jayboy

You are 100 percent wrong. Where did you get such a daft idea? That is not the point of most retirement visa programs globally. I know this because I have made a study of these programs globally. Most are not by any stretch of the imagination for elite retirees only. More wealthy than a poor person in the country and contributing something to the local economy? Yes. Most first world countries have no such retirement programs. An exception is Australia, where indeed the requirements are for the elite only. That makes sense for a first world country. It makes no sense for the vast majority of countries offering retirement visa programs like Thailand.

You can call it daft.Many influential Thais would disagree.You are kidding yourself if you think there is undiluted pleasure in having a horde of penny pinching foreigners permanently resident on short term visas, to say nothing of the criminals and sex tourists that blight the country's reputation and abuse its culture of hospitality.

Thailand is not remotely a third world dump like Ecuador or even the Philippines.It is becoming a prosperous country and the trajectory is upwards and at a quickening pace.

I'm not suggesting existing retirees should be sent packing (though the Thais may decide otherwise), but the current system is obviously anachronistic for reasons already explained in detail.

The signs are already in the air - restrictions on visa runners, tighter implementation of visa regulations, slow down in PR processing.

Retirees are also in a clear category, although the wealth criteria should probably be raised substantially.

Why? Do you realize many retirees own their homes in Thailand? That means they pay no housing costs. Many who are renting or not renting are doing quite well on spends well under 800K baht per year. To repeat, this is elitist. The current retirees at the current levels are no burden at all on the Thai society. Rather they are a benefit. There is hardly any safety net for Thais much less retired foreigners. We pay our own way at these current levels and there is no problem with that.

Note that in the Mexico retirement visa program, those who own a home in Mexico qualify at one half the required level as those who don't (and even the upper level is under 800K baht per year income). If the financial rules are raised, at least an adjustment for those who own condos here should be strongly considered.

But the whole point of most countries retirement programmes is that it should be elitist, in other words to attract wealthy, educated and reputable retirees.

Those who just get by probably shouldn't be here at all.

How do retirees own their own homes by the way?

The next part I find rather funny. "It's a very broad church with a corresponding..." The rallies certainly never show that and to steal a line you used lately, your pavlovian response to the yellow shirts and casting them all as Sino-Thai and disregarding everyone else is amazing! Yes I certainly see a couple of more middle class folks at red gatherings, usually driving a truck loaded with the less fortunate and never sitting in the mix agreeing with what is being said from the stages. Or are you implying that this very broad church are just the unseen millions? I mean, really, there are the PTP folks (relying on the continuation of the patronage system) and some folks aligned with the more draconian of the red leaders ... but a broad base in anything but the rural farmers? Notta chance unless they see something in it for themselves.

I actually agree that the red rallies are largely rural working class and lower middle class events, though the urban element is surprisingly high and increasing over time.However whether you like it or not there is much support from many who wouldn't dream of attending rallies and who have no time for or are completely disillusioned by Thaksin.Before the May events descended into violence no Bangkok resident could not be struck by the support from ordinary people on the streets for the Reds.The internet is alive with Red support from professionals, students, middle class and educated people.

I assume your reference to a couple of middle class folks driving trucks is facetious, but anyway the reality is the Red supporters are almost everywhere.

- Several posters have mentioned that they would like Thailand to get rid of “undesirables”, Jayboy refers to "...Pattaya dominated by the very worst kind of expatriate and long term "tourist"?,...". I'm not sure what he means by this except that it is probably racism and just meaning he wants to get rid of people he doesn't like <insert nationality>. Perhaps you are alluding to there being some foreign criminals resident in Pataya or other places. But your ideas still do nothing to eliminate these criminals, since criminals also have money and usually lots of it. Most would easily have enough assets to meet any new high income/asset criteria that immigration could possibly set. So higher income/assets criteria is not likely to filter out “undesirables” like many would believe , it would only reduce the overall number foreign retirees/residents.

I don't see how I can be accused of racism.Nothing I have said even touches on ethnicity.What I personally feel is neither here nor there.

My earlier post is I think clear but to summarise.Thailand has changed significantly over the last thirty years and is no longer a poor country.There is no obvious economic argument for a large (and mainly downmarket) expatriate population, particularly of modest wealth or skills (if they work).Thais are tolerant people and rules change very slowly.However there is some evidence that at the policy level there is concern that Thailand is hosting many thousand of expatriates semi permanently who are on short term visas, and defying the spirit if not the letter of the law.Few other countries would tolerate this, particularly the visa run process.In brief Thailand needs fewer expatriates and those who are here should meet specific criteria.Legitimate businessmen are already looked after very efficiently.Retirees are also in a clear category, although the wealth criteria should probably be raised substantially.The key challenge for the Thais is the vast mass in between.Whatever one's views one can sympathise with the Thais wish to have along hard look at these people, particularly since the regulations governing them have grown like Topsy over many years.

