youreavinalaff

Not pedantic. Realistic. Relying on the death of your mother and older brother to achieve something is far far from nearly achieving it.

To break a contract one must go against that contract. By law, Thai contracts have a notice period, for both parties. If that notice period is adhered to, the contract had been followed, not broken. Judging by your last paragraph, you don't seem to care either.

So, 40% of Muslims claiming state support is hardly a drain on the economy. Especially as much of it is employment based.

Immigrants working lower paid jobs do not get paid less. They are subject to national living wage. Also they have to earn enough to satisfy visa requirements.

Giving notice is not breaking a contract. As for how many serious matters, the OP did not say.

Employment based benefits. Proton is suggesting they are not contributing to the economy. Receiving employment based state support suggests they have been and likely still are. What percentage of all UK citizens would 40% of Mudlims be? My guess would be around 10%.

5555. That's funny. You've added figures together for effect. Those figures also include state pension. That is employment based. Meaning they have been working and paying dues, if on full pension, for 37 years.

Net migration is well under 1 million. Why use figures you can support? Anyhow, if there were not any immigrants working in UK, a very large percentage of care homes would be grossly understaffed or closed down due to lack of staff. Many people in need of domiciliary care would not get it.

The claim was "most immigrants" are on benefits. Also, the Government statistics show "state support" in their figures showing ethnic claimants. That includes government pension, which is not really a benefit as its been paid for. I would imagine the figures would be quite different if pensions were not included. Give it 10 or so years it will change a lot too as second generation UK citizens become pensionable age.

He completed "most" and ended "some". Not sure where you get "several" from. He also adhered to the contract by giving correct notice for serious matters. He seems to be taking contracts seriously.

The conversation is immigrants. Not race. Immigrants benefits claims are not based on race. Neither are UK citizens. Your comments suggest there are not any white immigrant in UK.

White people? Don't you mean UK citizens?

A million every month? I think you'll find net immigration is not even that a year. Immigrants on visas can only claim employment based benefits. Only then, those on a working visa must leave if they are not working for longer than 60 days. Those on family visas cannot claim if not working. If they are not working, spouse must adhere to the financial requirements, soon to drastically increase, alone. Muslims? I wasn't aware benefits were religion specific

Really? What would that achieve, as a married couple?

The immigrants that are here working, paying tax, NI and contributing to the economy? The same immigrants that are employed in and actually keeping the healthcare industry going?

Hardly "nearly king".

You are funny. You question my experience as only one offs, then bang on about your one occurance. You talk about 1 pub or one boy in Norfolk then say you are talking about whole towns. Make up your mind. You need to compare like with like. Now you say lunatic drunks make you feel unsafe. Plenty of those in Isaan. Anyway, seeing as you like to compare, I would rather walk around my home town in UK at night than BanYang district in Buriram. Then again, I'd rather walk around Muang district of Buriram than Croydon. I'll say it once more. Both danger and safety are in evidence in SOME places in both UK and Isaan.

There is no positive. Both had a large part of their lives taken away from them. For that, there is no amount of compensation that would suffice.

Not in the case of the OP as he is speaking about completing the sponsor part of the application.

You are mixing it up. You clearly don't know the difference between " illegals", "refugees" and " asylum seekers".

More likely, the poster had not seen the reports about the updated law. Therefore, was not aware that what hecposted was outdated. Not everyone can be perfect.

It was you that started using whole countries by comparing Isaan to UK, as a whole. I pointed out " In some places in UK. Some pubs. Some places in Isaan too." You asked about personal experience. Then you ask if I watch the news. Watching the news is not personal experience. I went into 6 pubs on Saturday night. Nothing to worry about. I've been in a night club in Buriram when things have kicked off. Also had to protect myself and my wife in an instance of heritage rage. That's why I used "some" in my post and have not used "never". Some parts of Isaan are no go areas. As are some parts of Suffolk,Norfolk (As you’ve) mentioned) Devon (where I live) or other parts of UK. Other parts will only very occasionally have issues. Hence my original reply to you " In some places in UK. Some pubs. Some places in Isaan too."

There used to be a law that living costs were deducted from compensation. As the post above shows, it's now been scrapped.

I have not posted that I've never experience it. You made that bit up. I've also never denied it happens in UK. 21 years in Thailand and 32 years in UK. I have felt equally safe in both countries. That leads me back to my original comment which was " in some places". Not all of either country is dangerous or perfectly safe. No need for outbursts.

Nearly King?