CaptHaddock

Bongo,

Don't give up the effort! I appreciate your skeptical posts. While I don't have direct knowledge of the Thai housing market myself, the self-serving mendacity of the real estate lobby sounds just like the song of the bubble deniers here in the States. And we can see now how well that has turned out.

Or course, they will never give up either. "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it" - Upton Sinclair

Capt Midnight

Some very interesting stuff here. One thing about "face" that many westerners fail to realise, is that it is a real, powerful, and sometimes destructive force, as well as the glue that holds many Asian cultures (not just Thai) together.

I recall some years ago that a visiting professor at Chulalongkorn University took it upon himself to sack a manual worker, forget the exact nature of the job that the subordinate did. The professor, as clever and well-educated as he was, simply failed to have any regard for the face of the sacked employee, who came in the next day with a gun and shot him dead.

Anybody who lives anywhere in Asia without bothering to learn as much as possible about the culture is asking for trouble.

Yes, although this is the kind of incident that happens here in farangland, too. I was once in a small office in a large corporation that was set up for the purpose of firing employees. There was a panic button under the desk that brought a guard into the room promptly. Workers in the US Postal Service have taken to shooting co-workers and managers so frequently that the phrase "going postal" has come into use to refer to workplace violence.

So, the risk of humiliating someone to the point of deadly violence is by no means exclusively Asian. And yet, there is a difference in the importance of losing face between the cultures, isn't there?

yikes. Count your blessings you're in the Big Apple.

May eventually retire to Thailand however, so the subject is of more than academic interest.

Like most farangs I sometimes think that I grasp the Thai concept of "losing face", but then some new episode makes it clear how limited my understanding is. I am only talking about "losing face" here, not "gaining face", which I take to be a distinct, if related, concept. Anyway we just had such an enlightening episode that I think others may find interesting. There is a, naturally, a large cast of characters in a tangled web of relationships, the complexity of which is important to consider since it is the ultimate point of the story. Here's the cast of characters, whose names have been changed:

Nok, 30, my wife, who lives with me in New York City since 2002. Nok is the eldest of three girls and essentially raised her sisters herself.

Nut, 28, my wife's middle sister. A pretty girl, she married "up" two years ago. They have a one-year old boy.

Noi, 22, my wife's youngest sister, a college student in Muang Lop Buri.

Both Nok and Nut graduated college in Thailand.

Somchai, 28, husband of Nut, just finishing his MBA, hard-working, ambitious young businessman type.

Jeab, 53, mother of the three girls and wife of Kamnan Thon. Very nice woman, shy, forced out of grade school to help her mother around the house. Deeply regrets lack of education.

Kamnan Thon, 55, father of the three sisters, eldest son in his birth family. Honest, hard-working, self-sacrificing, but at the same time, loud-speaking and frequently tactless. As a young man he worked to put his brothers and sister through college, all of whom achieved middle-class careers as a result, except him. Since he obtained the farm when his girls were young school age, he put them to live in his father's house in Muang Lop Buri where they would have access to better schools. Kamnan of five villages in eastern Lop Buri province, where the family farm is located.

Aunt Aom, 50?, sister of Kamnan Thon, an administrator in a government school in Muang Lop Buri and the central character in the story. After the death of their grandfather she is effectively the boss of the house in Muang Lop Buri where the three girls grow up and where Noi still lives.

Kob, 19, daughter of Aunt Aom, a college student in BKK and so, cousin to the three girls.

Suree, 55?, mother of Somchai, mother-in-law of Nut, a nurse who married a doctor. Turns out, as Nut learned only recently, the doctor is actually by now a baht-billionaire. The doctor lives in another city for some unexplained reason.

Nut and Somchai live in Suree's large house with servants in a gated community outside of Bangkok. Since the three girls grew up in a poor neighborhood in Muang Lop Buri, Nut has thereby moved up a great deal. Her family pressured her to marry Somchai, as it seems, because he was such a good "catch" economically. Nut herself was ambivalent on her wedding day, but that is water long under the bridge by now. Suree is by no means the harsh Asian mother-in-law of cliche, but Nut nevertheless recognizes where they loyalties lie within her husband's family. When young-couple type conflicts emerge, it is clear that Suree will always side with her son. All are overjoyed when the son is born and this does seem to enhance Nut's leverage in the family since everyone recognizes that if it should happen that the marriage were to end at any point, they would risk losing the apple of everyone's eye, the young boy emperor, who is spoiled by a household of adoring females.

