BAF

i see u're being drown in blind anger BAF , not helpful .

Don't worry I'm not in anger, maybe it was the bold and underlined texts which have made you think so but thery weren't meant to be the written equal of shouting, they were meant to help them by highlighting the important bits on which to focus their thought process (and their replies)...

Not helpful I agree, they are still ignoring them and going on about their fairy world

Instead lets employ our most prominent (as u say thai apologist) THIS post is for you SAMRAN ( & maybe also heng??) .

Heng has already given his answer and that is (quoting verbatim from his post #53): "As mentioned, if you put yourself in an "impossible situation," who's fault is it?"

It says it all really...

Now let's hear from samran (not that he hasn't already answered, just read the thread...)

I think I get that you believe:

No, you don't.

You are just repeating random parts of your same old arguments to which I have already replied (to you and others) several times on this very thread.

I have suggested you go back and address (point by point) the replies that you had already got from me here and which you have left and are still leaving unanswered.

P.S.

yeah. For a white guy you sure do seem to know a lot about Thailand. You must be one of those guys that wishes he was Thai.

I don't know what kind of joke this is meant to be but he is half Thai and has Thai citizenship so he doesn't have to deal with ANY of the issues we have been talking about here...

There are too many signs and advertisement mainly in Chinese/English with no Thai at all to confirm that.

Ah, but the Chinese aren't evil bread-eaters like us... they eat rice so they're OK.

How many signs in English have all of the words spelled correctly?

BTW, the devil is (also) in the details: have you ever noticed how on the top of the advertisement boards there almost always are some Thai writings? If on advertisement boards foreign writings are in the highest place (i.e. higher than Thai's) the advertisers have to pay more tax on them!

personally i think the average thai is as xenophobic as anybody else.

Personally I think you are clueless about Thai culture and society. And what is worse, you refuse the data and facts spoon-fed to you.

i think the xenophobia exists and is used and exploited by politicians, but for the most part its overstated by people on this board, at least it applies to farangs. personally i think most farnags on here overestimate their own importnace in this country.

Let's close (immigration wise) our countries to Thailand (just like Thailand does to us) and see how important we are to them and how they to us...

i do wonder if the reason for the xenophobia in that survey is the flood of migrants thiland has had from burma and cambodia, not to mention their problems in the south. xenophobia towards these people is high IMO anyway.

So it's not xenophobia, racism and classism if it's not directed towards us eh..?

Do you come from a low GDP per capita country?

you know you act like its impossible to live here. its not. the regs may not match the west, but there is no reason why they should

"No reason why they should", you have already said that and I have already asked: what are the reasons for which we are allowing Thais into our homecountries?

MAYBE replying to my question you would see those reasons.

Maybe.

. when thiland's economy reaches the same level as italy's then you can talk about it, until then its a bit silly IMHO.

So why there are VERY MANY countries whose economy is far below the level of Italy's with much easier immigration laws than Thailand?

And do you know what is a "bit silly"? It's keeping to drone on about your groundless theories avoiding to address the hard facts and datas presented to you which disproving them and the counter-arguments confuting your Thai culture-ignorant opinions...

Typical of the smiling blind daydreaming Thai apologist brigade.

The fact that there are MANY countries with BOTH lower and higher (and some with much lower and much higher) GDP per capita and far easier immi laws proves that GDP per capita isn't the important factor you think it is.

Far more important are the society's perception of foreigners and the perceived possible pros and cons of allowing them into the country.

i disagree with you, gdp per capita is very important as once it reaches a certain level it implies that a large section of society is middle class, which in turn give rise to the priority of fairness, justice, stability, education, mass travel, reduction of corrution, ability to enforce laws etc.

So why there are MANY countries with BOTH lower and higher (and some with much lower and much higher) GDP per capita and far easier immigration laws than Thailand?

its at that point you expect countries to have more enlightened laws and regualtions esp. toward immigrants. if you think gdp per capita is not important why is it all the countries with very liberal immigration policies have very high gdp per capita.

So why in that Gallup survey the Philippines, with a much lower GDP per capita than Thailand and from the same region as Thailand, is globally the friendliest country to migrants and Thailand has the biggest number of xenophobic citizens?

