How to live for 4000 baht a month. Not inc rents.

[dfdgfdfdgs]

On 10/28/2017 at 7:48 PM, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

But it seems he left off a few real expenses, like:

--visa/extension costs  according to the other guy I'm on overstay so..

--health insurance and/or medical expenses   don't have any, it's a calculated risk based on my age and the amount of savings I have (fairly young and enough to cover all but the worst accidents).  My lifestyle is healthy so I'm not high risk for a lot of the usual things that might hospitalise you.  I do a lot of marathons and trail/jungle running here but they have insurance included. 

--dental care/teeth cleaning  yeah

--trips back to the home country at some point/points  not been there for 5 years but I do travel around south east asia, so fair point.

--a GF or wife or just one night fling sometimes  i don't date girls who don't pay for themselves.

--mobile phone and/or home internet services  forgot that, 300 baht a month for wifi, unlimited data 199 baht a month with Truemove

 

 

[dfdgfdfdgs]

On 10/28/2017 at 5:32 PM, geriatrickid said:

Unfortunately, the The budget described by the OP is more likely to be associated with the people who kill themselves either through intentional means or through misadventure such as a drug overdose.

Sorry to say, if one reads the  news and TVF reports, the people who have jumped from buildings , hung themselves, slashed their wrists, overdosed etc. are of two distinct subgroups neither of which is exclusive; 1-They have suffered from a chronic illness and 2-  They have had very limited financial means. The 4000 baht  budget does not allow for the medical insurance let alone decent medical care, nor the contribution to a family unit essential to surviving critical  illness. 

 

I'm not suicidal at this moment in time.

[dfdgfdfdgs]

On 10/29/2017 at 6:10 AM, shanesox said:

Who says it’s “old” folk being frugal? A lot of under 30 losers in Thailand living on a few thousand baht a month because they don’t want to work hard in their own country

 

 

You say that like it's a bad thing?  Seems pretty smart to me.  You only get one life, why spend it working all the time, that's not a rational thought process and we only do it out of necessity and because society teaches us that we must.  I tried the working all hours thing, I did 14 hour days for about 5 years, made a tonne of dough, but I wasn't happy, I wasn't experiencing anything.  If I'd have died then I wouldn't have done anything in my life and all I would have had to show for it would be some wads of paper.  Valuable in a monetary sense but actually totally worthless.

[dfdgfdfdgs]

On 10/29/2017 at 7:26 AM, Just Weird said:

Do you really think that the OP, who lives on less than B4k per month, has an oven?

 

 

I have a mini oven.  It has an integrated timer and grill function.

 

 

 

 

Oven snob. 

[dfdgfdfdgs]

On 10/29/2017 at 7:39 AM, Just Weird said:

Really?  Exactly what do you get in that bag for less than B50?

 

Bag of sticky rice 1.5 baht

Bag of steamed rice 4 baht

Big 1-2kg bag of longan/rambutan/manogsteen (or whatever's in season) 15 baht

Any number of various curries, 6 baht each as the other guy mentioned

Apples, bananas, about 15 baht for a pack of 4/bunch of 4.

Normal size bottles of milk 11 baht

pack of 4 yoghurts 15 baht (though these are popular so you have to engage in a scrum with the old Thais who have been hovering there for hours waiting for the sticker guy to appear)

 

etc

 

You have to time it right and you will rarely get all of the above the same night unless you stay in there for an hour or two.  And different stores have different times when they reduce stuff.  Even different branches of the same store.  But as a general rule, 9-10pm works well.  Inconvenient for some maybe but I'm usually on the way home from a run at that time so it's okay for me.  The main branch of Tesco in Onnut (the flagship store) has stopped reducing food now, since it revamped its food court.  I think there were too many people waiting around and it wasn't the type of customer base they were trying to attract.

[Rhys]

What no entertainment?

[Just Weird]

26 minutes ago, dfdgfdfdgs said:

 

I have a mini oven.  It has an integrated timer and grill function.

Oven snob. 

So what?  What's that got to do with the OP?

 

Edit. Oops, sorry, this thread is so old I didn't realise that you were the OP!   Congratulations on your oven and it's functions.

