiving 14 days and vice versa for Thais visiting those 2 countries.

What will change here? If they meant that they too will receive 60 days visa free, that would be a significant change BUT it doesn't change the fact that Laos and Cambodia are 2 nations who've been eligible for visa free entry into Thailand for many years and with no official limit on the number of entries either. 

On 5/20/2024 at 4:22 PM, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

Yes many, and yes.... Most public health agencies -- including the Thai MoPH -- still recommend mask wearing and social distancing as effective measures to reduce the risk of catching COVID.

 

"For safety sake, he suggested the wearing of face masks in crowded places, on public transport and in hospitals and nursing homes for the elderly. Washing hands often is also recommended, as are rapid antigen tests if flu-like symptoms develop, he added."

 

 

Of course these institutions "still" recommend mask wearing. They'll recommend Thais wear their [masks] for life, because there will literally never be a good reason to remove them, according to the MOPH, which is by far the most hysterical fear mongering health agency of any country in the world. No other country even comes close, not China, not Japan.

Mask wearing is Thailand's national religion.

9 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

Is there any hysteria about road deaths and the highway patrol's absolute refusal to patrol the highways to insure safety? 

 

Was there any hysteria about the recent burning season, which was the worst in memory? 

 

No. Why? For one, they did not have huge Big Pharma companies with an agenda. 

 

I would not put another baht into their pockets, unless this was more comparable to smallpox...

Well said sir. 

On 5/20/2024 at 2:02 PM, shackleton said:

When I went into my local shopping Mall even the staff there advised me to wear a mask 😷 

On this occasion I was not wearing the face mask but soon reverted back to wearing it 

Better safe than sorry 

Are you serious? What mall is this? If this story is true then I'm not coming back to Thailand. I'm not going to wear a [mask] again and especially not to enter a mall!

If it were me I'd have told the staff how nonsensical it is to wear a mask (they're useless) and that I'm not going to wear one for the rest of my life (many Thais will be wearing them for life).

On 5/5/2024 at 12:34 PM, Yellowtail said:

If you use a credit or debit card to load the card, it is cashless, yes? 

 

But if you deposit cash into your debit account, or pay your credit card with cash, does it make it not cashless? 

 

So I think it fair to say that per your definition, at a typical food court, some of the cards are cashless and some aren't, correct? 

I've never loaded a debit or credit card with cash. Cards take money from my bank account/credit card account and could function/be topped up/paid off regardless of whether physical cash is available or not.

A debit or credit card functions purely as a cashless device.

A food court card can also be called a "cash card". As I've mentioned too many times, you start with cash and end with cash. Just because you're using a card for that brief period to pay for your meal or drink, doesn't mean you can bypass the use of cash. Therefore, not a true cashless system and NOT what is meant by cashless (not withstanding the QR code options you have now; I'm talking about food courts that don't have QR codes not to mention how you can go back decades before QR codes and these food courts required you to give cash to get a card to pay).

Which doesn't happen with digital cashless payments because these do NOT require cash handling at any point in the transaction. 

From debit and credit cards to digital wallets and QR codes they all allow you to bypass the handling of cash if you so wish.

A don't understand the need to be so pedantic and go back and forth on something that is so simple to comprehend. 

On 5/3/2024 at 6:10 PM, Yellowtail said:

How so? 

Indeed. 

A debit card, a rabbit card and a food-court card are all effectively stored value cards, meaning you do not have to carry cash i.e. "cashless"

 

A credit is arguably a stored value card, only with the stored value being credit. 

 

The Starbucks app has a stored value digital card that you can reload with a credit card. How is this not cash-less, while a debit card is? 

The Starbucks stored value card is definitely cashless. Why are you making a distinction I never made?

A stored value card where you have to refill it using cash is technically "cashless" but it's not really what is meant here because cashless in this context generally means a digital payment using either a card or electronic means such as a QR code. 

Thus cashless means it does not involve the use of physical cash at any stage. 

23 hours ago, lkn said:

You can actually pay using PromptPay in the food courts I have visited (i.e. the QR code payment that deducts money from your bank account), I also believe they have supported various digital wallets like LINE Pay, and the Rabbit card (at least when I got my Rabbit card some ten years ago, I was told that it could be used in some food courts).

 

But I don’t think your definition of “cashless” is quite what people normally think of when saying cashless. Cashless means that you do not give physical cash to the vendor when paying for goods and services.

 

It doesn’t matter if the digital wallet or plastic card used for the payment is connected to your bank account or has been prepaid / topped up beforehand. As of such, my Thai bank account is really just a “prepaid wallet” that was topped up with Wise… oh… and my Wise debit card, is that cashless when I use it? Because I regularly have to top up my Wise account as well…

I beg to differ. Your definition of cashless isn't what people normally think of as cashless.

Cashless means not involving the use of cash in any way. Using cash to purchase a card and getting cash back at the end isn't what people think of when "cashless" is meant. You're still exchanging cash for something, in this case a card.

Money in your bank account isn't cash. 

So if you're using PromptPay to pay for food at a food court, then yes, that's truly cashless.