Actually the conversations covered many topics, but you find talking about politics amazingly dull? Hmmmm

Politics isn't boring but that's not the point I understand why you might want to deflect the subject which was your view (and those who think like you) on why some posters are supportive of the red cause.

I wondered whether there was some intelligent underpinning.Clearly there wasn't, just some odd comment about violence - as though any sane person supports it whether from the red or yellow thugs, or the military.

All very weird.

LKY's daughter in-law (Temasek holdings) did'nt complain about Taksin being 'corrupt'. Bought up his shares with a smile on their faces.

And your point is?

Doh - do we have to explain everything to you?

And your point is?

And BTW, since I was referring to the Singapore side, but you assumed I was referring to Taksin....

I guess that makes YOU the pavlov dog!!!

Woof Woof!!

Touche! I stand corrected.

LKY's daughter in-law (Temasek holdings) did'nt complain about Taksin being 'corrupt'. Bought up his shares with a smile on their faces.

And your point is?

That a clever crook is still a crook. Taking advantage of corruption does'nt leave your hands un-dirty. I thought it was obvious.

No it's not obvious at all.You need to read up on the details of the Temasek sale not just grunt out a Pavlov dog (Thaksin crook, Thaksin bad) reaction.The sale was legitimate and was supported by key elite Thai institutions such as Siam Commercial Bank.There were some tax irregularities certainly but the campaign against the deal only gained traction when Thaksin's domestic enemies saw it as leverage.

LKY's daughter in-law (Temasek holdings) did'nt complain about Taksin being 'corrupt'. Bought up his shares with a smile on their faces.

And your point is?

Bilahari was also critical of the Thai government in 2008, labelling then premier Thaksin Shinawatra as "corrupt" along with "everyone else, including the opposition." Opposition leader is Mark.

Personally I have always found the Singapore leadership cadre to be nuts, intelligent yes but a bit barking.Bilahari, Koh, Mahubani (the craziest "can Asians think?" of the lot).

Grudging respect for Harry Lee though.

Meanwhile Kausikan was also allegedly critical in his assessment of Singapore's other neighbour' date=' Thailand reported the Australian press.

He had supposedly said that Thaksin Shinawatra was "corrupt" along with "everyone else, including the opposition".

[/quote']

Remember the law-bending and use of nominees in the case of Temasek acquiring Shin Corp?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sale_of_Shin_Corporation_to_Temasek_Holdings

The squeaky clean Singapore govt and its cronies seem to be willing to bed with those they called corrupted if the purpose serves their interests. Birds of a feather flock together?

Of course, the advice for such a structure was proposed by a rather respectable law firm in Thailand. And ironically, is used by hundreds if not thousands of companies in the country.

And supported by the then Siam Commercial Bank with its elite shareholders.

As a postscript to Arkady's excellent post, I suppose one consideration is that the kind of high value foreigner Thailand wants and needs (eg skilled MNC manager) is not necessarily interested in PR.From my experience these kind of people see a Thailand posting as a say 5 year interlude before returning to the mainstream in Tokyo, London, New York etc.For these people the Thai work permit/visa system is extremely efficient and trouble free.Indeed with a capable secretary/competent lawyer (which most would have) the annual renewal process would be no more hassle than signing the usual mountain of documents.So PR while of interest to some of these wouldn't really interest most of them.Therefore the kind of pressure that would make the government sit up and take notice isn't really there.

Very encouraging and thanks for the report.For no very good reason I had come to the conclusion that local renewal would be a pain, and had been thinking of a one day renewal when next in the UK.Your report suggests local renewal works very well.

Sorry, ... my post wasn't clear. By "who" I meant their character, who they are as people etc ... not who as in identity. Perhaps what I should have said is that the people I talked to throughout the evening had opinions about "why" some posters are "red".

I chose not to participate in that line of discussion but I did tend to agree with the people.

It still seems an extraordinarily dull way to spend an evening.let me guess..posters sympathetic to the Reds dont understand the network system and mostly have Isaan ex bargirls as companions etc? Surprise me that the discussion was on a more intelligent level.

A more interesting discussion would be why millions Thais are sympathetic to the Red movement despite the huge black propaganda effort.Truth is it's a very broad church with a corresponding political complexion - from left to right.To me the fascinating aspect is that it is much more socially representative than often suggested, though I agree with a base of working and lower middle class.