For Aunt Aom on the other hand, life is not looking up so much. She and her husband, a school teacher, divorced a few years ago. Although she is a school administrator she continues to live in the house where she grew up, a house that is not up to middle-class standards. And therein lies the crux of the story. Some time ago, Aunt Aom descended on Nut to stay while she had some conference or other in BKK. And stayed. And stayed. Since then she stays as much as half time in Nut's house, which is really the house of mother-in-law Suree and the billionaire doctor, of course. Of course she was never invited to stay by Nut or anyone else. To the farang mind Aunt Aom is selfishly imposing on Nut to an extraordinary degree. But selfishness is evidently a familiar component of Aunt Aom's character. My wife resents her to this day because when the girls were growing up, Aunt Aom didn't really take care of them. My wife had to cook for and supervise her sister's from the time she was six years old. Even worse, Aunt Aom viewed her nieces as the poor relations and treated them like servants, commanding them to do household chores while exempting her own two coddled children.

And here is where I begin to lose my grasp of the social dynamics of Thai families. I asked my wife why her father did not step in during those years to restrain Aunt Aom, who, after all, as a younger sister is lower on the scale than he is and,furthermore, owes her middle-class status to his self-sacrifice in putting her through school at his expense. Kamnan Thon comes across as a forceful, assertive personality. Why didn't he protect his daughters? My wife just shrugs at that point saying that he never did assert himself in that way on their behalf. Was it because he couldn't enforce his protection since he was always away? Or is he driven to avoid conflict whenever possible, despite his apparently assertive personality?

A few months ago, my wife first mentioned the burden that Aunt Aom has been placing on Nut. I was aghast. Wasn't it humiliating for Nut to have a poor relation squatting in her home, which is not even hers, but that of her upper-class in-laws? Yes, my wife agreed, it was every bit as embarassing for a Thai as it would be for farangs. Couldn't Nut refuse to permit Aunt Aom to stay there? Certainly not. Nut would lose face. Well, then, couldn't Nut ask her father to tell Aunt Aom that she is out of line? Woudn't that solution fit into the hierarchical structure of the family? While Kamnan Thon would probably agree to do it, the family felt that since he is so tactless that such a conversation would be needlessly harsh. I don't know if there was actually any family discussion of this option or whether it was just my wife's assessment. On the other hand couldn't Nut go to mother-in-law Suree and apologize by expressing her embarassment at the tacky behavior of Aunt Aom. No, Nut couldn't do that either because she would lose face in that scenario as well. Now,this response genuinely surprised me. Why would Nut be blamed for apologising to Suree? Well, that's because Suree would be permitted to respond in only one way in such a conversation, by pooh-poohing the very notion that it was any imposition at all and saying how much she enjoyed having Aunt Aom about the house, etc. Since it pretty much goes without saying that those are not Suree's true feelings, putting her in the position of having to say them shows lack of consideration on Nut's part. At this point I begin to feel how tightly the social bonds tie the hands of every one involved. Indeed, the point of social custom begins to seem to be to deprive the participants of any option other than to grin and bear it.

We dropped the topic for a couple of months.

Recently, the subject came up again. It came out that Aunt Aom had purchased a computer for Kob a year ago from Nut and Somchai, who sell them as part of their business. The price was 20,000 baht. Aunt Aom paid 10,000 baht at the time, but hadn't paid the balance. Nut asked for the money repeatedly, but Aunt Aom allowed as how that was now the responsibility of her divorced husband, who hadn't, however, had any part in the transaction. I can just imagine Nut's face falling through the floor as her in-laws realize the poor relation is also a deadbeat. By this time my wife had decided to resolve the situation. She planned on asking cousin Kob to speak to Aunt Aom. Well, how would a college girl be willing to tell her mother to toe the line? Now Kob is a sweet, pretty girl, whom my wife and her sisters never blamed for the overbearing demands of Aunt Aom even if Kob was frequently the beneficiary of them. It's hard for me to see Kob standing up to her mother in any sense.

Just yesterday my wife mentioned me the problem has been solved. She did not speak directly to cousin Kob. Instead she went to sister Noi who is closer in age and closer socially to cousin Kob and asked her to make the request. And that worked as my wife explained because by going to Aunt Aom through Kob through Noi, each contact was through the person who was closest to the next in the chain. So, it was exactly the opposite to the farang preference for direct-confrontation. No one lost face. When she sees Aunt Aom next time, neither of them need feel uncomfortable, even if Aunt Aom knows about her role as an instigator, which she probably doesn't. Aunt Aom also paid the outstanding 10,000 baht on the computer.