Why most if not all Latin American countries with comparable or lower GDP per capita have far easier immigration laws than Thailand?

you go into eastern europe with its lower standard of living then suddenly you are confronted with the reality of the ingrained and nasty nature of european xenophobia and racism.

True, still that "nasty nature of european xenophobia and racism" is LESS nasty than Thailand's and translates into easier immigration laws than Thailand!

Thailand is one of the most xenophobic country in the world.

i think thailand is one of the most nationilistic countries in the world, and its perhaps a short step to xenophobia from there.

More BS, the USA and France, to name just two, are amongst the most nationalistic countries out there and still, look at their immigration policies!

BAF

It is pretty clear that you think that Thai people should be treated similarly to how you are treated in Thailand as a non-Thai. You advocate that 'we' westerners should start telling Thais to leave and influence govt policy where possible, to teach them a lesson.

Since you want to make an example of someone, and force others to suffer, how about starting with sending your wife back and giving 'Thai people' a taste of their sour immigration policies??

steveromagnino,

it doesn't look like a sure thing, far from it, still there is the possibility that you would understand what is "pretty clear" that I think if you started addressing (point by point and reading and writing slowly) the replies that you got from me in this very thread...

I am not holding my breath.

the only VALID comparison is with countries in a similar stage of development.

The fact that there are MANY countries with BOTH lower and higher (and some with much lower and much higher) GDP per capita and far easier immi laws proves that GDP per capita isn't the important factor you think it is.

Far more important are the society's perception of foreigners and the perceived possible pros and cons of allowing them into the country.

you make the point that thai citizens are treated so much more fairly in uk/usa/eu etc. how well are thai citizens treated in thailand? do they have access to fair and just laws? are they enforced fairly among thai citizens?

You don't get it.

Thais can get PRs, get citizenships, own land, work any job and be allowed to stay with their spouse and children in both the West AND Thailand, Westerners get all of that ONLY in their own homecountries.

you know the answer to these questions. why do you think you should have access to fairness/stability thais themselves dont have?

I am advocating being treated in Thailand as a Thai since Thais are treated in my homecountry as Italians.

I am clearly NOT saying that I should be treated in Thailand like I would be treated in my homecountry since, obviously, what I have at home is not available in Thailand even to the Thais themselves.

look at the countries above and below thailand in per capita gdp then decide how good or bad it is here in thailand.

I have already done that, haven't you read?

Thailand is one of the most xenophobic country in the world.

For example, a Gallup International Voice of the People survey about the people's perception of immigration as a mainly good or mainly bad thing found in 2005 that (snippets):

"THE PHILIPPINES is globally the friendliest country to migrants, while Thailand has the biggest number of xenophobic citizens." [incidentally, may I point out to you that the Philippines have a much lower GDP per capita than Thailand and are from the same region as Thailand?]

"The study found 87 percent of Filipinos believing that immigration is good for the country"

"Topping Asia and the world in animosity toward migrants at 82 percent is Thailand"

trying to compare visa regs between here and home is nonsensical IMHO. they will never be simliar

If you don't think that the reasons for them are Thailand's xenophobia and racism then why do you think "they will never be simliar" when so many other 3rd world countries (both richer and poorer than Thailand) do have far easier laws??

nor is there any reason that they should be similiar.

What are the reasons for which we are allowing Thais into our homecountries?

Do I take it that you would be OK with sending Thais residing in the West back to their smiling homecountry?

if they break their visa regs then yes.

I meant: change our visa regs to match theirs and send them back home.

Why should we allow them to reside in the West?

Many are already coming (legally and illegally) to be exploited in LOS and be sent back once they are not needed anymore...

if i may answer this. yes they are treated like shit, but they still flood here. why is that? it because thailand compared to their country of birth is far better. sad but true.

And the point was: for those reasons they are ALREADY coming (legally and illegally) in Thailand so your defense that easier immi laws would mean a flood of poor immigrants is groundless.

Besides, if that really was a concern, Thais already have much different rules for different nationalities so they could just make less hard the ones applying to "richer" immigrants...

It's because of something in your tea.

Pimalai, pour me another cup!

