1 hour ago, Leaver said:

Who said anything about the benefits system?

 

I am talking about free medical care for a catastrophic illness / injury.  Eg. cancer, serious stroke, major operation requiring months of physio.  

 

When you say you "make provisions for health emergencies" is that insurance, or savings, because a catastrophic injury would see your savings diminish, rapidly, then you will be returning home to go on benefits.  

 

Why not return home, get your illness / injury treated for free, and keep your savings intact? 

 

I know I have paid my fair share of tax over the years, and would have no problem recouping some, or all of it, in medical care.   

Number 1: I don't have any asset or home in Australia, so where do I theoretically return home too, in order to get treatment. Rent a home? Buy a vehicle to get around? No thanks.

Number 2: I've got comprehensive health Insurance and life insurance.

Number 3: I've got significant savings and while I prefer not to spend in on medical treatment, if I have to then I will, plus I've still got 10 years to work. How much does one need to have sufficient buffer, I've probably got more than average.

Number 4: I own my home in Bangkok, so my only cost is treatment and my wife is there. If I go "home" then my wife needs to relocate.

 

Choosing whether you want to go back to your country of origin to get "free" treatment is more complex than just getting on a plane.

6 hours ago, Aussieroaming said:

Number 1: I don't have any asset or home in Australia, so where do I theoretically return home too, in order to get treatment. Rent a home? Buy a vehicle to get around? No thanks.

Number 2: I've got comprehensive health Insurance and life insurance.

Number 3: I've got significant savings and while I prefer not to spend in on medical treatment, if I have to then I will, plus I've still got 10 years to work. How much does one need to have sufficient buffer, I've probably got more than average.

Number 4: I own my home in Bangkok, so my only cost is treatment and my wife is there. If I go "home" then my wife needs to relocate.

 

Choosing whether you want to go back to your country of origin to get "free" treatment is more complex than just getting on a plane.

So you do have insurance.

 

I have health insurance covering me in Thailand, and health insurance in my home country, as well as free medical, as a citizen, should the insurance find a "get out of paying clause."   

 

Unlike yourself, I haven't burnt my bridges, and I have residence I can return to, should I be 6 to 12 to live, in which I would like to spend that time with family. 

 

You mention you are still working, do you have trauma insurance and salary continuance?  Without these, savings can be depleted, should something unforeseen happen.

 

Owning your home in Bangkok is handy, but if the injury / illness was serious, such as cancer, or spinal, I will go back to my home country for treatment. 

 

 

13 hours ago, Leaver said:

So you do have insurance.

 

I have health insurance covering me in Thailand, and health insurance in my home country, as well as free medical, as a citizen, should the insurance find a "get out of paying clause."   

 

Unlike yourself, I haven't burnt my bridges, and I have residence I can return to, should I be 6 to 12 to live, in which I would like to spend that time with family. 

 

You mention you are still working, do you have trauma insurance and salary continuance?  Without these, savings can be depleted, should something unforeseen happen.

 

Owning your home in Bangkok is handy, but if the injury / illness was serious, such as cancer, or spinal, I will go back to my home country for treatment. 

 

 

Where did I say I've burnt my bridges. I chose to live in Thailand because my wife likes it. I'm financially secure and can live wherever I want, so no bridges burnt at all.