So what does it mean to lose face? I gather that losing face is nothing more than the shame that arises from the public failure to avoid conflict. As such, it accrues to all the public participants in marked contrast to the notion of guilt, for example. Nor does it have anything to do with self-esteem, which, like guilt, but unlike shame, one can experience at home alone.

I asked my wife why none of the other participants could figure out the solution. She explained that people like her mother, who was aware of the whole situation, and Noi were too low in the hierarchy and too conditioned to passivity even to look for a solution, since any failed attempt could easily result in some kind of blow up and then they too would have lost face. Loss of face is like motor oil; it just gets all over everything. I also asked her why Nut could not find the solution since as the principal victim she had so much more incentive to take some social risk than even sympathetic bystanders. She thinks that Nut simply felt too constrained, living in a household where she has no opportunity for initiative of any kind. In some sense, doing nothing is never the worst thing you can do. Would my wife have found the solution if she had never left Thailand? She isn't sure that she would have. She has definitely developed more of the New Yorker's sharp elbows since moving here. And she doesn't have as much as risk either since she only visits once a year these days.

I also asked my wife what it would be like if we moved to BKK. If some family member turned up uninvited at our door, I would send her directly to a hotel. Would I be losing face all the time from actions like that? No, because I am a farang and the rules don't apply to me. To some extent, she is exempted as well since she can't be expected to control me.

So, the Thai social context places maximum, indeed exclusive, emphasis on avoiding conflict. Individual's feelings or entitlements would seem to take a distant back seat. Nor is the concept of guilt particularly relevant. Sort of like the old rule from driver's education, that the person most responsible for a traffic accident is the one who had the last clear opportunity to avoid it. And the traffic rule is like the Thai loss of face for the same reason: because the consequences outweigh all other considerations.

The Thai concept of loss of face is difficult to understand not because it is unknown to us farangs, but because loss of face is also very important to us. But when we say loss of face we mean loss of status. Such a loss of status could arise from conflict as well as other situations, but it would depend on culpability not the failure to avoid conflict. Even if some farang were to get into a fight he could have avoided standing up for his rights, while we might regard him as foolhardy, he would not necessarily lose face. He might gain face as a tilter against windmills, for example.

I'm going to be in the same boat since my plan is to retire at 62 (six years from now). It gets real complicated for me because my wife is 6.5 years older than me so we have to make medicare/tricare decisions too. If I'm apprehensive about anything concerning retirement, this is it!!

Yes, insurance is pretty critical. Medicare doesn't apply in Thailand. Does Tricare? Anyway I sent in for a quote to the Thaivisa broker. Will let you know what I learn. I will also get competing quotes, of course.

I am 58 years old and live in the US, where I have adequate health insurance. My wife and I plan to move to Thailand no sooner than three years from now when I retire. I understand that some companies, such as BUPA, will renew insurance for people over 60, but not sell them new policies at that age. Is it possible to buy health insurance coverage for Thailand now, while I am living in the US with the plan of renewing it to cover us when we resettle there? Has anyone done this?

>>How did Thailand fare during the 'Great depression' ?? My guess is that they were not greatly affected as they have always been agriculturally based and independent, and probably mostly barter trade....

Thailand was deeply affected by the Great Depression. One effect was the revolution that overthrew the monarchy in 1932.

My wife arrived here in New York City in 2002. She had a college degree from Thailand, but spent her first year studying English full-time at a university to get up to an American college-level standard. Then she did a two-year degree in a design field, finishing up with a 3.8 gpa and the best-of-class design award. She started with entry-level, dues-paying jobs in her field. Recently she moved up to her first job with real design responsibilities. Each job she has had was a step up, however, and each was a success. Her current job has full benefits and a good salary, which she is delighted to earn. All in all, her transition to an urban, middle-class American life has been remarkably smooth.

One of the big advantages for her was that she had majored in English as an undergraduate and was very motivated to experience living abroad. Also, since she is a city person, even though she is from a smallish town in Central Thailand. So, she loves New York.

I live in a 16 million baht house. Well, thats what is up for sale for.

My rent is 70K per month.

Im in Bangkok. You do the math.

Unless you are out of farang populated areas then renting is the way to go.