If recent judicial decisions are anything to go by, we already no the outcome.. farangs are entitled to an opinion but some on here have an unhealthy interest in certain threads. Is there 6-7 of you using the same ip address

Judicial decisions at this point are moot. The cases are under investigation.

I had an interesting conversation last night with several members of the forum (only one other ever posted on politics). Their opinions were quite fascinating on the topic of who the farang are that are red shirt supporters.

If you think that there are people using multiple screennames the mods do have the ability to check IP addresses. Mine is a static IP address unless I post from my BB (I never post from my BB). My mac address changes between about 7 computers but all on the same IP address. Can all of this be defeated? certainly it can by anyone that has some IT skills. However, over time the truth will out. (to steal a phrase from the English, i think)

Lighten up.It's just a chat forum for expatriates.Getting together to discuss who is Red and who is not is just sad (as Alan Partridge might say).Who gives a toss?

And anyone who posts with multiple identities, regardless of political views, really needs to find something more interesting to do with his life.It's not really possible to win an argument on Thai Visa nor should one want to.The best that one can hope for is to gain some insight (and I often get this from members with whom I profoundly disagree).

I am no stranger to violence involving Armed Forces and if I had been anywhere the disturbances I would have removed myself and my family from the vicinity at the sound of the first gunshot. It is a pity that the protesters were not of that mindset. Those that remained knew that they were in a place of extreme danger and must take some of the responsibility for the subsequent sad events. It cannot be denied that they formed a contributory factor and I wonder if a true peace can be attained unless they acknowledge this within themselves.

You could say the same about the Chinese students murdered in Tianmen Square by the Chinese army.Some people are courageous and have strong principles.

The results of this report will be a PR exercise. There were shots from both sides but the confrontation would never have taken place without the red thugs. So blame the deaths on the originators and not who finally pulled the trigger - even in close battle fear usually leads to friendly fire casualties. Even if the journalists were targeted they like the other unfortunate victims were are direct result of the violent confrontation and seizure and that lays the blame squarely on the reds. End of story.

I often feel that posts than are completed with "end of story" simply demonstrate that it is in fact just the beginning of the story.All the evidence now emerging whether from official sources or elsewhere are showing that many innocent civilians were shot by the army.It may well be there was no alternative to the overall strategy and I still believe the army acted professionally in a very difficult situation.

In this particular post with its curious mixture of defensiveness, dishonesty and prejudice there is a very reasonable point made about the "fog of war".However I think that it's important that the argument that protesters deserve whatever comes to them should be resisted.The Reds had every right to protest.The blame for the tragic outcome rests on many shoulders including the red leadership, the army and the government.

The reds DID have the right to protest, and at the same time also did NOT have that right. When acknowledged red leadership like Arisaman called on people to bring bottles to fill with petrol in advance of the protests they lost the right to call it a "peaceful protest". That there were Sae daeng's "Ronin" in the mix certainly sealed the fate of how the protests would end. In an attempt to beat the Oct 1 deadline for being in control to set the new leadership for the military the red leaders (perhaps not all of them in the case of Veera) seemed prepared to go to any lengths to secure control before that deadline. It is good to see a change from "most" to "many", regarding the deaths as it still remains unclear who killed whom during the battles.

The right to PEACEFUL protest can be used as a benchmark for democracy. There is no right to armed protest.

The official reports have begun to emerge and the events will become clearer though not perhaps with complete certainty.I would however expect the current consensus that many innocents were killed by the army to become widely accepted.This is not a criticism of the military effort which was generally professional, though clearly with some disgraceful lapses.However it will be instructive to compare positions taken including the barking mad "reds murdered themselves" to various other extremes.It will be clear that the back pedalling has already begun (see quoted post) and will certainly continue as the truth becomes generally accessible.It's becoming evident as most reasonable people would have anticipated is that it was a very mixed picture.Anyway all credit to Abhisit who slightly against my expectation is taking a very fair approach (so far).

Thanks Jayboy!

There is a major difference between us Jayboy. That is; I speak to the posts and you talk about the posters.

I suggest others be the judge of that.

Not so. It might well be if the message had been the application of the law is not impartial. Whether the law itself is impartial or not is down to the law makers - and nobody in their right mind would call them impartial.

The judge who, in the concealment of assets case, stated that he was not going to rule against somebody who received a lot of votes needed to read his job description.

