Who really suffers

[JackThompson]

2 hours ago, Thailand Outcast said:

I can actually understand why they appear indifferent, or disgusted.

Their country is being "occupied" except, by people with passports, instead of guns.  ????

The thing is, they rely on there occupiers for employment and investment etc.????

"Occupiers" have control over a place - while we are powerless to do anything but b____ on here ????.  If we were buying up their land and making them homeless in their own country, or robbing the social-services they designed to support their own people - then I would see where they are coming from. 

Surely powerful global interests have hooks in Thailand - same as every country these days - but the elites who own those have nothing to do with us plebs. 

[wilailuk]

5 hours ago, Thailand Outcast said:

I can actually understand why they appear indifferent, or disgusted.

 

Their country is being "occupied" except, by people with passports, instead of guns.  ????

 

The thing is, they rely on there occupiers for employment and investment etc.????

Occupied???

 

Thailand is a cheap whore, nothing else.  They slept with the US during the 60´s, sold out all national honor for that phony war next door, (did the same during WW2 with Japan, they ARE a rare breed, lying bastards) -  got a whole new country and infrastructure for that job, still does... CIA had/have waterboarding camps here, they fly in "terrorists" - and the Thai/Chinese elite mofu´s dont´care, they don´t care about anything, not you, not me, only money, they are Chinese you know?

 

So please don´t feel sorry for Thailand or the scumbags who rob, steal and f... this beautiful country, they don´t deserve any pity, only Karma will get them, sooner or later..

 

 

Edited April 10, 2019 by wilailuk

[gentlemanjackdarby]

6 hours ago, RocketDog said:

No offense intended, but I find it almost comical that you are discussing bank interest and it's impact on your estate value. I say comical because bank rates around the globe are just a sorry joke. 

 

For that to be even remotely relevant you must have one huge pile of money in the bank!

 

Of course you will earn the best of the atrociously pathetic rates with timed deposit products like CDs. Talk about having your money tied up! 

 

If I had that kind of money in a bank I'd be deeply concerned about more likely threats like bail-ins or outright confiscation as sovereign debt reaches an inevitable breaking point. 

 

Personally, I'm getting out of fiat currencies and more into tangible assets like real estate, metals, and collectibles.

 

And NO, I don't trust banks as far as I can throw them, and I'm a 97 lb weakling!

Bank rates aren't necessarily a joke everywhere in the world - I have some cash in a savings (demand deposit) account at a large credit union (about USD 10 billion in assets) that's paying over 2%;

 

I also have some money in a purchased money fund (Charles Schwab - SWVXX) that's paying 2.3%

 

Now those rates look very poor when compared to returns on equities over the last 10 or so years, but those interest rates are about par with inflation (depending on one's situation and the measure of inflation one chooses), meaning one's principal is maintaining its purchasing power. And there's no risk to principal

 

Shares in the purchased money fund can be sold and settled the next day, so no tie-up there

 

I also have a small position in a high-yield bond fund (PHYZX) with a current 30 day SEC yield of 6.58% - Of course, there is risk in that type of investment from a rise in interest rates (not likely for the foreseeable future) and from the bond holders inability to service their debt (not much of a risk currently since corporate debt levels aren't that great and most issuers are servicing their debt), but the risks are not as great as holding equities.

 

Speaking of outright confiscations, real estate and precious metals are prime candidates for confiscation when a particular country's economy goes down the tubes - don't forget the 'nationalization' of entire companies that happened in Latin America in the '60s or, in the 1930s, President Roosevelt's outright ban of the private ownership of gold.

 

As for collectibles, if one owns anything of note, such as pictures, sculptures, porcelain, etc, it would be quite easy for a government to in effect confiscate them by simply heavily taxing sales by auction houses, dealers, etc.

 

[Cat ji]

Or, in effect, "confiscate" retirement funds/investments.  ...And when Reserve Banks are "nationalised", the rest would soon collapse anyway.
(Why parking 800K baht or more in a bank in Thailand can be a good option for some people.)

