Abolish all Tourist Visas and Requirements Until 2030

[FarFlungFalang]

2 hours ago, rott said:

As soon as I see the word "should" I think why do they bother. Who do they think is interested in their opinion. 

Well,you for a start!

[donnacha]

1 minute ago, ravip said:

Honestly, does anyone think that this is a good idea for any country to resort to

Yeah. I do ????

I'm not sure why some members are so horrified by what would essentially be a continuation of the situation that existed for half-a-century before the junta seized power.

The difference now is that they actually NEED that foreign currency, mostly injected directly into the poorest parts of the economy, more than they need it in 1970, or 1980, or 1990, or 2000, or 2010.

This country has no real welfare system. Or, rather, WE effectively became their welfare system, and provided the demand that generated jobs for a million low-skilled workers.

The feeble attempts to distribute assistance during the first few months of the pandemic ended up being a lottery that helped very few. Having repeatedly crushed democracy every time that elected government showed any inclination to do anything for the people, the elites are not about to turn around and provide anything more than theatrical assistance to the masses.

Thailand is a rich country, but that wealth will never be shared. The elites have enjoyed low/no taxes for years, mainly because there is no real welfare system, and that has only been possible because millions of tourists kept coming and generating those ground-level jobs.

The junta may be too stupid to realize it but, even though no one in their family or circle of friends works in a restaurant or hotel, their continued survival relies on the masses being able to eat. It may turn out that the Thai people actually do have a limit to what they will meekly accept.

Covid will be with us for a while. Nothing really can open up until 2021, but it could conceivably take even longer than that. Two years without tourism is going to destroy a lot of lives, a lot of relationships. Desperation changes people. It changes countries.

The elites should pray that tourism can return sooner rather than later. And, when the doors can open, they should do everything in their power to win as many tourists as they can, for as long as they can.

 

[Youlike]

1 hour ago, tonray said:

Just because your a citizen of a developed country does not mean you are a developed citizen. Why not just start the "Empty your Prisons: Thailand Extended Stay Program" ?

Exactly, maybe the BLM will also come to thailand soon....we don't need them..i know far better places to go to anyway, thailand is off the list for holidays.

[Hi Tea]

2 hours ago, donnacha said:

For the next decade, all ASEAN countries should eliminate all visa requirements for the citizens of developed countries. They should stamp visitors in for a year, and hope they stay spending money in the country for as long as possible. As long as you have not been blacklisted, you should be able to simply buy a one-way ticket, hop on the plane, and figure out your hotel once you arrive.

Just like your own country does, eh?  Or is this suggestion just for ASEAN member states, if so why, don't other countries need tourist income also?  Why do you suggest that only citizens of "developed" countries should qualify, do they spend a different type of not-as-valuable currency?

[Airalee]

6 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Thailand needs to decide if it can handle people coming in to Thailand for longer who are probably going to be working illegally or who do not have sufficient means to meet the existing visa requirements. 

I understand exactly where you’re coming from with regards to working illegally, but perhaps the idea of “sufficient means” needs to be revisited by Thai immigration.  I’m not sure I understand why a single expat/retiree needs ฿65k/month vs a married one only needing ฿40k.  What is the extra ฿25k for?  
 

I know there are expats that claim (boast) that living on anything under ฿100k is barely surviving and then there are the expats who seem to be quite happy on the same ฿30k that an English teacher might earn.  As long as they are properly insured (and I agree with you wrt what you wrote about insurance), I’ve seen many comfortable, modern sub ฿10k condos for rent and I’m sure the thousands of Thai landlords would appreciate someone filling their empty room and aren’t so concerned if said retiree is drinking wine vs Chang and doesn’t care if they eat a ฿100 meal vs a 5 star hotel buffet.  Various sectors of the economy depend on people with varying financial means and I think that within reason, these expats/retirees can easily be accommodated.

[BritManToo]

1 minute ago, Hi Tea said:

Just like your own country does, eh?  Or is this suggestion just for ASEAN member states, if so why, don't other countries need tourist income also?  Why do you suggest that only citizens of "developed" countries should qualify, do they spend a different type of not-as-valuable currency?