From Thai Visa Forum rules:

15) Not to use ThaiVisa.com to post any material which is knowingly or can be reasonably construed as false, inaccurate, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise in violation of any law. You also agree not to post negative comments criticizing the legal proceedings or judgments of any Thai court of law.

Time for jdinasia to start thinking of a new username, methinks. Or have I broken TV rules regarding the pre-empting of moderator actions? :jap:

An intelligent man always uses a caveat

Hence the use of the words "may not be as ..." , nor was I critical of a particular ruling or member of the judiciary.

In fact those of you that actually do break that rule fairly regularly might want to learn from my post

His hypocrisy is astonishing.Fortunately since his tactics (baiting and goading members) were exposed long ago, few take him seriously.

,As as for your comments about him, as well as his cabinet and ministers all being "squeaky clean", I challenge you to name me JUST ONE PM in the history of Thailand who has managed to do that. Believe it or not, I like Abhist, and believe he is a good man, but a good man at perhaps the wrong time. I believe that in his heart he truly does want to do what is right for Thailand, but as an old saying goes: It's hard to soar with eagles when you're surrounded by turkeys. Or in his case, vultures.

All of this is sensible and few reasonable people would disagree.The only key omission in the summary is that Abhisit himself is under pressure from the vested interests in the military (budget doubled since the 2006 coup) and other elite circles.Culturally, as an upper class Thai, it's hard for him to resist but I suspect he knows he must for the good of the country.He has the intellect and liberal education that gives him the necessary detachment.But time is rushing by and soon the political environment will be become very difficult to manage.As Harold Macmillan once said when asked what politicians needed to worry about, "Events, dear boy, events".Already ordinary Thais are discussing politics among themselves in ways that that would horrify the elite that so long has excluded the majority from meaningful power.To some extent and looking at the broad context the events in Bangkok earlier this year simply demonstrate a confirmation that everything has changed and for better or worse there is no going back to the deferential status quo ante.

The results of this report will be a PR exercise. There were shots from both sides but the confrontation would never have taken place without the red thugs. So blame the deaths on the originators and not who finally pulled the trigger - even in close battle fear usually leads to friendly fire casualties. Even if the journalists were targeted they like the other unfortunate victims were are direct result of the violent confrontation and seizure and that lays the blame squarely on the reds. End of story.

I often feel that posts than are completed with "end of story" simply demonstrate that it is in fact just the beginning of the story.All the evidence now emerging whether from official sources or elsewhere are showing that many innocent civilians were shot by the army.It may well be there was no alternative to the overall strategy and I still believe the army acted professionally in a very difficult situation.

In this particular post with its curious mixture of defensiveness, dishonesty and prejudice there is a very reasonable point made about the "fog of war".However I think that it's important that the argument that protesters deserve whatever comes to them should be resisted.The Reds had every right to protest.The blame for the tragic outcome rests on many shoulders including the red leadership, the army and the government.

Thaksin regarded it as a good occasion to provide the United States with the other side of the story of what had taken place in April and May, the Thai government having already given information to the US administration and Congress.

Pretty sure the "other" side of the story needs to be told by the other side. Does Thaksin think he'll do a better job than D. Rivers?

Asked whether Thaksin would be able to attend, Thani said it was up to the US authorities to decide whether to allow him into the country.

Asked whether Thailand would seek his extradition if the former prime minister entered the country, Thani said the Office of the Attorney-General (OAG) would be responsible for making such a decision.

However, Sirisak Tiyapan, director of the OAG's International Affairs Department, said it would be for the Foreign Ministry and the Police Commission to request extradition. Unless the two agencies made such a request, the OAG has no authority to do anything, he said.

"The Foreign Ministry and the police have done nothing [in this regard] so far," he said.

This crap makes me nauseous.

Maybe just pull it together and arrest him and do your jobs.

Certainly Dan Rivers was in the pocket of Thaksin & his Red Shirt terrorists. Most one-side reporting I have ever seen. I always knew - by living in the U.S. until two years ago - that CNN was a very unreliable source of "news." But, I had believed the BBC to be a little more accurate with it reporting. But after the Red Shirts occupation of Bangkok, I now know the BBC is as bad as CNN and set out from the beginning taking the side of the violent revolutionists (Thaksinites). No reporting was more pro-Thaksin, more UDD, more PTP, more full of lies and anti-government than was the reporting of Dan Rivers. I saw the little scumbag somewhere in the Middle East on TV just the other day. As much money as Thaksin paid him I would think he could retire comfortably in his mansion in northern Thailand. CNN International and the BBC along with Dan Rivers are disgraceful!