Okay, I'll do some math. Let's for simplicity say that the relative "value' of involved variables remains about the same the next 20 years - that means that the future equivalent of involved cash would give you the same housing conditions in 20 years from now.

a) Paying a rent of 70k/month means you'd have paid the 16 million in about 19 years and not own a thing.

Let's say you buy the place for 4.8 million in cash and take out a mortgage of 11.2 million (70% of the price). A payoff through 20 years at around 6.5% interest would make pretty close to 70K a month. So - the difference to case a) is that for the initial down payment of 4.8 million you'd be the owner of the 16 million baht house after the 20 years.

Not trying to argue, that one gets the best possible value for that 4.8 million - just trying to say, that it isn't that simple to figure whether rental or ownership is the better option.

Let's look more closely at this financial sleight of hand. The rent of 70k provides the owner with a 5.25% gross return. Not very handsome for the risks he is taking in the BKK property market. A mortgage for 11.2 million at 6.5% means a monthly payment of 83,504. Let's ignore maintenance costs. That means the total payments over 20 years would be 20,000,000. But you neglected the opportunity cost of that 4.8 million down payment. If that were invested at let's say 5% return compounded that would produce 13,000,000 after 20 years. So the total cost is now 33,000,000. The 70k rent for 20 years, if it doesn't change, adds up to 16,800,000. So the property has to double for you to break even in 20 years. That could happen, but it's by no means a slam dunk. The renter in any case takes much less risk.

No one is worth 40 billion in Thailand. That is Bill Gates type of rich and if someone were that rich in Thailand they would have to own the entire country.

Pretty much correct.

Is Forbes forgetting for some reason that well-known Thai who is worth $40 billion?

I don't understand the 40k baht per month requirement. If I were to settle in Thailand with my Thai wife, my retirement income from investments would exceed the 40k baht per month requirement. Would that income then be taxed by Thailand? After a while, my wife would also work and would probably earn more than the 40k baht per month. I expect that her income would certainly be taxed, but my retirement income then cease being taxed?

Regarding Social Security, my wife has been working regularly and paying into the system here in the US for the last 7 years. We plan to move to Thailand within the next 4 years. My understanding is that she could get SS from her work @ 62 yo if she continues living here but would require US citizenship to draw her SS if living in Thailand.

Has anyone had this experience? It would certainly be incentive to take the test before leaving.

I don't believe that citizenship status has any effect on eligibility for SS payments. I have heard many stories here in New York of immigrants retiring back in the old country on SS. Not all of these were citizens.

In addition to premiums and likelihood of paying off, one of the considerations in choosing health insurance is how long you can retain it. I have read that if you insure with BUPA before age sixty, they guarantee your right to renew for the rest of your life. Has anyone here got this coverage? I am not sure what it means if there is not also a restriction on the increase in premiums.

We may resettle in Thailand after I retire and I am thinking of buying insurance from BUPA while still here in the US and under sixty, so that I can be sure to be able to renew later in Thailand. Anyone have any advice on this strategy?

I might mention that the first Americans leaders did not trust the workers to vote properly, and at first only allowed White, male, free, educated property owners to vote.

Few Americans understand that the Electoral College exists because of slavery, which is not surprising given the misleading history of the period that we learned in school. The South would not have joined the Union without anti-democratic provisions to enable them to balance their interests against those of the more populous North. The first of these provisions was the Three Fifths Compromise which increased representation of Southern states in the House of Representatives by counting each slave as three fifths of a citizen. Direct, popular election of the President would have enabled the North to determine the outcome of presidental elections because they had more than double the population. So the Electoral College was created to preserve the unfair representation of the South in the House of Representatives in choosing the President. (Each state is allocated votes in the Electoral College as a total of its number of Senators, which is always two, and its Representatives, whose number is determined by the state's population of citizens, inflated in the South by including three fifths of the disenfranchised slaves.) It goes without saying that House members from the South could hardly have been representing the interests of the slaves.

The election of 1860 was the first in which a Northerner, Lincoln, was elected without the support of any Southern states, a result made possible only by the four-way field of candidates: Lincoln, Douglas, Breckenridge, and Bell. Lincoln won in the Electoral College without a majority of the popular vote.

My recommendation would be to get totally informed and then make a sound decision.

My Thai wife is in the same situation. She has a green card and will apply for citizenship in March. The main drawback is that she will always have to file US income taxes and possibly pay, even if she moves back to Thailand at some point. The advantages, for travel and inheritance, outweigh this, but it will be a headache if she ever were to return to Thailand. I recently read an American expat complaining that his tax return to claim the Foreign Earned Income credit was 100 pages prepared by some professional.