Why not just "anyone with money to spend".

If I'd stayed in Cambodia when the borders closed, I'd have been able to stay forever .... as long as I purchased the VISA extension for $300 every year, no need to see immigration or fill out any forms, just my signature and the cash.

 

And if Cambodia wants to let me cross the border, as a Thai virus free expat, I'll be gone, spend my pension there, and f$%# Thailand.

Edited September 7, 2020 by BritManToo

[donnacha]

13 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

However, your idea of ‘visa Exempt entry’ of 1 years seems not to be aimed at Tourists, but at people wishing to live in Thailand.

 

Thailand needs to decide if it can handle people coming in to Thailand for longer who are probably going to be working illegally or who do not have sufficient means to meet the existing visa requirements. 

A tourist is not defined by the length of stay but by the fact that they are not occupying a job in Thailand. Some people travel for years, they are still tourists.

They don't like to hear it but digital nomads are actually tourists. Travelers have been writing, painting, planning business deals etc for centuries. The DNs did't invent it.

The solution to people working illegally is not, as the junta think, to destroy your tourist industry but to catch that handful of people, blacklist them, throw them out of the country, and heavily fine their employers.

Over the past ten years, when it has become possible to earn excellent money online, the idea that any Westerner is intent on stealing a job in a restaurant or a low-paid office position in a crappy Thai company is laughable.

Now, with remote work becoming a standard thing, the countries who recognize that these people are tourists will profit handsomely. Thailand, at one point, actually become recognized as THE hub for digital nomads - a real hub, not some made up BS from government agency - and pretty much blew that with the visa restrictions the junta introduced in 2015.

Also, this mania to keep out people "who do not have sufficient means". Again, if someone somehow falls into vagrancy, blacklist them and chuck them out. Very simple, and no need to treat all your other visitors as if they are criminals.
 

 

26 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

The following would make sense: 

- Visa Exempt for 90 days 

- Tourist Visa for 6 months

Yes, something like that but, again, when Covid is leaving us with so many unavoidable barriers to tourism, why even ask people to apply for that six month tourist visa? Why not just stamp them in with six months as Hong Kong already does?

Anything they can do to boost what little tourism they will have over the coming years, they should do. F**king around with visas is a completely pointless barrier that hurts Thailand's self-interest.

 

[Hi Tea]

1 minute ago, BritManToo said:

Why not just "anyone with money to spend".

"Why not just "anyone with money to spend".

Don't ask me, I'm not the OP.

[BritManToo]

Just now, Hi Tea said:

"Why not just "anyone with money to spend".

Don't ask me, I'm not the OP.

You were the one dissing the OP.

And have just joined my ignore list.

Edited September 7, 2020 by BritManToo

[whiteman]

donnacha

 

Dreams are free It is NEVER NEVER going to happen

[Hi Tea]

10 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

You were the one dissing the OP.

I was the one expressing my opinion of the OP's suggestion.  It you choose to interpret  it as "dissing" (Jesus...) that's just your opinion, your option and your problem.

Edited September 7, 2020 by Hi Tea

[CanadaSam]

I agree with most of what has been said on this topic, but the reality is that the "government" seems to be moving at a snail's pace on all of these vital issues!

 

There are many countries which have now already "controlled" the virus to acceptable levels, and have people able to, and willing to travel and spend money in Thailand, but the airport mostly remains closed, flights non-existing, and no signs of any change in the near future.

[donnacha]

24 minutes ago, Hi Tea said:

Just like your own country does, eh?  Or is this suggestion just for ASEAN member states, if so why, don't other countries need tourist income also?  Why do you suggest that only citizens of "developed" countries should qualify, do they spend a different type of not-as-valuable currency?

Most countries intervene when an important industry suffers a catastrophic collapse. In Thailand, the collapse of the tourism industry (in the wide sense of all the things that foreigners spend money on) is particularly catastrophic because:

1. A particularly large number of Thai people, whose skills are not suited for other parts of the Thai economy, rely on tourism.