Enjoy, I prefer dealing with the real world and real people to self-deluding daydreaming.

I'm sipping a bit of tea and watching television this morning as I look out the window and watch of kind Thai gentleman mowing the green of the 10th hole. I fail to see exactly how the vicious Thais are discriminating against me?

It's because of something in your tea.

I have always understood that Thai immigration and business regulations were historically and primarily aimed at potentially large Chinese influxes and not specifically targeting Westerners.

That's point one.

Wrong, Thai-Chinese make up much of the middle class and are succesfully infiltrating the real elite ruling class, Thai-Chinese have very recently had their shot as top rulers with Thaksin.

Point two : it is Karens not Thais that seem to wish to protect their somewhat unique social, economic and cultural situation in this instance.

Wrong, the extremely protectionistic business laws and the very restrictive immigration laws are made by the Thais not by the Karens.

Point three: that the Karens in Thailand have no proper status here probably makes them circle the wagons even more than they otherwise might.

?

I am guessing you have a pretty poor understanding of Thailand's class system...

Point four: there are few "universal rights" and each country chooses what their rules are. I can live with that in preference to a "new world order".

What do you mean by this meaningless sounding buzzword? A "world order" in which, for example, women and ethnic minorities aren't discriminated and where the spouse of a country's citizen is allowed to immigrate and granted PR and citizenship even when it doesn't make economic sense and just because of a very basic matter of humanity?

Why would that be a bad thing?

Personally, I would love to see a "world order" not handicapped by useless and dangerous Political Correctness... Let's call a spade a spade and ACT ACCORDINGLY!

to make my point here a list of countries with similar gdp to thailand

Can I ask you what on earth has one country's GDP to do with its immigration laws (bearing also in mind that 1st world countries apart practically no one else are welfare state types of country)??

Besides, I have already provided you examples of countries with both lower and higher GPD (and, much more importantly, GDP per capita) than Thailand with far easier immi laws...

anyway why compare thailand to the uk/usa etc. why not compare its laws with malaysia/phillipines/vietnam/china/india etc isnt that a better way to gauge its regulations.

Maybe because this is THAIvisa and we live/have an interest in/a bond with Thailand and not with Malaysia/Phillipines/Vietnam/China/India?

I am married to a Thai and not to a Malaysian/Phillipina/Vietnamese/Chinese/Indian.

That said, the countries in the same region as Thailand which I know the immi laws of (because I have an interest in and I would consider them as alternatives to Thailand) have ALL easier regs than Thailand (for example Philippines and Cambodia) and...

maybe even compare to south american countries.

... they (or at the least the ones I know the immi laws of) have ALL easier regs than Thailand!

For example, if I were married to a Brazilian I would get a Brazilian Alien Resident Card in less than 2 months!

If I were married to a Mexican I would get a FM3 (1 year renewable permit of stay) with proof of a monthly income of € 570 or half that (€ 285, Baht 11700) if I own a house in Mexico (yes I can!) and after two years I can get Mexican citizenship!

. the immigration requirements maybe annoying but as far as i can tell they are pretty much on par with other comparable countries.

It's just because you do not know what you are talking about! See examples above.

far from perfect and perhaps not that sensible, but still ok for the most part.

Do I take it that you would be OK with sending Thais residing in the West back to their smiling homecountry?

secondly women who marry thai men get citizenship dont they? or is that no longer the case.

They are exempted from the prerequisite of getting PR before applying for citizenship and that's not to favor foreign women but to favor Thai Men (only foreign women MARRIED TO THAI MEN are exempted)... Another telling indicator of the true values at the base of the Thai society.

I think the easiest solution would be to buy a Thai Elite card, complete with the 5 year renewable visa. From what I've seen/heard, none of the hoops to jump through that would be required with most other visas.

I actually tought about that when I was single and they introduced it (BTW its very existence is quite telling of the state of the country and the society, isn' it?).

At the time there still was the investment visa, multiple entries tourist visas were easy to get and back-to-back 30 days visa runs were no problem and since the only value of the card was, to me, the 5 years visa I decided to wait and see since the Thai elite Card has always seemed, almost from its very inception, on the verge of being scrapped.