By the way there is an additional restriction on an IRA when the beneficiary is an alien. In that case, I believe the alien is compelled to pay income tax on the entire value as a distribution when inheriting it. A spouse beneficiary who is a citizen can choose to keep the IRA as an IRA and take required distributions out over her lifespan. This represents a significant benefit to a citizen. The govt evidently fears that an alien beneficiary, with or without a green card, would just scoot home with the money without ever paying any tax.

Up till 1986 they were going along swimmingly. Now they have 100 year mortgages

and still live in 50 square meter "houses"

Naka.

I have been wondering what became of those 100-year mortgages from the 80's in Japan. Are people still paying them off? Did the next generation inherit the mortgage and continue to pay it off? Also, in reading an article aout the Japanese housing bubble bursting, I came across the story of some salaryman who bought and apartment for the equivalent of USD 1.2 million in 1990 or so. Now the apartment is worth about USD 300,000, but he is still paying it off and plans to continue to do so for another ten years. Now, I wonder why this poor guy didn't walk away when the apartment went under water? Is it because of a contractual requirement or cultural somehow?

My understanding is that you are a resident of your old state until you move and change drivers licence etc to a new state. You still owe state income taxes if you live in Thailand. The best and easiest solution is to move to Texas which has zero state income tax. You can just stay in a motel 6 and use that address while aplying for a new drivers licence and registering to vote.

I don't believe this is correct. My understanding is that you can establish that you are not subject to any state's income tax by taking the steps mentioned earlier, i.e. surrendering your driver's license, divesting yourself of property in the state, etc. The purpose of these steps is to establish that you are not a resident and do not have an intention to return in the future. A US citizen is always a citizen and therefore subject to federal income tax, but residency, in all its legal permutations, determines whether you are subject to state or local income taxes. Here is a link to an opinion from a cpa I found on the web:

http://www.taxmeless.com/page4.html

"brought her over in Jan. 2002, and married later that year. When we met I was 52 and she was 23."

isn't less than a year a pretty short time to know someone before popping the question? isn't that kind of a young age to get married?

you certainly have one of the more interesting stories haddock. has your wife made any friends in her classes. is she allowed to have friends and see other people socially who are her own age? have you become friends with any of her friends?

Yes, yes, yes, yes, and yes.

Good evening my fellow gentle persons. Wow there are some rather bitter individuals here...

Well, siddv, I feel qualified to speak for the other end of the bell curve of opinion here. I met my future wife online in 2001, went to Thailand to meet her later that year, while there invited her to come to New York to study English full-time (involved a big extended family powwow), brought her over in Jan. 2002, and married later that year. When we met I was 52 and she was 23. We are happily married and just celebrated our fifth wedding anniversary. She spent a year on ESL to get up to a university level and went on to get a two-year degree in a design field here in NYC, earning some academic distinctions along the way. She got an entry-level job earlier this year and is prospering there. Like you, I am stacking up my nickels in anticipation of retirement in the not-too-distant future, which could well be in Thailand.

In our case I believe that it has worked out well for several reasons. My wife was an English major in her Thai college and was strongly motivated to live and study abroad. It was like opening the gate in a horse race and off she went. It is immensely satisfying for me to have been able to provde this opportunity and to see her thrive. As for our relationship, it is very strong. We spend all of our time together and trust is not an issue between us. We both like living here in NYC very much. Living in Thailand would have posed very different challenges, especially fo me. For one thing her family, who are honest people by the way, show the typical Thai familial closeness, which would be a little too much togetherness for me. And then there is the language and integration into society issue for me in Thailand although that actually has some appeal for me.

My advice for you is this:

1. Make sure that when she comes to LA to study English that she applies to a first-rate university with a full-time program. Otherwise she may have trouble getting a visa. My wife went to Columbia U. and had no trouble. We tried to bring over her sister at one point to study for three months at an ESL school and she was refused. Once you are refused she can just forget it in the future. So the stakes are high. As you have apparently realized, bringing her over on a student visa allows you time to get to know each other without the decision pressures of a K-1 visa. In the end if you two decide not to marry, you can feel confident that you have at least improved her situation in the process.

2. Pay close attention to your girlfriend's needs. Does she want to have a career here? Or is she only looking to advance her English skills? When there is a big age discrepancy you have to work a little to remember what was important to you at that age. In our case, although it would be financially advantageous for me to retire to Thailand, if my wife wants to continue to pursue her career here, I will retire later in order to enable that.