Edited November 8, 2017 by Just Weird

[dfdgfdfdgs]

What do you mean by entertainment?  I'm not a party type of person.  I like hiking/camping and snorkeling/freediving and playing/watching sports.  I spend a lot of evenings finding snakes (not in BKK obviously, usually Koh Chang).  I've no interest in malls and coffee shops and bars.  Instead of cinema I'll usually torrent the film.  I'll go to a night market type place like W District to watch the football if it isn't on PPTV, but that's about it.

 

I don't live on 4000 baht every month, to be clear.  But when I stay in BKK, I'm usually at that figure or there abouts.  BKK is cheap.

[naboo]

36 pages?

 

Guide to living on 4000B/month. 

 

Each day, put 100B in your wallet. Brunch at 10am for 35B. Dinner at 5pm for 45B (push the boat out). Drink as much free water at these eateries as you can. 20B left to squander on a bar of soap, laundry detergent or a 20l bottle of drinking water.

 

1000B saved for bills.

 

Easy.

[MaeJoMTB]

1 hour ago, dfdgfdfdgs said:

Not everybody is paying for sex in Thailand.  

Most of us are ....... I'll probably stop in a few years or 10.

[MaeJoMTB]

47 minutes ago, dfdgfdfdgs said:

I have a mini oven.  It has an integrated timer and grill function.

#metoo

[Techno Viking]

1 hour ago, dfdgfdfdgs said:

 

Not everybody is paying for sex in Thailand. 

No man is getting his end away for free.

[dfdgfdfdgs]

On 10/30/2017 at 12:31 PM, bazza73 said:

Let's not kid ourselves. Thai women are with us because of the security we provide, compared to their previous precarious existence. Threaten that, and you arouse a raging demon.

That only applies to the older ones, who have had time to have had a 'previous existence'.  Lots of Thai girls just prefer white guys (for example), nothing more complicated than that.  Like lots of us prefer Asians.

Edited November 8, 2017 by dfdgfdfdgs

[bazza73]

3 minutes ago, dfdgfdfdgs said:

That only applies to the older ones, who have had time to have had a 'previous existence'.  Lots of Thai girls just prefer white guys, nothing more complicated than that.  Like lots of us prefer Asians.

True. Some Thai women prefer white guys because some Thai guys treat them like crap. Personally, I now prefer Asian women because most of them are not fat slobs.

Edited November 8, 2017 by bazza73

[dfdgfdfdgs]

4 minutes ago, Techno Viking said:

No man is getting his end away for free.

 

Why not?  You meet a girl on one of the dating sites.  Most of those are free.  So there are no costs to procure the 'target'.

 

You proceed to invite her on a recreational outing, to a park for example.  They like parks.  It's free.

 

She likes you and you like her and thus results copulation.  A condom might be advisable, but aside from that, everything is free is it not?

[bazza73]

16 minutes ago, MaeJoMTB said:

Most of us are ....... I'll probably stop in a few years or 10.

You might be surprised how far your libido can stretch with Thai women.

[dfdgfdfdgs]

On 10/31/2017 at 5:34 AM, thaibeachlovers said:

Seems that some TVF posters consider that one can "live" only if one is spending money. Given that most of what people spend money on is unessential and somewhat pointless, if one can live without all the extraneous clutter one could be far more content with life.

The year I spent in Antarctica where the only thing requiring payment was booze, and we all lived the same was the best year of my life.

 

There's nothing stopping the world living without borders and money - only greed drives these things.  Without personal greed, corporate greed, and governmental greed, money is obsolete.  You simply take what you need and no more and everybody works a limited number of hours to produce the things that everybody needs.  Everybody gets the same and everybody lives comfortably.  It'll need some sort of apocalypse for this to happen, I guess.

Edited November 8, 2017 by dfdgfdfdgs

[MaeJoMTB]

2 minutes ago, dfdgfdfdgs said:

There's nothing stopping the world living without borders and money - only greed drives these things.  

Not sure that works with Muslims in a non-Muslim part of the world.

Don't think it's a greed problem either.

[Naam]

1 hour ago, Rhys said:

What no entertainment?

he has entertainment.

 

Quote

dfdgfdfdgs said:

I have a mini oven.  It has an integrated timer and grill function.

 

[bkk6060]

Just now, dfdgfdfdgs said:

 

Why not?  You meet a girl on one of the dating sites.  Most of those are free.  So there are no costs to procure the 'target'.

