Rob Browder

OK - you have a permitted-stay issued in Thailand - not a "visa." In that case, the permitted-stay ends when your job ends. If BOI will do a 21-day extension, that is good. I do not know how a "BOI extension" affects the ability to change to a different permitted-stay in-country. Recent posts indicate transfer to a Non-O w/o leaving the country not possible without an agent - but you can always ask.

If possible, it would be done via the MFA, who issues Visas. They have been known to make corrections on visas - unknown if they would help with this case, however.

... and "proof of payment," so cannot use "rent a ticket" services. Note they also say return to passport-country ticket, which does not follow official regulations (ticket to anywhere outside Thailand should be OK). They are making this up, to encourage use of their agent-service partners - at which point, NONE of the requirements are enforced - similar to many extensions in-country. Although one is unlikely to have all those "requirements" enforced at most crossings, anyone making a border-run without an agent-service should be prepared to stay out 2+ nights, be able to purchase a fully-refundable ticket to their passport-country, and able to purchase a hotel-booking in Thailand, if/when demanded. Also, have the 10K baht worth of cash to show. "I left my money-cards with my wife/gf," or "in my condo" or whatever won't cut it. Prepare for the worst, and be pleasantly-surprised if things are easy. That is my strategy with EVERY interaction with Thai immigration - even for "no problems reported" things. "Expected Outcomes" not being met is a source of stress and disappointment, so don't set yourself up to suffer, folks. Always have a "Plan B," and a "Plan C." Don't "expect" fairness, consistency, or compassion - EVER.

... and selling 60-day Tourist Visas. A better solution would have been returning India and China to 15-day VOA (addressing their 'criminals" concern), and making the TR Visa 90-days. Oh well. It seems really simple to deal with the "illegal working" problem - just set the policies based on the ratio of the Thai minimum-wage versus the visitors' countries. If the visitor country's min-wage is nearly the same, then 30 days. if it is lower - 15-day VOA. If it is multiples higher, 90-days or more.

Ok - so you are currently on a 90-day permitted-stay from Non-B Visa obtained abroad? In that case, you have until the "permitted stay" stamped in your passport for that visa-entry, regardless of when your job/work ends. If this is the case, I do not know why BOI was advising about this, since you did not get an extension-of-stay from them. I have never heard of a "21 day extension," either. The "7 days to leave the country" - yes - but after that, no extension in Thailand is possible. I would ask your local Immigration office what they need for you to apply for a non-O based extension for Thai-family, using your 400K seasoned bank-money. If they will do it from your current permitted-stay, you are set.

Yes, with every "crackdown," immigration has expanded or price-increased their agent-partner services.

Come on a Non-O, so you can easily open a bank-account. Get a 60-day extension to "visit Thai family" if you need that extra 60-days to get your 400K in the bank and "seasoned" for 2 months. Note that the "agent service" which can involve a bank-account assistance is generally for retirement-type extensions - few will help with thai-family type extensions, and for those that do, it is more expensive than retirement-based. And, you would pay more for that service-package, than the cost of a Non-O 90-day Visa from your home-country + 1900 baht 60-day extension from immigration.

Non-O Retirement does not allow working in Thailand. If over 50, and work / income does not involve Thailand, and all earnings are deposited into a foreign account, I would stick with Non-O Retirement vs DTV. If under 50 and w/o Thai family, the DTV is a great option.

Why not a neutral state? Why must it be either a proxy of one or the other? See Austria during the cold war, as a model. This was being proposed back in 2014. The West dismissed it - not Russia.

If you were living in the Donbass region, being shelled for 8 years (including Trump years) before Russia stepped-in, you would probably call the Russians peacekeepers, also. Trump's ridiculous position, is pretending he didn't continue the very "uniparty" escalation which caused the war. Every time he says the war would "not have happened, if I were president," I want to puke. He just hired one of the war's chief anti-Russia cheerleaders for Sec-of-State, and still brags about starting lethal-aid to Ukraine. He's only trying to get a "deal" now, because the West's Ukraine proxy war was lost. They are out of military options to "turn the tide," short of WW3 - and would likely lose that, given Russia has now re-mobilized, and they have not. Sadly, I suspect they merely want to "buy time" to re-mobilize their military - Europe's in particular - then resume the conflict in 5+ years.

If you go to a Non-O based on marriage to a Thai, the work-permit will not come into the question of whether you can get the extension, provided you have 400K in the bank for 2+ months. The date on the termination-letter is your last permitted-day of stay. You would need a new letter with a later-date, if your employer is extending things for you. You will show that to immigration when you request the change of permitted-stay. Hopefully, they will allow you to apply without making a border-run. If they refuse to do the change, THEN you could apply for the 7-days extension if you need more time before a border run. But, after you get that 7-day extension, the ONLY option is the border-run.

Of course - direct violent-threats are prohibited, and should be. That is exactly where the courts put the line. This is being tested with new restrictions, however - will see what happens.

Now do the same thing, but Mexico joining a Chinese alliance, and guess who "couldn't bear" that. Also, only a portion of Ukrainians wanted what the West was pushing, after years of the USA spending literally Billions on propaganda, telling them how great it was going to be. Then, when snap-elections were agreed, the coupsters nullified that with violence. They had to get Crimean folks out of the voting, before they could "win" an election - while cynically pretending they were mad about what they KNEW would happen. Yet, even then, the literal actor who was groomed for the role of president with a TV show (financed by an anti-Russian oligarch) had to promise to do the opposite of what he actually did, regarding all things Russian / peace.