1m baht (24,000E) would get you 5+ years of relative security. If you wanted, after 3 years apply for the PR.

Nope, as ovenman has already told you the 5 years visa is not a valid base on which to ask for PR and, as asiaworld has already told you, the card comes from a PRIVATE COMPANY and since it's a Thaksin's brainchild and it's losing money the whole thing is on very shaky ground, now more than ever.

You say "Who knows what the (visa/immigration) situation will be like in a year or 5's time.", well: who knows what will be of the € 24,000 "5 years renewable visas" in 1 or 5 years time!

I don't have any real problems with Thailand's policies regarding immigration/citizenship. Pretty complicated (in some cases for the layman), but they have their reasons. If they had lax policies that made it easy for any and everyone to move here, the country would be flooded with immigrants in short order.

Why are they trying so hard to attract more and more tourists then..? And why do they even have a sort of retirement visa?

And what has it to do with spouses of Thai citizens and fathers or mothers of Thai citizens??

Many would come from Thailand's poorer neighbours of course.

Many are already coming (legally and illegally) to be exploited in LOS and be sent back once they are not needed anymore...

Some would be upright, self-supporting, decent "westerners". Many would be less well-off "hippy/backpacker" stereotypes with little or no means of supporting themselves.

Where is the problem? It's worth repeating that the latest official Thai govt stats say that for Q1 2007 the average Thai wage still is THB 7709 (USD 258, EUR 188, GBP 127) and that this isn't a welfare state type of country and if they really wanted to discriminate between those with "means of supporting themselves" and those without where is the visa for the wealthy under 50s?? Where is the investment visa (backpackers with little or no means of supporting themselves aren't going to be buying 3 millions baht condos, are they?)??

Citizenship in a country and the priveleges that come with it, should be earned, not handed out like prizes in a box of cereal. If you have to work to earn citizenship, you'll appreciate it more than if it was just handed to you. If you really want it, then you'll do what is required to get it.

Is this meant to apply only to Thailand or can we apply this to our homecountries as well and stop handing out like prizes in a box of cereal the PRs, citizenships, universal work permits, land ownership rights, business ownership rights etc etc we give to Thais?

You put forth good arguments,in well written form,and it would be good to see these skills applied to other topics.

I used to do that (under another screen name) and... thanks mellow1

Also,I have no idea why you would even want to live here.

In other threads I have written at length about that but in short: I lived for years in Thailand for the "edonistic lifestyle" (read: whoring, boozing and generally speaking partying my ass off) I could not afford in the West. Living what I would call a "normal life" is much more safe and enjoyable in my home country, and to be honest even said "edonistic lifestyle" would be much more safe and enjoyable in my homecountry (and even more so in some other Western countries) but it would be infinitely more expensive and far out of my reach...

That is it in a nutshell. I never came here nor pretended to be here for the weather, the food or "the culture" (whatever the latter means): all of these are WAY better back at home.

Thailand's cultural setting makes for a VERY good "naughty" playground and the funny thing is that the very same issues I talk about here and criticize about Thailand and the smiling blind daydreaming Thai apologists deny/defend are exactly what is holding (and will be holding for the foreseeable future) Thailand back as a 3rd world country and what allows me to enjoy Thailand as a single man (and prevents me to live in Thailand as a married man)

You don't have a Thai wife,

I do, and that's why I left Thailand

not looking to live in a cheaper manner because you are on a pension.Your young,go do things for a better future and stay away from 3rd world countries.Come on vacation have fun and go somewhere else to live.Living here and coming for a vacation is by far not the same. Good luck to you BAF.

Read back the thread and you will find our plans mentioned here. Thanks for the good wishes!

Throughout this thread, there seems to be an underlying idea that "one size should fit all countries" as far as immigration rules are concerned.

And, of course, that size should be the one that we grew up regarding as 'chiselled in stone'.

But should Thailand be expected to welcome immigrants in the way that it was to the advantage of England, the USA and Australia to welcome hard-working, skilled immigrants in the past?

(Note that I said 'England', and not the UK, as England drew on the Scots, Irish and Welsh, as well as the Flemish, German Jews etc.)