 

You proceed to invite her on a recreational outing, to a park for example.  They like parks.  It's free.

 

She likes you and you like her and thus results copulation.  A condom might be advisable, but aside from that, everything is free is it not?

Yes, I use to do the same thing.  Met many girls for freebies on the sites.

I cannot judge others as like I say, I did the same thing.

But, 99% of the freebies are girls actually wanting a relationship.  Sure, I would lie and say that is what I wanted also.  

But at some point it clicked and the 2% of me that has a heart took over and realized, that it just did not seem right.  The sincere follow-up messages from the girls when I knew it was all for my benefit.

Hey go enjoy it but you may want to think at some point about their side and what they are looking for.

Edited November 8, 2017 by bkk6060

[MaeJoMTB]

56 minutes ago, dfdgfdfdgs said:

Why not?  You meet a girl on one of the dating sites.  Most of those are free.  So there are no costs to procure the 'target'.

Free the first 2 or 3 times, but if you don't give her money she won't be around for long.

And they bang every guy they meet on the first date, and usually they are fairly 'busy'.

Edited November 8, 2017 by MaeJoMTB

[balo]

Free the first 2 or 3 times, but if you don't give her money she won't be around for long.
And they bang every guy they meet on the first date, and usually they are fairly 'busy'.

Sounds like a cunning plan to me, free the first 2 - 3 times , when she realize you're broke she moves on. Then back to the dating site and rinse and repeat . [emoji41]

[dfdgfdfdgs]

I'm not just/solely looking for sex with lots of people.  But a gf that matches well is hard to find, so I'll take the sex until I can find it.

 

I think a lot of the girls are naive, they want a fairytale.  They don't seem to realise that their government doesn't really want us here and our situation is precarious.  Even if we pay for an elite visa it's no guarantee that programme is going to be around forever.  And people's jobs change, circumstances change, they grow tired of Thailand, miss their home etc.  It's tough for a Thai girl to find a farang boyfriend who will stick with her for a long time.  Personally I have no intention of ever getting married in any country, I think a growing number of people from western countries are feeling the same, marriage is an outdated tradition with little if any benefit other than an extensive buffet at the reception.  Older guys can maybe manage it better because they stem from a more traditional age, so the culture matches more to modern day Thailand.

 

I theorise that most of us only remain (fairly) monogamous because society insists upon us (particularly females) that this is what we must do.  If there was no stigma about having sex with lots of different people (and really, why should there be?), then I think we would all be doing it.  In Iceland they have the right idea there, it's normal for them to have sex with somebody before they've even had a conversation with each other.

 

I wouldn't lie to them as you used to, if they asked me if I wanted to be their boyfriend and I knew I didn't, then I'd say so.  If I wasn't sure, I'd say that.  About half the time they'll still have sex with you anyway.  The ones who aren't hyper-emotional, who don't have their heart set on marriage and a lifetime together, are usually good for casual sex until either you or they get bored.

[dfdgfdfdgs]

26 minutes ago, MaeJoMTB said:

Free the first 2 or 3 times, but if you don't give her money she won't be around for long.

And they bang every guy they meet on the first date, and usually they are fairly 'busy'.

 

I've met a lot of girls who have zero interest in money.  In fact I'd say it's very rare I meet any who do ask me for money.  But then I don't message the ones who give off that vibe, or stop messaging them if they start to give off that vibe.  Usually they're honest from the start and will say what they want from you, either on their profile or directly.

 

How big is the age gap between you and them?  Because she has to find you aesthetically pleasing and that's much more likely to happen if you are in your prime.  If you don't have a physical attraction then you have to ask yourself why she's talking to you; answer will probably be money.  Very few of the under 25 girls will be genuinely interested in guys over 40 or 45.  That's just life I guess, we all get past our sell by date eventually.

 

Pattaya is a whole different ballgame.  I avoid talking to any girl from there because 90% of them are after something, whereas in BKK it's more like 20%.  I wish those apps had a filter to exclude Pattaya from search results.  And I wish Tinder had an option for 'ladyboys', rather than just male and female, not so I can find them, but so I can't.

