MangoKorat

I understand that foreigners who work in Thailand have to pay Social Security and I believe that as a result of that, you are eligible to receive treatment at Thai hospitals - correct? However, I believe that things change when you reach retirement age. I seem to remember reading that when you are over ?? years old, you still pay Social Security but you get it back at the end of each tax year? Does that also mean that you would not be eligible for free hospital treatment when you reach that age - even though you are still paying tax and SS? What is the position if you don't start working/paying tax until after the Thai retirement age? Any other things I should be aware of regarding tax and SS?

Having already invested significantly in Thailand and planning to invest substantially more next year. I would also like to have that security - although I am aware that I will have to go though a lengthy process and pay tax for at least 3 years (I believe). Do you need to get an exit/re-entry stamp each time? Or are multiple ones available? Given my particular Immigration Office, I'd like to visit there as little as possible.

Whilst I don't disagree, ladyboys create a lot of their own problems. Having been attacked and robbed by a group of them a few years back, they are not exactly, my favourite people. You can probably understand that most tourists are not so happy to be grabbed in the crotch by a guy!! At the time the police in Lumpini told me that Ladyboys were responsible for the majority of street crime in central Bangkok. Apparently they commit most of the robberies and pickpocketing etc. and when the police get called to a fight - many involve ladyboys.

That's not nice and bad taste at the moment.

Sounds good to me.

If I understand correctly, once you have PR you no longer need a visa - correct? If so, is there also no requirement to prove your income anymore?

I think its more likely that they go to beach road because they've heard about the katoeys and go to view them as if they are some kind of tourist attraction. They can also avoid having to buy beers in a bar - something that seems popular amongst Indians/Chinese. If that is the case, I have some sympathy for the katoeys. Only some though.

That, in the post a couple of positions up, should read 'not fully understood'. Out of time to edit.

Agreed. The next thing we'll be hearing is the old claim that men who sleep with katoeys are not gay - they are. I don't understand that denial, its as if they are ashamed of being gay and somehow think that because the katoey dresses like a woman and/or may have had cosmetic/surgical changes, its different. Katoeys are born male with male genitalia. They do not have the internal organs required to produce or feed a baby and are therefore male. To date, it is biologically impossible for a human being to completely change gender. Such people may only be attracted to katoeys and not at all interested in 'normal' males. However, sexual activity between two males is known as 'homosexual' - a term which has in recent years, become known as 'gay'. Before someone pipes up, I am fully aware of the existence of hermaphrodites - that is an entirely different matter. I am also aware of the fact that some people claim they have the right to 'identify' as they so wish. They are welcome to live in their own fantasy world but in reality if they are a man that wishes to 'identify' as a woman, that does not make them a woman. It does however, render another male that has sex with them as homosexual. I await copious amounts of flaming from our some factions of our community. I would point out however, that I both accept and respect gay people. What I will never accept is these new fangled terms, identifications and made up genders. Was I gay, I'm pretty sure that I would be offended by people who try to name homosexual activity using alternative terms as if ashamed of it.

Well that is extremely rare.

In fact you are incorrect, 'MONOGENIC OBESITY' although rare, can be traced though familes. I had neighbours when I was a kid where the mother was obese and her two children were like carbon copies of her in terms of both looks and obesity. However, I was using genetic as an overarching term to cover other types of 'involuntary obesity'. There are several conditions that cause someone to be fat whilst only eating the amount of food that they need. Some of these conditions are the result of complex chemical interactions between the body and nutrients. Some of these conditions are fully understood but they are very real. There are also hormonal factors - as I personally know very well. Part of my treatment for Prostate Cancer included Hormone Therapy. I was told that I may put on 'a little' weight, particularly around my waste, whilst receiving the treatment. Having had an almost flat stomach all my life I developed a 'beer belly' and put on over 10kg within 3 months whilst eating nothing more than my usual diet. For some reason this fat has been very hard to remove - something I was also warned of. A usual programme of dieting resulted in me losing weight elsewhere whilst the fat around my waist more or less remained. It is going slowly but it is very difficult to move - and I've been receiving advice from a professional dietician. Whislt I would accept that most obesity is self inflicted through over-eating, lack of excercise and poor diet, I can assure you that it is not always a 'voluntary condition' - grasshopper!

I hate to 'rain on your parade' but an awful lot of things have only been discovered in the last few decades. Its a phenomenon known as 'advances in medicine' - khao jai mai? I don't support those that intentionally make themselves fat but some, and I have no idea of the percentage, are not fat by choice. End of. I'm not going to engage in a pointless, off topic argument.

For someone who appears to support other minority groups, you seem to have a strange way of thinking. You're also wrong in some of what you say. Whilst some people cause themselves to be fat, there are others that can do nothing about it - its genetic. I'm not fat by the way ????.