[Cat ji]

2 hours ago, JackThompson said:

[...]
Surely powerful global interests have hooks in Thailand - same as every country these days - but the elites who own those have nothing to do with us plebs. 

That's what I was referring to earlier, re financial stability of a country.  Generally, the more cooperation with the global financial powers-that-be, the better it is for investment.  OTOH,... hence Venezuela.  Of course, just plain government overspending and overborrowing, goes the same way.

[gentlemanjackdarby]

7 minutes ago, Cat ji said:

Or, in effect, "confiscate" retirement funds/investments.  ...And when Reserve Banks are "nationalised", the rest would soon collapse anyway.
(Why parking 800K baht or more in a bank in Thailand can be a good option for some people.)

?

 

'Reserve' banks (U.S. Federal Reserve) are already 'nationalized' in the U.S. and, in effect, the U.S. Federal Reserve already exercises control over 'private' banks by tools such as the federal funds rate.

 

A government wouldn't need to to 'charge up the bloody hill' of 'confiscating' retirement and investment accounts - the government would simply tax the gains or distributions, as it does now, just at much higher rates. If the rate was high enough, it wouldn't take long for someone living off the account to be forced to 'spend down' everything in the account; the end result is the same.

 

Or, for example, the U.S. government might bring back the old 'net wealth' tax in which a tax is levied upon the financial instruments one holds, such as stocks or bonds, or simply on one's total 'net wealth' or 'net worth'. That's not the same as an income tax since an income tax exists only when 'something' happens, i.e., income is earned; with a wealth tax, one owes a tax on what one owns even if one does nothing.

[impulse]

On 4/8/2019 at 12:26 AM, CanuckThai said:

A reasonable investment (or brokerage) can almost guarantee a safe X points above inflation or X% over interest rates at a bank...

 

For a few years, then you'll take the haircut when another 2008 comes back around and wipes out all the interest you've made, and more.

 

Edited April 10, 2019 by impulse

[Henryford]

20 hours ago, Pattaya46 said:

I have read many similar posts along year. It's a good thing to assure she will get everything you want she get, but after that, what would happen to you if ever she dies before you?   (accidents happen) 

Very unlikely but if she did her son would inherit it all. Hopefully he would let me stay in the condo but at 80-85 would i care? Happy to rent till i croak. The annual income is still mine.

[jacko45k]

13 hours ago, Thailand Outcast said:

If it's not such a bad deal, why don't you move all you cash / assets here?  ????

 

You know why you don't, and the 800k should be no different. 

That is chalk and cheese. 

Moving 800,000 to Thailand plus living expenses is far removed from moving every penny/cent one has unless it really is all one has. It is very much a burning of the bridges and absolute folly. We are all on temporary 1 year residences. 

[Cat ji]

11 hours ago, gentlemanjackdarby said:

?

 

'Reserve' banks (U.S. Federal Reserve) are already 'nationalized' in the U.S. and, in effect, the U.S. Federal Reserve already exercises control over 'private' banks by tools such as the federal funds rate.

 

A government wouldn't need to to 'charge up the bloody hill' of 'confiscating' retirement and investment accounts - the government would simply tax the gains or distributions, as it does now, just at much higher rates. If the rate was high enough, it wouldn't take long for someone living off the account to be forced to 'spend down' everything in the account; the end result is the same.

 

Or, for example, the U.S. government might bring back the old 'net wealth' tax in which a tax is levied upon the financial instruments one holds, such as stocks or bonds, or simply on one's total 'net wealth' or 'net worth'. That's not the same as an income tax since an income tax exists only when 'something' happens, i.e., income is earned; with a wealth tax, one owes a tax on what one owns even if one does nothing.

Yes, all of that is definitely on the cards for me. 