Edited November 8, 2017 by dfdgfdfdgs

[MaeJoMTB]

15 minutes ago, dfdgfdfdgs said:

I wouldn't lie to them as you used to, if they asked me if I wanted to be their boyfriend and I knew I didn't, then I'd say so.  If I wasn't sure, I'd say that.  About half the time they'll still have sex with you anyway.  The ones who aren't hyper-emotional, who don't have their heart set on marriage and a lifetime together, are usually good for casual sex until either you or they get bored.

I learned from Margaret Thatcher, speak very slowly, don't tell them the whole truth, or answer a different question to the one they asked.

Works every time.

Edited November 8, 2017 by MaeJoMTB

[taipeir]

The British spend over £100bn on benefits for the elderly. Looking at the pension in isolation is a complete mistake. They get housing benefit, council tax benefit, a "minimum income guarantee", other benefits, winter fuel allowance, free bus travel....
 
If you're unemployed or a carer you qualify for the national insurance credits....
 
The British welfare state is very generous; indeed, we're leaving the EU in part because we can't afford to extend its coverage to millions of other folk. 

One senses a big Porkie pie. British welfare doesn't stand up well to most developed economies in Euro.

This socialist paper agrees.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/pensions/11189414/Why-Britains-state-pension-is-one-of-the-worst-in-Europe.html

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

[taipeir]

One senses a big Porkie pie. British welfare doesn't stand up well to most developed economies in Euro.

 

This socialist paper agrees.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/pensions/11189414/Why-Britains-state-pension-is-one-of-the-worst-in-Europe.html

 

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

 

Also...immigrants pay more in than they take out

 

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles/1114/051114-economic-impact-EU-immigration

 

Over the period from 2001 to 2011, European immigrants from the EU-15 countries contributed 64% more in taxes than they received in benefits. Immigrants from the Central and East European ‘accession’ countries (the ‘A10’) contributed 12% more than they received.

 

 

 

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

[Craig krup]

14 minutes ago, taipeir said:

One senses a big Porkie pie. British welfare doesn't stand up well to most developed economies in Euro.

This socialist paper agrees.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/pensions/11189414/Why-Britains-state-pension-is-one-of-the-worst-in-Europe.html

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
 

I'm at a complete and utter loss to understand what it is that you think the link proves. The article talks about "pensions" not "pensioner incomes". My point is precisely that you don't capture what the British state does by looking at pensions. In many countries the pension is what you get: no housing help, local taxation help, nothing. Britain ain't like that. Of course if you live in a foreign country you don't get these other benefits. But that's a separate issue. Try sitting on your backside, living off rent like Rigsby and not even paying NI, in some other country and see if the "minimum income guarantee" kicks in, as it did for my ex-landlord.

 

It's also worth noting that the article says that provision in some countries is exactly why they're going bust.

[Craig krup]

14 minutes ago, taipeir said:

Also...immigrants pay more in than they take out

 

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles/1114/051114-economic-impact-EU-immigration

 

Over the period from 2001 to 2011, European immigrants from the EU-15 countries contributed 64% more in taxes than they received in benefits. Immigrants from the Central and East European ‘accession’ countries (the ‘A10’) contributed 12% more than they received.

 

 

 

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

Again, this nonsense kills me. The UCL study said that it was almost a wash out - neither a cost nor a benefit - the non EU migrants were a massive cost for the period looked at, and the EU migrants (pre-child rearing and retirement, post-education) have to be looked at through time. Looking at a snapshot of their position is just silly. Over 88% of EU migrants wouldn't qualify for a Tier 2 visa, and as they age and demand £7,500 a year secondary school places, and £2k a month universal credit the numbers will look very different. I don't mind. It doesn't affect me. But you'll see the truth of this in the lower per-head spend.

[taipeir]

You are trying to create your own conditions as to why they will be an economic burden when an objective study from UCL says they are not an economic burden and in fact they are contributing much more than they take.

Which makes sense as they are mostly health, young and in productive employment.

 

Your argument that kids extract money when they go to school and before they start working is a joke. Their parents are paying MORE in tax than the unemployed , pensioners etc. When they graduate they them go on to be tax payers. Also their families just by living in the UK spend pretty much all their income in the UK. Of course if the kids lived overseas you'd be moaning the money went overseas.

 

No dice.

 

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk