Spin Off From "story Of My Thai Citizenship Application" Thread

[meemiathai]

So it is the same in thailand!

It's slow and painful but that's the future.

Yes but this thread is about the present and the foreseeable future. I'm not that much bothered, at the moment, to think about Thailand's immigration laws affecting my great-grandchildren's offspring...

What exactly then you are trying to achieve? Maybe we can help?

[meemiathai]

I said you were superficial coz are you 100% sure if the immigration rules were a bit more welcoming, it is surely going to be a good thing for everyone? How can you be that sure?

Do you think this is just as simple as I give you one candy you give me one, I take away one candy you take away one?

There are lots of things which have to be taken into consideration. Would you want the land prices to rise?

[BAF]

It was in the ski resort in turin(as I said) and I of course do not remember the name. And sorry I did not ask the big guy at the entrance "what do you mean by locals?". I just saw him holding them and giving them to people who went in and when we asked what that was he said free drinks, and when we asked for them he said it is for locals. And god knows what locals mean.

So you don't know:

1. if they were they a regular thing or a one off

2. if they were they some kind of promotion/advertisement

3. what they meant by "locals" (local residents or Italians)

4. what kind of "proof" were they asking to hand those vouchers (IDs, passports ...)

<deleted> are we wasting time about then?

Edited August 8, 2007 by BAF

[meemiathai]

Well BAF guess we got all the answers we could from this thread . Nobody including your 'future children' gives rats arse about mixed family predicaments in this country !

Q.E.D.

Good for all wise, who don't have thai spouses. And my deepest condolances to all who have . Wish none of you would be wheeled out of the country by your dear thai family members, when you can't jump the hoops !!

Yes, the only other way is to get the hel_l out of Thailand and move to a civilized country.

Until LOS changes its ways, Thailand is bound to remain a great (dangerous) PLAYGROUND. Nothing else and nothing serious.

Where? Italy?

[BAF]

I said you were superficial coz are you 100% sure if the immigration rules were a bit more welcoming, it is surely going to be a good thing for everyone?

As I have tried to show, our immigration laws are NOT "a good thing for everyone" in the sense you are talking about here!

We have them for the reasons which I have said. Now, they are either a good and right thing and Thailand should adopt them too or they are a wrong, bad and stupid thing to do and we should change them to match Thailand's.

[meemiathai]

It was in the ski resort in turin(as I said) and I of course do not remember the name. And sorry I did not ask the big guy at the entrance "what do you mean by locals?". I just saw him holding them and giving them to people who went in and when we asked what that was he said free drinks, and when we asked for them he said it is for locals. And god knows what locals mean.

So you don't know:

1. if they were they a regular thing or a one off

2. if they were they some kind of promotion/advertisement

3. what they meant by "locals" (local residents or Italians)

4. what kind of "proof" were they asking to hand those vouchers (IDs, passports ...)

<deleted> are we wasting time about then?

So you think you are being reasonable then. Should I have been that crazy to have asked all those things? It was just a bloody observation which was obviously enough to prove double pricing did exist!

So you think that was not double pricing then? Was it not?????

[meemiathai]

3. what they meant by "locals" (local residents or Italians

What difference does that make?

[BAF]

Good for all wise, who don't have thai spouses. And my deepest condolances to all who have . Wish none of you would be wheeled out of the country by your dear thai family members, when you can't jump the hoops !!

Yes, the only other way is to get the hel_l out of Thailand and move to a civilized country.

Until LOS changes its ways, Thailand is bound to remain a great (dangerous) PLAYGROUND. Nothing else and nothing serious.

Where? Italy?

Where both I and my wife are not running the risk to be wheeled out of the country when we can't jump through the hoops anymore.

IS IT ITALY OR THAILAND, meemiathai?!?

Edited August 8, 2007 by BAF

[meemiathai]

I said you were superficial coz are you 100% sure if the immigration rules were a bit more welcoming, it is surely going to be a good thing for everyone?

As I have tried to show, our immigration laws are NOT "a good thing for everyone" in the sense you are talking about here!