Re nationalizing the Reserve Bank...let me put it this way...I'm talking "3rd world" style. The major commercial banks...well, they say nationalize them; what and how, I don't know. The populist national socialist doing the talking does not care about the reactions at the global level, would probably like the drama, sees it all as neo-colonialism. (Something like Venezuela or Zimbabwe.)

[losworld]

On 4/8/2019 at 8:25 AM, mlkik said:

I keep 800,000 baht in a Thai bank for my retirement extension and the interest rate is as good as the rate if I kept it in a UK bank.

and... what's your point?

[mlkik]

1 hour ago, losworld said:

and... what's your point?

My point is keeping money in a bank in Thailand or the UK the interest rate return is about the same,so I keep it here to enable me to obtain my annual extension without any worries.

People who keep their money in banks here are no worse off than keeping it in a bank in their country of origin.

Edited April 11, 2019 by mlkik

[Thailand Outcast]

30 minutes ago, mlkik said:

My point is keeping money in a bank in Thailand or the UK the interest rate return is about the same,so I keep it here to enable me to obtain my annual extension without any worries.

People who keep their money in banks here are no worse off than keeping it in a bank in their country of origin.

Makes for an expensive visa. 

[Thailand Outcast]

8 hours ago, jacko45k said:

That is chalk and cheese. 

Moving 800,000 to Thailand plus living expenses is far removed from moving every penny/cent one has unless it really is all one has. It is very much a burning of the bridges and absolute folly. We are all on temporary 1 year residences. 

I don't see it as chalk and cheese.

 

I see the 800k as part of my wealth, in it's entirety, not something that I can be forced to pay, because it's not a large part of my overall wealth.  I treat the 800k as I would treat 8 million, and make sure both are put to work for me.  Thai banks will not get a free ride off me.  

 

A bad deal is a bad deal.  Simple as that.   

 

However, you do raise a good question.  You have said someone should not move the 800k to Thailand, if that is their life savings.  What if it was 5%, 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, etc etc of their life saving?

 

At what percent would you advise not moving the 800k to Thailand of the sole purpose of getting a visa?

 

 

[mlkik]

2 hours ago, Thailand Outcast said:

Makes for an expensive visa. 

No it is very cheap , 1900 baht per year. And the money in the account is a good back up for unexpected medical problems and reasurrance that I do not have to worry about my future.

 

[Gweiloman]

I don't see it as chalk and cheese.
 
I see the 800k as part of my wealth, in it's entirety, not something that I can be forced to pay, because it's not a large part of my overall wealth.  I treat the 800k as I would treat 8 million, and make sure both are put to work for me.  Thai banks will not get a free ride off me.  
 
A bad deal is a bad deal.  Simple as that.   
 
However, you do raise a good question.  You have said someone should not move the 800k to Thailand, if that is their life savings.  What if it was 5%, 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, etc etc of their life saving?
 
At what percent would you advise not moving the 800k to Thailand of the sole purpose of getting a visa?
 
 

I guess if 800k represents 80% of your total wealth, then you would understandably want to put it to work and maximise your return.
But if it only constitutes 10% of my wealth, then I’m more than happy to put it into a FD paying me 2.4% pa as I’m a firm believer in having a diversified portfolio which includes cash in bank.
So essentially, the Thai visa only costs me Thb1,900 pa and with my saved agent fees of 15-20k, I can treat myself to quite a few sumptuous meals.


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Thailand Outcast]

1 hour ago, mlkik said:

No it is very cheap , 1900 baht per year. And the money in the account is a good back up for unexpected medical problems and reasurrance that I do not have to worry about my future.

 

Cut and pasted from a post of mine in another thread. 

 

The figures speak for themselves.  It's basically a 45,900 baht a year visa, and you lose control of your money.  

 

Also, the money in your account is not for emergencies.  It is not back up.  You can only use 400k of it for 5 months of the year, or you don't get next year's visa. 