I think we'd noticed that.

1 to 1 is an absolute rarity in Thailand when they fight with foreigners.

Many, many years ago, I made the mistake of saying "nah mate, you're a guy" to a katoey on Sukhumvit, Bangkok. I got out alive but only just. If the 'customers' in this incident said something similar, I'm not at all surprised at the result. Thai's never fight 1 to 1 but katoeys are far worse.

I don't know about the 'Ultra Rich' from elsewhere but there was a time when the 'Ultra Rich' of Thailand regularly holidayed at Koh Kood. Judging by the prices at The Soneva Kiri resort on the island, they still do. A 3 bedroom villa at the Soneva Kiri runs at around 225,000 to 270,000 baht per night in high season - I kid you not. Thankfully, us lesser mortals can visit Koh Kood these days with prices from around 2500 baht per night.

Can I ask which type you bought? The one I decide on is likely to get a lot of use so I don't want to buy a cheaper one and regret it.

He could yes, but based on personal experience, if he's asked why he's entering and he says to visit his child, he could have a problem. It would depend on his visa/entry history. As I've posted previously, I was given a warning when my Multi Non O ran out and I entered exempt. I was told that visiting my wife was not considered as tourism so I should not enter exempt or on a tourist visa (I had expired Non O's and Tourist visas in my passport). I was told that visiting my wife required a Non O and I would not be allowed to enter again without one. That was at odds with the wording on the Royal Thai Embassy's (London) website at the time which stated that a tourist visa could be used for short visits to family. I considered e-mailing the embassy on that point - telling them their wording conflicted with advice from I.O.s in Thailand but based on previous experience when I've pointed out mistakes on their website (there used to be many), my notification would fall on deaf ears. As far as I know, the advice that a tourist visa is suitable for family visits is still on their website. Whatever, having received one warning, if I was the OP and the purpose of the trip was to visit a family member, I would rely on what I was told at the airport and obtain a Non O - they are the people who decide if your getting in or not.

PM sent

???????????? - you couldn't make this stuff up could you?

It may be correct as per previous thinking but at my new place I don't want detergents and bleaches entering the septic tank - if indeed I have a septic tank. I have never uncovered the entire pipe run and there is no cover to remove on my tank to check on where things go currently - I just suspect that everything goes directly into the septic tank. All I have in the garden is a concrete pad and a vent - I presume the vent doubles up as the place where the tank is emptied through. I've never needed to unblock my system but from what I've seen in the suspended ceiling, the toilet outlets will use 90 degree T's instead of swept bends. The previous owner had some problems I believe as he warned me not to put paper down the toilet - I do and always will. Getting Thai people to do that is impossible unless I remove the bins.

OK, I'll get their number today and PM you.

That's what I plan at my new house. I'm pretty sure that the system at my current place sends everything into the same tank.

I can't really comment on your problem as I've no idea how Thai systems work. I tried to get a Thai to explain where the soakaway is at my Thai home but he had no idea what I meant. I'm not on mains sewerage in the UK and I've installed several systems over the years - they are very simple. Some more modern systems are 'aerated' using an air pump to promote bacterial growth in what was called the 'septic' tank but they are still very simple. Tank + Soakaway - waste matter including solids enters the tank, rots down. The tank has a set level and an overflow discharges water only to an outlet which is piped to the soakaway. If the soakaway is correctly built, it does what it says on the tin but it may be necessary for the soakaway to be very long/wide in heavy clay areas. Provided you do the pipework correctly the soakaway is the hardest part to get right - everything else is straighforward. In theory septic tank systems should rarely need emptying as if there is good bacterial growth, that will constantly eat away the solids. The water that comes out of the overflow should be almost clear if the tank is doing its job. Unfortunately modern detergents and bleaches damage bacterial growth which in simple terms mean the tank will need emptying more often. Older systems where it was not possible to provide a soakaway were known as cesspits. They had a bigger tank that was simply a storage facility and thus needed emptying regularly. I'm not really sure how the Thai systems work - maybe they are a hybrid of the two? If I have any comment to make on the photos of your system that you have supplied its that T junctions should never be used in sewerage systems - swept bends, swept according to the direction of travel should always be used. Seeing your pipework, I understand why the Thai's say don't throw toilet paper down the loo. T's are just asking for a blockage - they also make it very difficult to get drainage rods down to unblock the system. I refuse to have a disgusting bin full of dirty toilet paper in my toilet and when I build a new house, as I will be doing before too long, I will be installing a UK style system with swept bends and a full herringbone style gravel soakaway as I will have the luxury of enough land to accommodate that. Sink and washing machine wastes will have their own mini system to minimise the amount of problems caused by poor bacterial growth due to detergents and bleaches in the main system.