We have them for the reasons which I have said. Now, they are either a good and right thing and Thailand should adopt them too or they are a wrong, bad and stupid thing to do and we should change them to match Thailand's.

I agree. Italy should start using thai as their language. Change please.

[BAF]

Yes but this thread is about the present and the foreseeable future. I'm not that much bothered, at the moment, to think about Thailand's immigration laws affecting my great-grandchildren's offspring...

What exactly then you are trying to achieve?

Make you smiling blind daydreaming Thai apologists wake up and smell the somtam...

[meemiathai]

Good for all wise, who don't have thai spouses. And my deepest condolances to all who have . Wish none of you would be wheeled out of the country by your dear thai family members, when you can't jump the hoops !!

Yes, the only other way is to get the hel_l out of Thailand and move to a civilized country.

Until LOS changes its ways, Thailand is bound to remain a great (dangerous) PLAYGROUND. Nothing else and nothing serious.

Where? Italy?

Where I am not running the risk to be wheeled out of the country when I can't jump through the hoops anymore.

IS IT ITALY OR THAILAND, meemiathai?!?

Thailand! BAF!

[meemiathai]

Yes but this thread is about the present and the foreseeable future. I'm not that much bothered, at the moment, to think about Thailand's immigration laws affecting my great-grandchildren's offspring...

What exactly then you are trying to achieve?

Make you smiling blind daydreaming Thai apologists wake up and smell the somtam...

I am quite happy with that then. No worries I will help.

[BAF]

3. what they meant by "locals" (local residents or Italians

What difference does that make?

The difference between having permanent double prices for Italians and foreigners and a promotional campaign aimed at the local customer base of whichever nationality...

Don't try too hard, you won't get it.

Edited August 8, 2007 by BAF

[BAF]

Where I am not running the risk to be wheeled out of the country when I can't jump through the hoops anymore.

IS IT ITALY OR THAILAND, meemiathai?!?

Thailand! BAF!

In Thailand I am required to show annually a certifiable combined monthly income of more than 5 (FIVE) TIMES the Thai average, now show me the hoops my wife is periodically required to jump through in Italy to avoid being wheeled out of the country!

Edited August 8, 2007 by BAF

[meemiathai]

Where I am not running the risk to be wheeled out of the country when I can't jump through the hoops anymore.

IS IT ITALY OR THAILAND, meemiathai?!?

Thailand! BAF!

In Thailand I am required to show annually a certifiable combined monthly income of FIVE TIMES the Thai average, now show me the hoops my wife is periodically required to jump through in Italy to avoid being wheeled out of the country!

Som Nam Nah!

[meemiathai]

3. what they meant by "locals" (local residents or Italians

What difference does that make?

The difference between having permanent double prices for Italians and foreigners and a promotional campaign aimed at the local customer base of whichever nationality...

Don't try too hard, you won't get it.

Yes I am stupid and you are intelligent! Good for you! And now anything I can do to please you? I will.

[BAF]

Where I am not running the risk to be wheeled out of the country when I can't jump through the hoops anymore.

IS IT ITALY OR THAILAND, meemiathai?!?

Thailand! BAF!

In Thailand I am required to show annually a certifiable combined monthly income of FIVE TIMES the Thai average, now show me the hoops my wife is periodically required to jump through in Italy to avoid being wheeled out of the country!

Som Nam Nah!

One of the finest examples of smiling blind daydreaming Thai apologist around...

Pagliaccio.

[meemiathai]

Where I am not running the risk to be wheeled out of the country when I can't jump through the hoops anymore.

IS IT ITALY OR THAILAND, meemiathai?!?

Thailand! BAF!

In Thailand I am required to show annually a certifiable combined monthly income of FIVE TIMES the Thai average, now show me the hoops my wife is periodically required to jump through in Italy to avoid being wheeled out of the country!

Som Nam Nah!

One of the finest examples of smiling blind daydreaming Thai apologist around...

Pagliaccio.

I am proud of it. So what?

[Heng]

In summary: 'it's not fair,' 'there are so many things wrong with it,' 'but I'd move there if I could... which I can, but I think I'll whinge about it instead.'

[steveromagnino]

Hey BAF

You are right, I don't use message board much; thanks for that tip about search function; it is pretty good! It didn't exactly return everything but I have attempted to grab all your key questions to me and right at the start. It only seems to return one post - but I've done my best to grab out your questions!

'Doesn't Thailand exempt foreign women married to their Thai men tee-rak they met on a beach bar somewhere from PR requirements making it much easier for them to get citizenship?'

Not that I am aware of; foreign women have to go through the same steps as men do; my ex girlfriend who was Japanese for instance was unable to get PR because she didn't work even though she had been here 9 years. She had to get annual VISAs like most others. Of course, her husband could show the income to support her; the requirement is joint income as I understand, but since most foreign men marry poorer women (and mostly the women marrying THai men tend to be marrying wealthy guys), it is often the foreign man's and Thai man's income shown that becomes the important one. Maybe James Brown still has something with Its a mans world.

Since each application is considered upon its own merits, however, then yes I do believe the majority of women would find it easier to obtain citizenship due to IMHO the on average higher incomes and connections of their Thai spouses (I do not personally know of any low income men married to foreign women here at all personally, yet probably 95% of the men I know married to Thais would have families in law that are at best Thai Bangkok lower/middle class, and mostly a lot poorer/less educated/less connected than that - this is blatantly obvious from this board as well); the inbuilt (sexist) attitude that men look after women; the smaller number of obvious female overstayers/whoremongers/illegal workers in the media and the more likely compliance with legal requirements - for whatever reason women I meet here tend to have the 'engage brain' switch turned on a lot more than some men, who act first, think later, without even considering, for instance, the legal situation for the future (ahem).

'Moreover, once you get your PR after your first 3 years in thailand () do Thailand allow PRs (and citizenship later on) for all of the foreign components of your family you may have with you (for example, children from a previous marriage)?'

Why do you have some kids ler? AFAIK no, Thailand does not give you PR for all foreign components; each must apply individually. Exactly the same as Singapore (a country richer and more developed than Italy, as an example) where each application is considered on its own merits.

'The 100 PRs per nationality limit as opposed to the 2,800,000 legal migrants today in Italy (a country of roughly the same size as Thailand) should make you realize Thailand's racist and xenophobic stance towards immigration but that seems out of your reach, never mind.'

citizenship granted + 100 PR per year per nationality vs. 2.8m total legal immigrants (all having PR and having acquired it in one year all coming from one country) would be the correct comparison. Obviously, you have never worked in research; your logic is indeed beyond my reach :-).

Each country gets 100...what could be fairer than that?! Actually, I agree with you somewhat, the policy is somewhat silly and shortsighted; however I am not the planner deciding who is worthwhile and who is not. If I was in charge, it would be a fair bit stricter, but with financial payouts to skilled working migrants. As it is now, there doesn't seem to be a short queue of idiots and winners wanting to come in... in fact the main reason why we are having this conversation is simply that your personal circumstances don't fit the criteria and you aren't willing to either sacrifice 4 days a year to renew OR to start doing some work because the idea of working here is not intersting to you here.

I do agree, the policy could do with some tweaks; and gave you a list of things YOU could do to change it; sadly you have ignored all of those ideas in favour of complaining on line to anyone that will listen; a group that is shrinking as this thread dies.

'So how come non-working pensioners have the easiest time of all..?'

I am sure you can look up all manner of information; however since I know plenty of foreigners who claim living here and working legally to be an absolute breeze (if a bit annoying to have to meet a lawyer once a year) I would have to add that for most expats working here legally, it isn't exactly tough. Let's just say....for many non foreigners the existing restrictions are far from taxing.

For others, such as yourself, the restrictions are unbearable (for you) -tough to say who has it easiest. For a retiree without the necessary income, the bar would be unbearably high.

I do agree that there should be some sort of retirement visa for people under 50; in this case age is being used as a proxy for need to work; like using a sledgehammer to squash a mouse. Much like the case of illegal immigration by 10%+ of Thais say in NZ resulting in a change that ALL Thais had to now get a VISA in advance, and the VISA on arrival was rescinded. (estimated based on the 1999 arrival data given to me at the NZ embassy; where they stated that around 2,000 illegal overstayers were caught out of a total of around 22,000 total visas on arrival issued to Thais). You don't seem to have any problem with such an approach to issuing visas (and neither do I); why can you not accept you are on the flip side of the same point now???

Incidentally, you had your chance with the investment VISA and you didn't take it. Times change. Be careful not to overestimate your own value - there are probably people posting here in this very thread that are richer, bigger spenders, bigger tax payers and probably more willing to devote time to helping others....than you. Just having money is far from the be all and end all of immigration - NZ went through that lesson years ago.

'Wasn't it at least 5 years on a household registration card to ask for TC and at least 2 years processing time? 3+5+2= you are looking at a theoretical 10 years process... NEVER even HEARD or READ about someone getting it so "quickly" and if you are going to tell me that any of your plenty Western male friends has got it in less than (at the very least) 15 years I won't believe it.

Not that I believe you know plenty of Western men naturalized Thai anyway (we may have a much different concept of "plenty" of course)... '

Well i know of about 10 that i can think of whose timing I know, and a total of around 50 non Thais (men and women) who have acquired citizenship; I know of another perhaps 20? with PR. Exact process AGAIN is: 3 years to get PR which takes at least a few months and usually around a year to acquire (i.e. 4 years) then at least 2 years on top of that, so a minimum of 5, more likely around 6-10 years from first arriving and getting extension of work from there; however there are other ways to speed things up no doubt, and for someone with odd circumstances, well it could be as little as 1 (honourary) or as long as never. Apparently being married and working plus speaking Thai and having contributed something to Thai society are looked upon favourably.

I am not about to list the people involved, but will say that in the public eye, well there is the head of research of Citibank well less than 10 years;

By way of comparison, NZ requires 5 years with PR (during which there are considerable restrictions on travel, language test, etc) before being able to apply to become a citizen. To get PR takes additional time beyond that; I don't know of anyone recently that has done it; I think (but am not 100% sure) that it is an application and perhaps a year of processing. So...total about 6 years or more. To get citizenship as the result of marrying a New Zealand in theory can be as short as 2 years, but can be denied as can PR or even access to the country; it is not a given right AFAIK. Again, test of language, good character etc. This is shortened down to 2 years with marriage, hence the rash of mail order marriages leading to NZ's fine status as a whoremeister town. Great role model.

UK is 5 years of living in the UK with not more than about 3 months spent abroad.

The requirements for married partners are different; and for same sex partners, different again.

BTW, lest you think 6-10 years here is unbearable....I found this at MPI, which gets us a little closer to a fairer comparison:

'Despite a relatively restrictive naturalization policy that requires, among other things, 10 years of residence, more foreigners are choosing to assume Italian nationality. The number of naturalizations has increased steadily from 7,442 in 1995 to 11,570 in 1999. More than 84 percent of the naturalizations are due to marriage with an Italian citizen. With more than a decade of steady increases in immigration, the country is likely to witness many more naturalizations'

Seems like Italy isn't that easy either; compare that number to NZ for instance. 84% due to marriage with foreigners....interesting. 10 years is about on par with Thailand....consider your point blown out of the water for the non married segment - or are you so self serving you only want to talk about the people in your own position of married, rich, not wanting to work and expecting equal treatment I note you haven't mentioned the Bossi-Fini Law; which apparently puts in a whole bunch of new restrictions; is that still in place over there? Seems like (and I admit Thailand's laws are xenophobic) Italy has a dose of xenophobia too.

Or should I call that....common sense. And the common sense of arranging immigration and most other fiscal/non fiscal policy in a developing country should be different to that of a developed country?

'Dismissing this like just something BAF is interested in means, besides other things, ignoring the plight of families risking to be split and children to be forced out of their homecountry/abandoned.