 

 

Firstly, the 800k is tied up for 5 months.  400k is tied up forever.  Of course, you can withdraw any or all of it, but you will not receive next year's visa, so that's as good as 400k you will never see again, for as long as you wish to live in Thailand. 

 

You will get between 6% to 8% return if your 800k is in a diversified, non aggressive, managed fund, in your home country.  Let's just pick the average of 7% for this example.

 

You get 1.5% from a Thai bank for your 800k.

 

Here's the maths.

 

800,000 baht x 7% = 56,000 baht per year.  (return from a fund)

 

800,000 baht x 1.5% = 12,000 baht per year.  (return from a Thai bank)

 

56,000 baht - 12,000 baht = 44,000 baht.  (this is what you are forced to "lose" under the 800k method)

 

44,000 baht + 1900 baht (visa fee) = 45,900 baht.  (this is the total cost to an expat using the 800k method, and they have lost the use of their money through seasoning and have to deal with all the paperwork)

 

45,900 baht / 12 months = 3.825 baht. (visa cost per month to live in Thailand under the 800k method)

 

versus

 

20,000 baht / 12 = 1,666 baht.  (visa cost per month to live in Thailand if you use an agent, and there is no seasoning to worry about, and you maintain control of your finances, which are left in a safe western country, and no paperwork to do)

 

3,825 baht - 1,666 baht = 2,159 baht.  This is the extra cost to people using the 800k method, or, what people using the agents save, per month.

 

Remember, we are talking about the same "product."  Not an inferior visa class.  

 

Of course, there are other issues to think about, like how your beneficiaries get the money if it's in a Thai bank etc, but the above shows the loss / savings over one method versus the other method.

 

I am lucky, I have some time to sit back and see what happens after the 90 days, with those who have used an agent. 

 

To sum up, the 800k runs at a continual loss for the expat, as it doesn't even keep up with inflation.  

 

You say I don't see the 20,000 baht ever again, but you don't see the 44,000 baht in losses, that you will never earn each year, from being forced to lodge 800k into a Thai bank, at 1.5%, with 400k of it you can never use again.    

 

Now, compare the 800k method to the visas offered in nearby countries, and you can see what a lousy deal this is.   

[marcusarelus]

19 hours ago, wilailuk said:

Occupied???

 

Thailand is a cheap whore, nothing else.  They slept with the US during the 60´s, sold out all national honor for that phony war next door, (did the same during WW2 with Japan, they ARE a rare breed, lying bastards) -  got a whole new country and infrastructure for that job, still does... CIA had/have waterboarding camps here, they fly in "terrorists" - and the Thai/Chinese elite mofu´s dont´care, they don´t care about anything, not you, not me, only money, they are Chinese you know?

 

So please don´t feel sorry for Thailand or the scumbags who rob, steal and f... this beautiful country, they don´t deserve any pity, only Karma will get them, sooner or later..

Karma and God and the tooth fairy. 

[Thailand Outcast]

20 minutes ago, Gweiloman said:

I guess if 800k represents 80% of your total wealth, then you would understandably want to put it to work and maximise your return.
But if it only constitutes 10% of my wealth, then I’m more than happy to put it into a FD paying me 2.4% pa as I’m a firm believer in having a diversified portfolio which includes cash in bank.
So essentially, the Thai visa only costs me Thb1,900 pa and with my saved agent fees of 15-20k, I can treat myself to quite a few sumptuous meals.


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

You can easily get 6% to 8% in a non aggressive fund.

 

You are ripping yourself off.

 

See Post 226 for the figures. 

[marcusarelus]

3 minutes ago, Thailand Outcast said:

You can easily get 6% to 8% in a non aggressive fund.

 

You are ripping yourself off.

 

See Post 226 for the figures. 

5 years ago the pound was at 55 baht.  Figure your 6% and the pound at 40 baht.  How'd we do? 