2. They have little access to welfare, shallow family resources, and nothing of their own to fall back on other than the highest levels of consumer debt in Asia.

3. They, and their government, are presuming that everything will swing neatly back into place next year. It won't.

In the case of my country, we have a tourist industry, but it is not as important to the economy as a whole, most of the people working in it can be soaked up elsewhere in the workforce, and, if all else fails, they have access to generous welfare and retraining schemes.

I would DEEPLY appreciate it if Thais could travel to my country more easily, but most women in my country would campaign fiercely against it.

In general, I want all people of good character from any country to be able to travel to every other country as tourists. Unfortunately, that would also require realistic laws around not allowing just anyone to claim asylum and live at taxpayer expense. I believe that is unfair and is destroying the basis for welfare states.

My solution would be to allow anyone in who arrives by air, is not blacklisted, and is coming from a country to which they can be returned if necessary. If they break the law, straight back on a plane. Apart from that, they are very welcome, and I hope that visitors of all colors, faiths, and nationalities will have fond memories of my beautiful country.


 

Edited September 7, 2020 by donnacha

[donnacha]

8 minutes ago, whiteman said:

donnacha

 

Dreams are free It is NEVER NEVER going to happen

????

[Hi Tea]

1 minute ago, donnacha said:

In general, I want all people of good character from any country to be able to travel to every other country as tourists. Unfortunately, that would also require realistic laws around not allowing just anyone to claim asylum and live at taxpayer expense. I believe that is unfair and is destroying the basis for welfare states. My solution would be to allow anyone in who arrives by air, is not blacklisted, and is coming from a country to which they can be returned if necessary.

"I want all people of good character from any country to be able to travel to [Thailand] as tourists...My solution would be to allow anyone in who arrives by air, is not blacklisted, and is coming from a country to which they can be returned if necessary."

Brilliant "solution", allow anyone entry but only anyone of good character!   How would that be determined? 

 

"...and is coming from a country to which they can be returned if necessary".

So there are some countries to which their citizens cannot be returned?  Really?

 

"Unfortunately, that would also require realistic laws around not allowing just anyone to claim asylum and live at taxpayer expense".

Huh?  Those exist already.

[donnacha]

32 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Why not just "anyone with money to spend".

If I'd stayed in Cambodia when the borders closed, I'd have been able to stay forever .... as long as I purchased the VISA extension for $300 every year, no need to see immigration or fill out any forms, just my signature and the cash.

 

And if Cambodia wants to let me cross the border, as a Thai virus free expat, I'll be gone, spend my pension there, and f$%# Thailand.

Exactly this.

Cambodia are hitting you up for a nice little wad of cash there, and it is probably more than most Cambodians actually pay in tax per year, but it is worth it to avoid all the BS hoops that Thailand needlessly forces us to jump through.

None of those hoops mattered as long as the tourists kept flooding in in their millions, but that has now changed, changed utterly.

Their treatment of every category of visitor or foreign resident in Thailand needs to be reassessed in light of the actual situation.
 

 

32 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

as a Thai virus free expat

This is one of the most bizarre aspects of this whole saga: what exactly is the junta's understanding of the virus if they are chasing out some farangs who would prefer to stay, and continue spending money, and who they know are Covid-free, while opening up to other visitors of unknown Covid-status and forcing them to undergo an elaborate process to minimize the Covid risks, simply so that they can spend the same money that the guy they threw out could have spent?!!

 

Edited September 7, 2020 by donnacha

[Pilotman]

The OP is wrong on many counts.  Exaggerating the impact of tourism on Asian economies, ignoring the cultural issues of too many tourists impacting local culture. over reliance on that industry that is stifling the growth of high tech industries.  But the biggest issue is uncontrolled movement into the country.  What country in its right mind would allow such a thing.  I know that the UK/US/Australia/NZ would not and it would be madness and unacceptable if it did. The OP apparently wants it all his or her own way.  The message is, 'do what I want, not what is good for you'.  It is a typical arrogant western view of what Asia is and is not.  It is not a playground for western holidaymakers, despite what many would like to believe. 