It's distustingly inhuman. It's the 3rd world.'

And yet you can easily come here and have to go through the inhumanity of either working, leaving every 90 days a MASSIVE burden of 4 DAYS PER YEAR, or set up a small company that enables you to pass some income through it, pay tax and allow you to stay for the monster set up cost of probably less than 1/100th of your frequently commented upon (by you) net worth!

Looking beyond one person's plight........ there are countless families split up for various reasons which are far more tragic than your own unwillingness to work; e.g. in NZ a pop star retiree was denied PR having already spent 1m+ dollars on his house because he had a pacemaker; his wife however was given PR. Families with disabled children are routinely denied PR to avoid being a drain on the system and this is fairly standard. The lack of sympathy, oh the inhumanity of it all.

Do you even have any children BTW or is this an entirely theoretical situation designed to somehow prove that Thailand is unreasonable?

If it is the latter, then YES I agree Thailand has some fairly strict laws in place, which are necessary as Thailand has unfortunately not got the pulling power for the world's winners as say the USA might have. Again, the intent is right, but the execution is probably a little heavy handed.

You say so yourself that :

'Funny you say that, many folks back in the first world would think of ANYONE voluntarily choosing to live in a third world country as a "loser"... '

Yet ironically, you are the one wanting to talk about living here coming from the first world! I wonder whether you are one of the 'many folks' you speak of 5555555555555 Do you think that a vanilla single flavour immigration policy around the world would work, when it is obvious to anyone that country policies already differ markedly in land ownership, rights, dual citizenship, handling same sex relationships, refugee handling, etc etc? Or is it simply that you wish Thailand would have the same policies as Italy?

Surely each country offers different attractions, and therefore should develop an immigration policy that matches what they wish to acheive. For instance, NZ has a brain drain, and therefore encourages working educated affluent, and actually gets loads of non working rich ;-( Thailand wants skilled labour, not louts...we already have a ton of louts! This is a country's right, and any sane, logical person would consider such issues in deciding where to live, as you have done in deciding that despite being a European millionaire and extolling the virtues of Italy, that you would like to like and work as a nurse in USA, since you did not take up the opportunity for an investment visa when it was available, and refuse to set up a company to pay tax enabling you to stay OR to actually work.

'True, I hear if it wasn't for Thailand's open doors policy Gates and Buffet would have already made the move...'

Most amusing. have you read a list of the millionaires and billionaires that spend time here; some even buying property? hel_l, we have a few sportsmen, business people and stars living in some of the developments I consult to. They don't seem to be having trouble with Thai immigration law. Now with regards to actually working here; well I don't see Gates and Buffet living and working in Italy either...no idea what point you are trying to make here.

'You mean New Zealand doesn't grant PR and citizenship to spouses and parents of New Zealanders?'

No. AFAIK NZ does not give PR to parents of NZers. It is far easier for spouses but not entirely automatic; far easier than Thailand for instance.

BTW just FYI in the interests of pointing out some more interesting points about NZ, up until 1987 NZ had a favouritism policy, to ensure a larger number of white people came to NZ than non whites; just 50 years ago my own grandparents and mother paid a poll tax, a penalty, for being not white, when they went to NZ. There is a points scheme test; BTW my guess is that given what you have described, you would be unable to migrate to NZ at all with your unwillingness to work unless you were married to a New Zealander.

With regards to the wonderful Italy, I found this at MPI:

'Despite a relatively restrictive naturalization policy that requires, among other things, 10 years of residence, more foreigners are choosing to assume Italian nationality. The number of naturalizations has increased steadily from 7,442 in 1995 to 11,570 in 1999. More than 84 percent of the naturalizations are due to marriage with an Italian citizen. With more than a decade of steady increases in immigration, the country is likely to witness many more naturalizations'

Seems like Italy isn't that easy either; is this data correct?

'3. Nice gateway? Yes. Ever opened a world atlas and seen how Italy is positioned with respect to the sources of much of that illegal immigration and the rest of the Western Europe? No, I guess...'