She will also need friendships here. Perhaps you can help her in this regard. You will spend more time socializing with younger people than you would have.

3. Start learning Thai seriously. I have started and there are numerous benefits.

Sometimes it makes sense to choose to play the small odds in life. On the one hand they may be the best odds we can get and, on the other, we can make the most of them by doing our best.

Good luck to you whatever you decide.

For those of you who recommend maintaining a US address while living abroad, are you worried about liability for state income taxes? Some states, such as California reportedly, can be very aggressive about coming after you to collect state income tax basing their claims of liability on legal standards other than the common sense notion of where you actually live. So, for instance, if you have lived in a state and continue to own property, they may interpret that as an intention to return to residence in the state and regard you as liable for all state income tax in the meantime. This would not be pleasant.

severing relation with local tax jurisdictions is a worry .. to keep a bank account I will need a US address.

I have an Internet biz w/ income I can run from Phuket as well as here, but the deposits & tax red tape could be an issue.

I am considering moving the bulk of my cash assets out of the US .. perhaps find a bank that is acceptable for US direct deposits

If you have time, you might consider moving for a few months to a no-income tax state before you decamp for abroad. Then you could use a US address, through one of those mail forwarding businesses that give you a local address, for example. Moving your assets out of the US does not reduce your tax liability, either federal or local, unless you intend to violate the law, that is. It depends on the aggressiveness of your state's tax collection practices. I would certainly investigate before making a decision. This is an area where an ounce of prevention may be worth much more than a pound of cure.

what did YOU leave behind YOU wish YOU still had?

what is easy to find in the west that has driven you bonkers looking for in Thailand?

suggestion, thoughts & regrets appreciated.

One critical step for an American retiring abroad is to severe your relationship with your state so that you can avoid state income tax on your retirement income. Doesn't apply if your state has no income tax or if it doesn't tax retirement income. For most of the states, and especially desperate ones like California, your may be liable for the tax unless you take steps to severe the relationship. These steps are things like returning your driver's license, selling off any real estate, etc. Imperative to check with a lawyer. Some states looks for any evidence of an intention to return as gounds for tax collection. Common sense does not apply; only the law does.

Finances are sorted, but do I actually want to retire? And what is the right age to do so?

This is clearly a topic near and dear to the hearts of many, mine included. It is plain that some succeed in retirement, early or otherwise, and many do not. I am working on the basis that what determines whether your own retirement is successful is how well you are prepared for what you retire "to." While we understand very well what we are leaving, the stress of work life in most cases, it is in the unknown future that we retire to where we will be content or not. So, my own process at age 57 incorporates these steps:

1. identify the sources of enjoyment in your current life: my own are fairly typical:

a. daily life with my Thai wife

b. dinner with my close friends of long-standing

c. two hobbies that I pursue, birdwatching and photography

d. exercise: daily six miles of walking (often the best part of my day)

e. satisfactions of a job well done at work with other people

2. plan how to accommodate each need in retirement.

a. Thai wife will be there, whether we retire in Thailand or remain here in the US

b. if we go to Thailand, leaving my old friends behind is a problem since new friends are just not the same. Friendship might be a reason not to leave.

c. these hobbies can be pursued in old age in most locations

d. walking is not an option in BKK so I would have to switch to a gym-based activity

e. not sure how essential this would prove to be in Thailand, but I might do a little light teaching to satisfy this need. I hope that I can find a better solution though.

Now, all this sounds too straightforward to need explaining, but many, perhaps most, people fail to plan even to this extent. My own parents never identified their need for companionship with peers and have felt lonely and isolated for twenty years of retirement. About five years ago I found myself in a job that stressed me out to the extent that I had to admit that I had no source of enjoyment in my normal day. So, I took up first one then the other hobby and now I am developing my interest and skills in both with a view toward spending more time at them in retirement. In addition, I am learning Thai to make the Thailand option more realistic. Since my wife, who is younger, will be pursuing a career while I am retired, the choice between Thailand and the US will basically depend on her career preference.

The financial problem is the largest one for retirement, but realistically planning for satisfaction requires inventorying our individual needs and sources of enjoyment.

If we go to Thailand I would retire in four years. If we stay in the US, I would work two or three years longer to meet the additional financial requirement. My current job is well-paid, low stress, but fairly boring. So, I would leave it now happily if there were no other considerations. But since there are, I consider myself lucky to have the options that I do.

Hope this helps.

Capt Haddock