An extreme example perhaps but does indicate the treatment meted out to foreign journalists by the obsessives if they dare to depart from the "approved line", particularly when they point out some home truths.It's odd that people like this who express themselves like this who lie (Rivers in the pay of Thaksin!) and bluster are surprised when the CNN,BBC etc ignore their absurd and paranoiac complaints.

I wonder how many emails [email protected] will get.

She's got one from me, anyway.

I have seen it below.It's not bad at all, mainly well balanced (apart from the sentence I discuss below) and free of hysteria.It is also accurate as far as I can see.

I think however it would have been even better if you had rephrased the part:

"and his organisation's demands show that the premise of "democracy" is of no significance as they are essentially calling for the return of Thaksin's ability to pillage the country without recourse to the Law."

because you here move from an impressive cool recitation of facts to a logically disjointed and slightly weird subjectivity which is out of synch with the rest of the letter, as well as being plain wrong.

Thaksin is many things, but he is not an idiot. He will not go the US. This is a non-story.

Possibly.

But if he does go to the US, says his piece and departs it will be hard for his enemies to claim he is permanently on the run from one third world dump to another.It will be hard for Thailand to pretend most countries don't consider any extradition request politically motivated and it will be hard for those forum members whose main interest is castigating Thaksin that the wider world shares their views.In fact quite a few people will have egg on their faces, especially little Kasit (not so much Abhisit who is not pushing the matter so much)

If - assuming Thaksin does travel to the US - the Thais say that for some technical reason an extradition request was not served (for Thailand and the US have a valid treaty) you can be sure they have been told in advance by the State Department they are wasting their time.If Thaksin doesn't travel then not only does he seem rather cowardly but in addition I think that this will be evidence that extradition proceedings represent a clear and present danger for him - somewhere, sometime.

Just speculation on my part and we will soon know the score.I do feel that Thailand (and Abhisit) has a lot of goodwill internationally so perhaps Thaksin will be shipped back to Bangkok.I honestly don't know - nor do I suspect do most other people.

No - not at all!! If he says his piece the world will question why a US Govt office would summon a wanted terrorist criminal to give evidence against the "friendly to the US Government". It will also question little Shinawatras own actions whilst in power. The fact is Khun t is a fugitive for the rest of his life. My final comment - you seem to think that ts has some sort of moral code when he has shown time and time again that he is a bare faced liar, and not embarrased by his own stupid anti human conduct. My own feeling is that all of this is just hot air from ts's publicity department and his two small minded lawyers. As one poster said he will withdraw stating he is doing it to save everyone trouble. No one will have egg on their faces except for him who already sports a whole omelette on his fizog!!

In a way this discussion is redundant because very shortly we will have the hard facts available.Then you can be sure forum members may wish to revisit the various predictions made.Although your post is a little confusing it seems you are saying he will withdraw.At that point I selflessly will be making various "egg on face" awards as appropriate.

It makes you wonder (just a little bit) if THIS might be the payoff for Victor B.

Extradition of Thaksin to Thailand from the US? It would make me proud

And what if not? Will you feel ashamed?

It would certainly prove that the US has lost any shred of moral or legal decency if they refuse to extradite him. I won't feel ashamed, I will just pity that my old homeland has completed the transition to a 3rd world banana republic.

His extradition from the US would make me proud because it would prove to me the US has not yet become a completely corrupt den of thieves with no sense of right and wrong, or of justice.

It wouldn't prove anything of the kind.

In this matter as in most other dealings between states, the driving force is what is perceived to be self interest.Law plays a part certainly, morality in my view very little.As Charles de Gaulle commented long ago "The state is a cold cold creature." All this is understood very well by the great powers the US, China, Russia etc.

Thaksin's human rights abuses will hardly be relevant in this (US extradition) matter.Why?

1.Thailand has never raised them as an extradition matter (and we know the reason why)

2.Brutal though Tak Bai and other southern atrocities were, Thaksin was not primarily responsible. (The military was).

3.Drugs war killings.Difficult case to make and sell internally since the ultimate objective seen as laudable (still probably the opinion of most Thais).Support at the time from elite interests still powerful can't be overlooked (and certainly won't be by Thaksin's lawyers)

On the subject of Robert Amsterdam generally, it won't be sufficient to hurl abuse at him as is common on this forum and elsewhere, sometimes accompanied by snide anti semitism (S.P Somtow).His arguments will have to be addressed and demolished in possible in a cool forensic way.They never are, certainly on this forum.If the Thais were clued up they would already be looking to recruit one of Washington's many very smart lawyers.

4.Bush/Blair plausibly guilty of much worse