[Thailand Outcast]

1 minute ago, marcusarelus said:

5 years ago the pound was at 55 baht.  Figure your 6% and the pound at 40 baht.  How'd we do? 

Is every foreigner in Thailand on the pound?  

 

in any case, that means it would take more pounds to deposit the 800k now, thus making it an even lousier deal for Brits. 

Edited April 11, 2019 by Thailand Outcast

[Jip99]

Just now, Thailand Outcast said:

Is every foreigner in Thailand on the pound?  

 

 

No, but the Dollar and Euro are hardly sparkling either.

[Thailand Outcast]

1 minute ago, Jip99 said:

 

 

No, but the Dollar and Euro are hardly sparkling either.

Show me the "sparkles" in depositing 800k at 1.5% into a bank in a 3rd World country, where you can't access it for 5 months, and after 5 months, can only access 400k of it?  ????

[Cat ji]

3 hours ago, Thailand Outcast said:

I don't see it as chalk and cheese.

 

I see the 800k as part of my wealth, in it's entirety, not something that I can be forced to pay, because it's not a large part of my overall wealth.  I treat the 800k as I would treat 8 million, and make sure both are put to work for me.  Thai banks will not get a free ride off me.  

 

A bad deal is a bad deal.  Simple as that.   

 

However, you do raise a good question.  You have said someone should not move the 800k to Thailand, if that is their life savings.  What if it was 5%, 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, etc etc of their life saving?

 

At what percent would you advise not moving the 800k to Thailand of the sole purpose of getting a visa?

 

 

Good point. Likely quite difficult for many to figure out, to decide. So it's not quite "a bad deal is a bad deal, simple as that."  I'm pretty sure that if I leave my money where it is now, it will eventually be wiped out...and I don't mean eventually as in many years, it's already late in the day. The 7%+ it earns now is only slightly more than the inflation rate...it could be more than 7% [and they bother me about that] but at least it is available to me immediately.  ...So it's more than just the 800K baht at 1.something% that bothers me.
 

Edited April 11, 2019 by Cat ji

[Joe Mcseismic]

27 minutes ago, Thailand Outcast said:

Cut and pasted from a post of mine in another thread. 

 

The figures speak for themselves.  It's basically a 45,900 baht a year visa, and you lose control of your money.  

 

Also, the money in your account is not for emergencies.  It is not back up.  You can only use 400k of it for 5 months of the year, or you don't get next year's visa. 

 

 

Firstly, the 800k is tied up for 5 months.  400k is tied up forever.  Of course, you can withdraw any or all of it, but you will not receive next year's visa, so that's as good as 400k you will never see again, for as long as you wish to live in Thailand. 

 

You will get between 6% to 8% return if your 800k is in a diversified, non aggressive, managed fund, in your home country.  Let's just pick the average of 7% for this example.

 

You get 1.5% from a Thai bank for your 800k.

 

Here's the maths.

 

800,000 baht x 7% = 56,000 baht per year.  (return from a fund)

 

800,000 baht x 1.5% = 12,000 baht per year.  (return from a Thai bank)

 

56,000 baht - 12,000 baht = 44,000 baht.  (this is what you are forced to "lose" under the 800k method)

 

44,000 baht + 1900 baht (visa fee) = 45,900 baht.  (this is the total cost to an expat using the 800k method, and they have lost the use of their money through seasoning and have to deal with all the paperwork)

 

45,900 baht / 12 months = 3.825 baht. (visa cost per month to live in Thailand under the 800k method)

 

versus

 

20,000 baht / 12 = 1,666 baht.  (visa cost per month to live in Thailand if you use an agent, and there is no seasoning to worry about, and you maintain control of your finances, which are left in a safe western country, and no paperwork to do)

 

3,825 baht - 1,666 baht = 2,159 baht.  This is the extra cost to people using the 800k method, or, what people using the agents save, per month.

 

Remember, we are talking about the same "product."  Not an inferior visa class.  

