Do i need Permanent Residence?

[KiChakayan]

14 minutes ago, Neeranam said:

I also can see no disadvantages. There's only one friend I had who chose not to get citizenship but just PR. He could have got it pretty easily as he had some extremely influential friends, living in Thailand for decades. He had the order of the white elephant from the king, and was first secretary at the US embassy. 

I think some people, especially older ones are very nationalistic and the thought of becoming Thai scares them.

Back in 1985 I reached the stage where I could believe that I understood and embrace the values of the Australian nation, and therefore applied to become an Australian myself. 

Here, I still have too much contempt for many things Thai, and the only motivation I have to stay in a country that I see as dysfunctional is to give my daughters the best opportunity to stage the return to civilisation that I won't be able to achieve. Anyway, I could apply neither for PR nor for citizenship, but things are such that I would feel embarrassed showing a Thai passport with my picture on it, while I can show my Australian document with quite some pride.

[Neeranam]

17 minutes ago, KiChakayan said:

Back in 1985 I reached the stage where I could believe that I understood and embrace the values of the Australian nation, and therefore applied to become an Australian myself. 

Here, I still have too much contempt for many things Thai, and the only motivation I have to stay in a country that I see as dysfunctional is to give my daughters the best opportunity to stage the return to civilisation that I won't be able to achieve. Anyway, I could apply neither for PR nor for citizenship, but things are such that I would feel embarrassed showing a Thai passport with my picture on it, while I can show my Australian document with quite some pride.

Strangely, nearly all the the people I've met with this attitude don't qualify for citizenship anyway, so it's all hypothetical.

Maybe if you worked here for long enough, you could reach a stage where you could embrace the Thai values.

 

My eldest daughter is going to go to school in Australia to give her better opportunity, not sure what you mean by saying your daughters get a better opportunity here, unless they are Thai, God forbid, as they will grow up thinking half of them is dysfunctional!

[jackdd]

1 hour ago, Neeranam said:

Do you have a link to this information?

I thought there were other types of alien.

Of course there are also some other minorities, like stateless people or refugees, but i don't know the Thai government / law terminology for them

 

I don't have a link which explains it, but i can tell you how you can see it by yourself

In official texts / laws they usually use these terms:

 

ผู้มีถิ่นที่อยู่ในราชอาณาจักร

Translates to: person having residence in the kingdom

Called "permanent resident" in english texts

 

คนต่างด้าวซึ่งได้รับอนุญาตให้อยู่ในราชอาณาจักรเป็นการชั่วคราว

Translates to: foreigner who has a temporary permit to stay in the kingdom

This is just everybody who is here on any type of temporary visa, be it non-B, non-O or tourist visa.

 

Of course on a practical level there are differences for the holders of these visas, for example 2 year driving license for tourists, 5 years for non-immigrant visas, but on a high level like the laws all temporary stayers are considered the same (Maybe some differences in the immigration act? But i think not even there), they are usually referring to these two categories of foreigners.

 

Another thing that i noticed, but i forget the exact terminology that they use, is that when official text talk about permanent residents they use a Thai word that translates to something like "living", but when they talk about "temporary visitors" they use another word, which means something like "stay", so somebody who is here on for example a non-B visa is referred to as "staying in Thailand temporary" according to the official terminology, and not "living in Thailand".

 

If you want to research this further you can just look these Thai terms up on Google, you will find a variety of official documents using these terms.

Edited December 23, 2018 by jackdd

[samran]

So we had the pendant patrol arrive on the thread to quibble over the permanency of ‘permanent’.

 

At the end of the day it can obviously stripped away, but not for ‘any’ reason, the reasons are quite limited. 

 

If I was to compare Thai PR to Australian PR, then Thai PR is certainly more solid. Like Thai PR, you lose Australian PR if you travel outside of the country with out a return residence visa. (Those in the US lose their green cards if they don’t return in one year. Those in Britain lose ILR after 2 years away). 

 

In Australia - the minister has ultimate discretion over all visas, and the ‘character test’ has been used quite liberally in recent years to revoke peoples PR despite their being no criminal convictions against them. Mere association is enough to get you flicked in OZ.

 

In Thailand, you still can run it through the courts at least, and if the narrowly defined criteria aren’t met, the you are safe. 

 

Citizenship is even safer for those naturalised. I’m not sure there has been any reports in the RG of stripping of citizenship in recent years .  

 

In contrast Australia, the UK are making it much easier to strip nationalities of those who were naturalised or those born as dual citizens. At one point a draft legislation by the current government had ‘damaged to federal property’ as grounds for stripping citizenship - it has to be pointed out to the minister that graffiti of a post office (federal property) would qualify for stripping of citizenship. They changed the draft, albeit reluctantly..