IMO, Thailand is as much vulnerable to being harmed by immigration as England etc were in a position to gain from it.

But having got an advantageous set of 'rules in' place (from 'Come, and Welcome' at one extreme in one set of circumstances to 'No Foreigners Admitted' at the other end in different circumstances) those 'rules' soon become the general idea of "What is Right", rather than "What is Expeditious for Us in Our Circumstances").

What is the 'right', however, alters when the circumstances alter, and then there is all sorts of argy-bargy as people get offended that those 'chiselled in stone' ideas that were implanted in them in childhood appear to being desecrated.

When farang men start marrying Karen (or Isaan) women, central-region Thais can hardly be expected to be undisturbed.

To simply dismiss all manifestations of those inner disturbances of their ideas of 'what is right and proper' as xenophobia will get us and the Thais and Karens and Northeasterners no further forward.

Mutual understanding stems from 'seeing where the other one is coming from'.

I recommend the book by Niels Mulder: "Thai Images, the culture of the public world" as an exposition of how modern Thais know and debate about their society, from the mish mash of 'social studies' that they get at the various stages of schooling from elementary to university, from their press, and from contemporary fiction.

Martin, the underlying idea of your post is that each country should do what it's best for itself and what it's best for one country isn't necessary the best for another. All fair and well but...

...while Thailand IS ruthlessly doing what it (its ruling class, that is) thinks it's best for itself disregarding basic human rights like that of being able to live with one's family and children, the Western countries ARE NOT doing what it's best for themselves and that's exactly because of those very same basic human rights (The declaration of the Universal Human Rights is, sadly, a product of just the Western civilization, it's not a shared accomplishment of the human race in its entirety) which we believe in and try to adhere to whenever and however possible.

Are you familiar with the condition in Thailand of the LEGAL immigrant workers from countries like Myanmar, Laos, Cambodia etc? The "Land of Smiles" doesn't allow foreign workers any automatic PR (and eventual citizenship) nor allow them to reunite with their spouses and children (like Western countries do), Thailand just exploits them and send them back home when it no longer needs them.

In certain cases (do "Phuket laws" ring any bell?) the treatment they get is illegal by internation conventions and resemble that of the Soviet gulags (they aren't allowed to leave the place of work, aren't allowed out of their accomodation at night, aren't allowed to have mobile phones etc).

If Western countries were to apply the same set of rules as Thailand to legal foreign migrant workers in our own countries we would be immensely better off and we were truly be doing what's in our best interest!

What do we do instead? Extend to foreign workers the benefits of our welfare states and treat them like we do our own citizens (work any job, own land, buy any thing etc), make and enforce anti-racism and anti-discrimination laws, grant them PRs and citizenships, allow them to reunite with their spouses and children and extend the benefits of our welfare states to them too etc etc etc

Near where I live I know of many Albanian and Moroccan families of 5-6 people each where for just 1 or 2 working people for family the Italian govt is paying welfare state benefits and services for the whole family (they are ALL legal)! They are a NET LOSS for Italy while if we were to disregard our "stupid" values and principles (which nobody else truly share nor practice in this world) and treat them like Thailand does they would be a NETT GAIN for Italy (only those 1-2 working people would be staying here and they would be sent back home once they are not needed anymore...).

And what about the Thais here? Almost all of them are women, most DO NOT work and just spend hubby's money and practically all of them is regularly sending money back home... They are, again, a NETT LOSS for Italy.

They wouldn't be here if Italy had the same set of rules concerning married foreigners as Thailand.

All of those people are allowed here just for humanitarian reasons and not because they benefit Italy, they DON'T.

Think it through, Martin, and let's hear what you have to say now....

All I have to add is what I always say when comparing our GFs'/BFs'/spouses' homecountry with our own: the only effective way to deal with the problems foreigners have in our home countries and that we have in foreign countries is RECIPROCATING the s.hit we get anywhere in the world outside of our tiny, fragile Western bubble of civilization. And if that means kicking out of my home country my Thai wife because we don't have a combined monthly income of 6/7 times the average Italian wage (as Thailand does), so be it.

Reciprocating Thailand's (among other things) immi and ownership rules it is (or should be...) very clear what Thailand would lose but what exactly do we stand to lose (provided they wouldn't quickly do an about face when realized we are serious about it)?

Well, it appears that the report is about one particular community and one particular business - elephant park.

People feel threatened and their reaction is unreasonable. What is so surprising? They've invested years and years of hard work and feel that new sons in law may take over their business.

How would small western business owners react in the same situation - a group of immigrants settles in the area and they look like they want to open new, competing businesses there, or marry their way into existing ones.

In the USA, this happens all the time. One that comes to mind is when a group of Vietnamese refugees settled along the Texas and Louisiana coastline and then began competing with Americans in the shrimping business. Along the Gulf Coast, generations of Americans had been involved in shrimping. They felt the Vietnamese were intruding in an area where they did not belong. It was not a pretty scene but eventually the situation was resolved. Today Vietnamese and American families co-exist and compete on an equal footing.

I fail to see the similarities between what happens in Thailand and what happens "all the time" in the USA (or any other Western country for that matter).

As you say, in the US the situation in the end gets resolved and everyone co-exist and compete on an equal footing, where is that happening in Thailand??

The exact opposite is true, and the situation is WORSENING (see the latest changes in immigration and business laws, regulations, their interpretations and actual implementations...).

supposedly I am a second class citizen here according to you.....even with a Thai passport.

You are still not correcting any factual inaccuracy I may have written... Nor here, nor in the thread you are in an inexact and out-of-context way referring to...

As a Texan I am sure you remember the warm welcome VietNamese shrimpers received in Texas and Louisian (torched homes and boats that the law ignored.)

The only online reference I could find is from pulitzer.org and says: "In 1981, arsonists torched two shrimp boats owned by Vietnamese immigrants in Seadrift, Texas, and the Ku Klux Klan held a rally against the Vietnamese in Galveston Bay, Texas, according to ‘‘Gulf Coast Soundings,’’ a book on shrimping by anthropologist Paul Durrenberger."

As for Thai immagrants, one of which I am married to, are restricted by quotas on visa and high investment requirements prior to visa approval. This from life experience as well as a law degree. US laws keep me in Asia where I am accepted based on my ability to add to the community and economically inspired violence is rare.

It isn't clear if you have married a Thai woman who already was an immigrant in the US or you are complaining about the waiting lists to immigrate to the US your Thai wife.

In the latter case, it's been argued to death and what you write is pure BS (and you say you hold a law degree?): there are hundreds of thousands of immigrants waiting to get into the US and immigration on the ground of marriage to a US citizen isn't subjected to quotas, just waiting lists (= she holds a place in a cue and will be called when it's her turn). More details in the relevant threads (for example: Spin Off From story Of My Thai Citizenship Application Thread).

In Thailand's case, on the contrary, THERE INDEED ARE quotas: 100 PRs per year per nationality (compare that to the hundreds of thousands immigrating and eventually getting PR and citizenship in the US or any other Western country of a similar size as Thailand)

In the former case, I am very curious to know more about those "high investment requirements" and how they compare to the ones existing in Thailand (just for your reference, even NON-INVESTORS applicants like married men have to show a combined monthly income of more than five times the average Thai's)...

very funny cause you like to write about about the reality that I and many others live.

But, hey, who am I to let real life get in the way of a rant?

Feel free, as usual, to correct any factual inaccuracy I may have written...

...and, as usual, you don't (you can't).

P.S. I have lived for years in Thailand, am married to a Thai, speak its main language and understand its main dialect. And all of that, in many cases, is totally irrelevant.

These Karen people wish to defend their business interests from "foreigners" (=farangs). How long does a Karen live in Thailand before losing the status of "foreigner"? Are they entitled to a but prachachon (Thai ID card)?

Check this thread out and what I have written there on this argument: "Thai Children With Foreign Fathers Don't Have Full Citizenship Rights In Thailand"

here we go.....

Yes, my usual bit of healthy and much needed reality check.

Feel free, as usual, to correct any factual inaccuracy I may have written...

article assumes that the foreign partner has some sense of business acumen.

The assumption must come from observing the average Westerner's standard of living and the average Thai's...