The numbers I have seen it was the Ukrainians who lost ~1-Million or more - the Russians a fraction of that - but still a lot. I expect we won't know the real numbers for years, if ever. Normally, the attacker loses 3:1 vs the defender, but that goes out the window when the attacker has a massive advantage in artillery, air-support, etc. And, the economic "bleed out Russia" plan backfired - only manged to de-industrialize Europe with sky-high energy-costs**, and re-invigorate many Russian economic sectors - and bring many new (formerly import) sectors on-line. **( which has benefited the USA. Europeans should hate us for this - but they want the war to continue more than we do - and to spend more money on war, making them even poorer - which seems crazy to me. Propaganda works, sadly.)

That would be a direct threat - incitement to violence - which is not covered, by existing court-precedent. There are people in prison for this sort of thing. One CAN say "this person" or "this group" is "bad" - but not call for violent acts, in response. Saying, "But, some nutter might act violently if they knew X," is not an excuse to ban speech. Related, "The Noble Lie."

Now factor in the unilateral withdrawal from the INF. The question is, why would the Europeans be nervous? The only way to MAKE Russia into the threat they describe, is by what they are doing. One might even reach the conclusion the Neocons won't be satisfied unless they can dismember and destroy Russia - exactly as those maps they published describe.

Is that why Trump pushed the Continuing-Resolution which continues funding for all that graft and corruption - attacked Thomas Massie for opposing it / threatened to "primary" him** - but does not criticize the Senate Rs who voted against removing that already-identified graft/corruption spending from the CR? Trump is being his usual Big Disappointment, again. But, all the "other party" (sic) has to do, is act even more crazy, and the good-cop/bad-cop tag-team keeps the Uniparty game alive. ** (For the 2nd time - 1st was the "CARES Act" which funded "drop box" voting, and began the destruction of the economy + wrecking the value of the dollar with massive deficit-spending. All that, to "lock down" the country over an infection which all evidence to date at that time, and since, indicated was only dangerous to those who were very old and/or sick.)

A neural border zone, especially one the size of Ukraine, would seem to be a sensible compromise. All the government of Ukraine needed to do, was respect the human-rights and cultures of the groups in Ukraine, and don't be a foreign-proxy - either for Russia or Euro/USA.

... where the "law" says you must NOT talk about obvious patterns of behavior, and the harm done as a result. It's straight out of Orwell's 1984. Granted, a "limited" version of similar is being attempted in the USA, currently - so we aren't far behind. Once one "category" is protected, others will be added, until free-speech is dead. But, per current court-rulings, the only "legal" limit on written-speech is making believable (vs joke / non-actionable) threats.

So, what did James Baker III mean, when he promised Gorby that NATO would not move "one inch" beyond a then-newly-reunited Germany? The only reason a nation would fear being invaded by Russia, is if they were coup'd by the CIA (Nuland admitted $5-Billion spent on this - caught on-tape), began persecuting their ~1/3 ethnic-Russian population (shelling those who refused to bend the knee), and offered themselves up as a "minutes to Moscow" missile-base, after the USA withdrew from the intermediate-range missile treaty (INF). Ukraine hit the trifecta. Then, they violated the Minsk peace agreements, which followed. Likewise, Mexico could "choose" to join a CCP military-alliance and host China's missiles, in theory, but I don't think that would go over very well in DC.

Sending people back to their own homeland, where their people are the majority, is "brutal" - but not doing that, and thereby sentencing your own country and its people to destruction, is not "brutal"? My criticism of Trump, is he refuses to do anything meaningful to send back the foreigners who flooded-in. The overwhelming majority of those are kept in the country by employers who pay them, who are never prosecuted under existing felony law for employing illegal foreigners. What he is doing - in his 1st term, and continuing now - is the policy he correctly ridiculed during his 2016 campaign speeches. This policy of non-enforcement is the primary reason wages have not kept pace with inflation, and 1/2 of the American people have lived "hand to mouth" during multiple administrations. If the USA is "doomed," this is the primary cause - the 2nd cause being the non-stop deficit spending on wars. This continues regardless of which uni-party functionary is "chosen" on the ballot, so there is no real "choice" in USA elections.

if you arrive on a Non-O, you could go straight to the agent for your 1st extension, with the lower fee (12.5K and up, depending on area). You only have to pay the higher fee the first year if you arrive on Visa-Exempt or TR-Visa, because that involves changing to a "Non-O" in Thailand, as part of the package.

Yes, Immigration have agents for that by land and air (as well as for extensions-of-stay). If doing this repeatedly, one can pay for "no hassle" entry, or play the lottery they might not let you back in.

The solution was to make the TR-Visa 90-days. Oh, but then people would stay longer and spend more money here - can't have that. Any "criminals" would just go see Immigration's agents for a longer-term stay - would only need a couple days to get that sorted, so 30 vs 60 days is irrelevant.

Rubio sat on the Foreign-Relations committee in the Senate, and was no doubt familiar with the CIA's "Uyghur" militant-training program, before this latest twist. A similar operation was carried out against Russia with Chechens.