Yep, as far as I can tell, Italy is about in the middle; yes it has a lot of problems controlling illegal immigration because it is a magnet for people wanting to come in and work and earn cash. Same as THailand has a problem with large numbers of non productive people wanting to come here.

Both countries are taking steps to control their respective problems. Part of Italy's problem also stems from the reality that actually becoming legal is, according to immigration forums, relatively taxing, combined with a relatively low chance of getting caught. But sure, feel free to comment on my knowledge of geography - Italy is not exactly very relevant or interesting to me - economically, culturally or in sport. I'd hate to think Thailand actually would even consider Italy as a role model for anything when there are so many better choices that are a whole lot more relevant!

In summary, your rant has some merit but as i have stated already - Thailand's immigration policies are indeed unfair and xenophobic to some degree - much like almost every other country in the world. magnitude may differ, and that would all depend on perspective; if you were single, HIV positive or blind, then your perception might be very different.

However, you are out to lunch if you think that:

- all foreign countries will gang together to somehow influence Thailand to change its policy

- that Thailand opening its gates wider to allow people like you in (who don't want to work or pay tax) is of importance to the immigration department, and that doing so would create a significant benefit to Thailand compared to letting in a teacher, business man, doctor or similar - the only thing you appear to bring to the table is money; there are plenty of other people that bring more to the table than you

- that being married to a citizen of another country should automatically give you the right to migrate to their country

- that you don't have options if you wanted to live here - you do - you simply don't want to set up the legal structure to do so, you don't want to work either, you don't want to sacrifice 4 days a year to leave and return with proof of income nor do you want to get an education VISA. With opportunity comes responsibility - just ask the thousands of non Thais living here perfectly happily right now - if you don't want the responsibility of any of these options, then head off to USA - I understand immigrating there is an absolute piece of cake!

Your main point:

'I will repeat here what I usually write when comparing our GFs'/BFs'/spouses' homecountry with our own: the only effective way to deal with the problems foreigners have in our home countries and that we have in foreign countries is RECIPROCATING the s.hit we get anywhere in the world outside of our tiny, fragile Western bubble of civilization. And if that means kicking out of my home country my Thai wife because we don't have a combined monthly income of 6/7 times the average Italian wage (as Thailand does), so be it.'

Please let us know when you choose to do that; after all it is your own suggestion regarding what you would have to lose in doing so:

'Reciprocating Thailand's (among other things) immi and ownership rules it is (or should be...) very clear what Thailand would lose but what exactly do we stand to lose (provided they wouldn't quickly do an about face when realized we are serious about it)? '

Whether Thailand welcomes or doesn't welcome tourists and foreigners....well you only need look at the numbers of tourist visitors (and resulting damage to the country) plus eager queue of foreigners wanting to come here to do various jobs (some good some bad) to know that supply of foreigners is not the issue. In other words...I think the officials will still be able to sleep tight knowing you went to USA instead of coming here :-)

BTW please let me know your budget for living on the 'average wage' that you have in mind here in Thailand; I could really do with a laugh of how a millionaire prefers to slum it. You sound very similar to my mother in that regard :-) You honestly think that 40,000b a month is too much to live on???? Mate, i have a lot of respect for someone willing to give up the basics in life; other than rice farmers who have no income (but can collect food and so on) living on 1/7th of 40,000b for 2 people....man good luck!

I reiterate my suggestion, that perhaps you should kick your Thai wife out of Italy, to show that you will not tolerate the unfair Thai laws. Why should she be able to take advantage of soft Italian law????

Look forward to your reply; if you have some way of using message boards better for that search function, let me know. Feel free to insert your usual put downs and snide comments regarding my education (and your mad props for your own wealth). I know that there are many richer, smarter, kinder, more educated and more handsome than me

[steveromagnino]

I said you were superficial coz are you 100% sure if the immigration rules were a bit more welcoming, it is surely going to be a good thing for everyone?

As I have tried to show, our immigration laws are NOT "a good thing for everyone" in the sense you are talking about here!