 

Of course, there are other issues to think about, like how your beneficiaries get the money if it's in a Thai bank etc, but the above shows the loss / savings over one method versus the other method.

 

I am lucky, I have some time to sit back and see what happens after the 90 days, with those who have used an agent. 

 

To sum up, the 800k runs at a continual loss for the expat, as it doesn't even keep up with inflation.  

 

You say I don't see the 20,000 baht ever again, but you don't see the 44,000 baht in losses, that you will never earn each year, from being forced to lodge 800k into a Thai bank, at 1.5%, with 400k of it you can never use again.    

 

Now, compare the 800k method to the visas offered in nearby countries, and you can see what a lousy deal this is.   

Sounds like you want to be the richest man in in the grave-yard. Up to you.....

[Jip99]

17 minutes ago, Thailand Outcast said:

Show me the "sparkles" in depositing 800k at 1.5% into a bank in a 3rd World country, where you can't access it for 5 months, and after 5 months, can only access 400k of it?  ????

 

 

Yes, that puts it in context......????

[marcusarelus]

29 minutes ago, Thailand Outcast said:

Show me the "sparkles" in depositing 800k at 1.5% into a bank in a 3rd World country, where you can't access it for 5 months, and after 5 months, can only access 400k of it?  ????

1.  Put my money in a fixed deposit account when I got 50 baht to the USD and have pulled out the interest every year since then.  2. Thailand is not a 3rd world country.  3.  I only pull the interest out every year so it has always been the same for me.  Sparkle, sparkle little star.........????

Edited April 11, 2019 by marcusarelus

[gentlemanjackdarby]

51 minutes ago, Gweiloman said:

I guess if 800k represents 80% of your total wealth, then you would understandably want to put it to work and maximise your return.
But if it only constitutes 10% of my wealth, then I’m more than happy to put it into a FD paying me 2.4% pa as I’m a firm believer in having a diversified portfolio which includes cash in bank.
So essentially, the Thai visa only costs me Thb1,900 pa and with my saved agent fees of 15-20k, I can treat myself to quite a few sumptuous meals.


Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

Not sure what you mean by 'putting it to work', but if 80% of one's wealth Is THB 800,000, the arithmetic works out to a total net worth of THB 1 million, which is about USD 31,000; not a lot of money considering the risks, especially for a retiree, of living in Thailand such as major health care costs or possibly needing to 'go home' or relocate to another country if Thailand decides they're no longer wanted

 

If that's one's entire net worth and 'putting it to work' means investing in equities or even (a conservative) bond fund, unless one has enough of a monthly income to cover normal living expenses plus emergencies, 'putting it to work' is courting disaster since both bonds and equities always have the risk of a decline in value (paper loss) or an actual loss (real dollars) if one sells 'a loser'

 

If one's total net worth is in the neighborhood of THB 1 million, it's likely best to stick with low-interest, boring things like a time deposit or a purchased money fund

[Lacessit]

On 4/10/2019 at 6:58 PM, Cat ji said:

Because Thailand is a financially stable country, firmly in the USA-based global financial system. And unlike many others and we.are.not.all in North America/Europe/whatever-former-European-colonies.
 

It's financially stable. Whether it is politically stable is a horse of an entirely different color. Irrespective of our length of time here, we are still on one year's notice at best.

Under those circumstances, having 800,000 baht plus living expenses here is OK. Having all my assets here would qualify me for admission to a mental hospital.

Edited April 11, 2019 by Lacessit

[marcusarelus]

7 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

It's financially stable. Whether it is politically stable is a horse of an entirely different color. Irrespective of our length of time here, we are still on one year's notice at best.

Under those circumstances, having 800,000 baht plus living expenses here is OK. Having all my assets here would qualify me for admission to a mental hospital.

I had all my assets in Singapore (USD) and they kicked me out so I put them here.  I think I've done much better than I would have in the pound.  Been here for 20 years.  What'd ya think? Have you done better?