[Lacessit]

Nice in principle. However, the current mess of bureaucracy that is Thai Immigration employs a lot of people, plus the hanger-on agents. I don't think they would relish being told to go back to the rice fields.

Having said that, 90 day reporting and TM30 BS is patently ridiculous for those retirees who have been living at the same address for years.

[Hi Tea]

16 minutes ago, donnacha said:

Most countries intervene when an important industry suffers a catastrophic collapse. In Thailand, the collapse of the tourism industry (in the wide sense of all the things that foreigners spend money on) is particularly catastrophic because:

1. A particularly large number of Thai people, whose skills are not suited for other parts of the Thai economy, rely on tourism.

https://www.scbeic.com/en/detail/file/product/2953/ekn1rppsq7/EIC_Insight_ENG_Tourism_2016.pdf

The three tourism-related sector– hotel and restaurant, wholesale and retail trade, transportation and communication – together employ more than 10 million workers, adding 1.4% each year and comprising 26% of total employment in Thailand.

 

26% is not a particularly "large amount" when compared with the 74% of people who do not rely on tourism!

[donnacha]

3 minutes ago, Hi Tea said:

Brilliant "solution", allow anyone entry but only anyone of good character!   How would that be determined? 

If you commit any infraction serious enough to come to the attention of the police, you're out!
 

 

4 minutes ago, Hi Tea said:

So there are some countries to which their citizens cannot be returned?  Really?

You're kidding, right? You couldn't seriously be unaware that the primary basis of refugee status is that people cannot be safely returned to their countries, to that their claimed countries will not accept them.

This is why it is standard practice for economic migrants claiming refugee status to destroy their identity documents.
 

 

6 minutes ago, Hi Tea said:

"Unfortunately, that would also require realistic laws around not allowing just anyone to claim asylum and live at taxpayer expense".

Huh?  Those exist already.

Again, I have no idea what magical country you come from but standard practice in most of the richer European countries is for undocumented arrivals to spend a decade or so fighting deportation orders in long, drawn-out court cases at taxpayer expense.

The solution I outlined regards people arriving as tourists, because I would like more legitimate visitors to be able to visit my country. The deal should be that you can come with no interviews, or proof of wealth etc, but a firm agreement that you cannot claim refugee status, there are no appeals, you will simply be flown back to the country you flew in from.

That law most certainly does NOT already exist in Europe. 
 

[poohy]

what's going to happen after half past 8 then?

[JTXR]

"Should", eh?

 

I kinda think that folks would be much better advised to restrict themselves to what their own countries "should" do. 

[Hi Tea]

12 minutes ago, donnacha said:

25 minutes ago, Hi Tea said:

Brilliant "solution", allow anyone entry but only anyone of good character!   How would that be determined? 

If you commit any infraction serious enough to come to the attention of the police, you're out!

So you're suggesting that while you want visa-free entry you also want police checks on every tourist? Brilliant.

 

 

14 minutes ago, donnacha said:

26 minutes ago, Hi Tea said:

So there are some countries to which their citizens cannot be returned?  Really?

You're kidding, right? You couldn't seriously be unaware that the primary basis of refugee status is that people cannot be safely returned to their countries, to that their claimed countries will not accept them.

"...their claimed countries will not accept them".

You're kidding, right?  You can't be seriously suggesting that you think there is any country on the planet that will not accept it's own citizens but will deny them entry?

 

 

23 minutes ago, donnacha said:

The deal should be that you can come with ... a firm agreement that you cannot claim refugee status

Tourists claiming refugee status is a problem that you see happening here?  How many have there been, let's say, over the last 5 years?

By the way, laws to prevent false asylum requests and the subsequent inability of a country to return fake asylum-seekers do exist, in every country.