We have them for the reasons which I have said. Now, they are either a good and right thing and Thailand should adopt them too or they are a wrong, bad and stupid thing to do and we should change them to match Thailand's.

So... let me get this straight.

In your world, there are two options for immigration policies. Italian or Thai. There is no compromise, there is no other option, it is one of the other.

Is that correct??

[meemiathai]

One thing I would like to add, BAF.

What would you say? If Italy and Thailand were to offer each other's citizen a passport. Meaning any thai can be Italian and any Italian can be thai. Which government do you think is going to say no first? Can you honestly answer my question? Since you know so much about Thailand.

[BAF]

Hey BAF

Hey steveromagnino, sorry for the delay in replying. Board rules prevent me to tell you the reason why, suffice to say it wasn't up to me....

You are right, I don't use message board much; thanks for that tip about search function; it is pretty good! It didn't exactly return everything but I have attempted to grab all your key questions to me and right at the start. It only seems to return one post - but I've done my best to grab out your questions!

Probably you selected to show the results as threads (which I think is the default) and not as single posts.

'Doesn't Thailand exempt foreign women married to their Thai men tee-rak they met on a beach bar somewhere from PR requirements making it much easier for them to get citizenship?'

Not that I am aware of; foreign women have to go through the same steps as men do; my ex girlfriend who was Japanese for instance was unable to get PR because she didn't work even though she had been here 9 years.

You haven't really read what I wrote: foreign women married to their Thai men don't need to get PR (which as I said and you and your friends have seen for yourselves is EXTREMELY DIFFICULT) before applying for citizenship.

'Moreover, once you get your PR after your first 3 years in thailand () do Thailand allow PRs (and citizenship later on) for all of the foreign components of your family you may have with you (for example, children from a previous marriage)?'

Why do you have some kids ler?

1. Why, do you only care about yourself?

2. This thread isn't about me

3. I may have them in a not so distant future (I am planning ahead like you and Heng are recommending to do)

AFAIK no, Thailand does not give you PR for all foreign components; each must apply individually.

Toddlers "applying individually"?!?

Exactly the same as Singapore (a country richer and more developed than Italy, as an example)

I haven't asked about Singapore (whose system I ignore and which doesn't interest me). Incidentally, Singapore, for this and many other reasons, has a long way to go to reach Italy's civil and social development... What you probably meant to say is that it has a higher GDP/PC at USD 20.690 against Italy's USD 19.080. BTW, France is only slightly ahead and Australia is behind like Italy and New Zealand and Spain are FAR behind. Economic indicators (BTW, once PPP adjusted Italy is still ahead of Singapore anyway) aren't the only measure of a country's overall development. If they were, amongst the world' models of development Brunei and the United Arab Emirates would be right there at the top... Is this what you are saying?

Besides, weren't these kind of arguments being used by the SBDTAs (Smiling Blind Daydreaming Thai Apologists) to show how Thailand was overall much better than Singapore (this was before Thailand turned into a worse dicatorship than Sillypore, of course...)

'The 100 PRs per nationality limit as opposed to the 2,800,000 legal migrants today in Italy (a country of roughly the same size as Thailand) should make you realize Thailand's racist and xenophobic stance towards immigration but that seems out of your reach, never mind.'

citizenship granted + 100 PR per year per nationality vs. 2.8m total legal immigrants (all having PR and having acquired it in one year all coming from one country) would be the correct comparison. Obviously, you have never worked in research; your logic is indeed beyond my reach :-).

If you are going to consider the total sum of those who have acquired Thai citizenship and those who hold PR in Thailand you should compare it to the total sum of those 2.8m legal immigrants (ALL of which have got/are getting PR and citizenship since there aren't numerical limits as in Thailand) and those who have already acquired Italian citizenship. The difference in favor of Italy would be even more staggering.