As for the claims of Xenaphobia, yeah well so what? Give me uneducated hillbillies anywhere in the world and I'll give you a pack Xenaphobes to interview for a newpaper interview. You get the good with the bad, even here in Thailand.

So you're saying that Thailand is ruled by uneducated hillbillies (the Thai immigration laws, Foreign Business Act etc come from the ruling THAI elite not from the Karen or any other hill tribe folks)...

And before our Yankee/EU/Australian Brothers and sisters get on and have a go at me, shall I'll just mention Dubai Ports, Chinese textile quotas and Philippine Banana's.

You can go figure out the rest.

Arabs, Chinese and Philippinos can own land and businesses and get PR and citizenship in the USA, Europe and Australia.

Can Americans, Europeans and Australians own land and businesses and get PR and citizenship as easily (or at all) in Dubai, China and the Philippines?

"You can go figure out the rest"...

Just because the local immigration system doesn't like you doesn't mean there is anything xenophobic about it. No more xenophobic than pre-1950's America was to blacks or UK to Indians during colonial times, etc. It's just preferences and sour grapes (yours).

I guess you're saying that Americans should still be treating blacks like they were pre-'50s and Brits treating Indians like they were during the colonial time...

Anyway, I have already said that I agree on this one (actually it was one of the most important points I have made): let's treat them like they treat us (RECIPROCATION) and see whose "preferences and sour grapes" is...

For starters, you wouldn't be holding a US Green Card

The fact is is you want farang stuff it's going to cost you, blame that on globalisation

???

You mean "before globalization" "farang stuff" used to cost less (let alone being available at all)?

That term is just another bogyman that people drag out without actually thinking much about it's meaning beyond catchphrase value.

So true...

Actually, I am against globalization but that's for the exactly opposite reasons of the so called anti-global crowd...

If they understood what globalization really means most of them (those genuinely believing the naive and grossly false, stupid and ignorant reasons they are given to fight it) would actually be PRO it

Well the first point probably isn't clear, of course they did.

Did what? They were available and cost less??

Luxury brands already tightly control their worldwide prices. there is minimal difference in prices for Apple, Chanel, Louis Vuitton etc.

This is a complete different issue unrelated to what we are discussing here and in Thailand those brands aren't pushing up the prices to match the Western prices to avoid speculations, in Thailand those luxury items COST MORE and in many cases MUCH more!

BTW, imported Western goods aren't just luxury items.

I used to buy and cook myself Italian made pasta and Italian made "ready sauces" in BKK and Pattaya and for example a jar of "sugo al basilico Barilla" (basil sauce Barilla) was 250 baht in Thailand 3 years ago (I shudder to think how much it is now) and is 50 baht now in Italy (it was 40 baht 3 years ago).

I doubt Barilla is forcing a five times markup on Thai retailers...

Further down the chain we have the Macdonalds, the Starbucks, Nike etc. They also control their prices to a large degree and the only direction we'll generally see those go is towards the upper prices.

Food and apparel are in very different situations, in the latter case and for the high end market it's true what you said above, in the former case the price is (should be!) much more related to the (local) costs involved (nobody is going to smuggle Thai made cheesburghers and cooked french fries in the West).

Secondly, I eat Thai food 95% of the time in Thailand,

If you were living in Thailand full time would you be eating those 25 baht meals all (or even most) of the time?

I used to stay at my girlfriends apartment but as we are now married and living with me we have to stay in hotels.

Ok, so if you and your wife were moving to Thailand what kind of accomodation would you choose?

My point still stands, if you want western facilities then why not live in Queensland, Florida or somewhere in the mediterranean, then you'll have your 1st world quality and 1st world prices.

The answer is of course a matter of personal circumstances, anyway I doubt that many here are staying (or want to stay) in Thailand to live the life of the average Bangkokian...

As for me, I lived for years in Thailand for the "edonistic lifestyle" (read: whoring, boozing and generally speaking partying my ass off) I could not afford in the West.

Living what I would call a "normal life" is overall much cheaper and much more safe and enjoyable in my home country, and to be honest even said "edonistic lifestyle" would be much more safe and enjoyable in my homecountry (and even more so in some other Western countries) but it would be infinitely more expensive and far out of my reach...