 

 

[RichardColeman]

My vote is for all those people married to Thais for 5 years - and can prove it and show they have lived together - should get an automatic free 5 year extension based on long term marriage. If you have taken care of a Thai and family for 5 years then there should be no more hoops left for you to jumo through and you be recognised as a valuable commodity to your wife, family and Thailand

[Hi Tea]

34 minutes ago, donnacha said:

50 minutes ago, Hi Tea said:

You're kidding, right?  You can't be seriously suggesting that you think there is any country on the planet that will not accept it's own citizens but will deny them entry?

Look, I'm really tired of explaining the world to you. I'm guessing you are quite young. You have a lot of attitude for someone who knows so little.

There are a wide range of countries who will either point blank not accept back their own citizens, or who will obstruct any such return by refusing to replace documents, such as passports, that the citizen has destroyed.

In one recent high profile example, Pakistan refused to accept the return ISIS bride and Pakistan citizen Shamina Begum, but there are literally hundreds of thousands of people around the world stuck in this limbo.
 

 

50 minutes ago, Hi Tea said:

Tourists claiming refugee status is a problem that you see happening here?  How many have there been, let's say, over the last 5 years?

Look, there is a level of ignorance beyond which one man alone cannot push back. I don't know what to tell you. Maybe read newspapers, maybe talk with older, more experienced guys. If you are in your early 20's, that's okay, but if you are this clueless in your early 30's, you might need some form of help that I regret I am not qualified to give you.

You really don't need to explain the world to me and you certainly haven't been doing that!  My grandchildren would disagree with your condescending and irrelevant assessment of my age.

 

So you can't answer that simple question regarding legitimate asylum-seekers that you brought up and seemed to think was relevant to tourists entry to Thailand?

 

Under International Law, no country can refuse entry to their own citizens who have no other nationality or revoke their citizenship if it would leave them stateless.   There are not "literally hundreds of thousands of people" who are refused entry to their own country of citizenship.

 

Shamina Begum was a British citizen born in the UK, she was not a Pakistani and Pakistan had no connection to her case, her parents were from Bangladesh originally.  She, initially, had her British citizenship revoked because she was, and still is, eligible for citizenship of Bangladesh by virtue of her parents both being Bangladeshi.

 

 

"...you might need some form of help that I regret I am not qualified to give you".

You sure aren't qualified to give me any kind of help.

 

As I said in a previous post you may want to back off the multiple personal attacks, it contravenes the forum rules...

"You have a lot of attitude for someone who knows so little".

"there is a level of ignorance beyond which one man alone cannot push back"

"you are this clueless"

"you might need some form of help"

Edited September 7, 2020 by Hi Tea

[Puchaiyank]

Thais will likely tighten visa restrictions and require more testing, proof of insurance and pocket money to enter their great kingdom...

 

After all, they consider themselves to be the most wonderful country in the world!

[mtls2005]

Weird that the OP is trying to convince us these are good ideas? They're not.

 

Does s/he realize that we cannot effect change here?

 

Useless exercise.

 

Write an open letter to various publications and the Prime Minister’s Delivery Unit, a research and policy advisory division that operates under the Prime Minister’s Office and reports directly to the Prime Minister, it worked for Herr Stoever in Phuket.

 

 

 

 

[Lacessit]

1 hour ago, Hi Tea said:

https://www.scbeic.com/en/detail/file/product/2953/ekn1rppsq7/EIC_Insight_ENG_Tourism_2016.pdf

The three tourism-related sector– hotel and restaurant, wholesale and retail trade, transportation and communication – together employ more than 10 million workers, adding 1.4% each year and comprising 26% of total employment in Thailand.

 

26% is not a particularly "large amount" when compared with the 74% of people who do not rely on tourism!

Google "ripple effect", please.

[Pilotman]

1 minute ago, Lacessit said:

Google "ripple effect", please.

is that what happens when I eat sprouts? 

[rott]

4 hours ago, donnacha said:

Well, you responded, didn't you? ????

Exactly I am not in a position to do anything about your suggestions. 

And 10 out of 10 for your snappy, cheap, meaningless response.