In other words, to make it simpler for you to understand:

for Italy, add 2,800,000 to the (millions of) foreigners with Italian citizenship

for Thailand, add those with Thai citizenship (how many??) to those with PR (how many??) to 100 PR per nationality for the next 5 years (hypothesizing all those eligible will aply and all will be granted it). Why the next 5 years? In the next 5 years ALL of those 2,800,000 will have got PR (and who knows how many more will have entered Italy but let's set this aside for a moment...).

Of course: we could simply compare only the ones who have already got their citizenship and PR (and the difference in favor of Italy would be equally overwhelming) but that would ignore the fundamental reality that ALL of those already legally residing in Italy ARE going to get PR and citizenship.

Obviously, you have never worked in research...

Each country gets 100...what could be fairer than that?! Actually, I agree with you somewhat, the policy is somewhat silly and shortsighted; however I am not the planner deciding who is worthwhile and who is not.

Yes, you are only the one trying to defend it...

If I was in charge, it would be a fair bit stricter, but with financial payouts to skilled working migrants. As it is now, there doesn't seem to be a short queue of idiots and winners wanting to come in... in fact the main reason why we are having this conversation is simply that your personal circumstances don't fit the criteria and you aren't willing to either sacrifice 4 days a year to renew OR to start doing some work because the idea of working here is not intersting to you here.

The main reason we are having this conversation is simply that being the (young and wealthy) spouse of a Thai national and/or the father of Thai citizens isn't a reason good enough to being allowed to live together with one's family in one's spouses's and children's homecountry.

Why you should be forced to work when you don't have to??

And NB, I wouldn't be "sacrificing 4 days a year to renew", I would be sacrificing my and my family's peace of mind, safety and stability (letting alone the practical hassles and disruption to one's life those once every 90 days visa runs mean)...

It seems you are the type of person who would build his family's future around 90 days visa runs. Well, I am not.

I do agree, the policy could do with some tweaks; and gave you a list of things YOU could do to change it; sadly you have ignored all of those ideas in favour of complaining on line to anyone that will listen; a group that is shrinking as this thread dies.

You haven't told me about anything I didn't knew about. I have clearly listed from the start all of the possibilities open to me and none of them translate into the stability and security a family needs.

You are proposing 90 days visa runs. Please keep these kind of ridiculous advices to you and your friends.

'So how come non-working pensioners have the easiest time of all..?'

I am sure you can look up all manner of information; however since I know plenty of foreigners who claim living here and working legally to be an absolute breeze (if a bit annoying to have to meet a lawyer once a year) I would have to add that for most expats working here legally, it isn't exactly tough. Let's just say....for many non foreigners the existing restrictions are far from taxing.

Very well but the question still stands there, unanswered: how come non-working pensioners have the easiest time of all if the fundamental underlying reasons for the present immigration laws are those you hypothesized?

May I refresh your memory? "Thailand is only interested in people working, so no coming in with a massive wad of cash these days and buying a big house."

For others, such as yourself, the restrictions are unbearable (for you) -tough to say who has it easiest. For a retiree without the necessary income, the bar would be unbearably high.

"INCOME"?!? All they have to have is 800k baht sitting in a bank... And they have the least paperwork and hassles to go through to boot.

I do agree that there should be some sort of retirement visa for people under 50; in this case age is being used as a proxy for need to work; like using a sledgehammer to squash a mouse.

<deleted> are you doing replying and trying to confute my arguments when you are still undecided yourself if you actually agree or disagree with them?!?

To quote you: "your logic is indeed beyond my reach"...

Much like the case of illegal immigration by 10%+ of Thais say in NZ resulting in a change that ALL Thais had to now get a VISA in advance, and the VISA on arrival was rescinded. (estimated based on the 1999 arrival data given to me at the NZ embassy; where they stated that around 2,000 illegal overstayers were caught out of a total of around 22,000 total visas on arrival issued to Thais). You don't seem to have any problem with such an approach to issuing visas (and neither do I); why can you not accept you are on the flip side of the same point now???

Because these two are completely different and unrelated situations! It's disconcerting and somewhat worrying that you can't see it by yourself...

The new NZ regs weren't designated to STOP those Thai visitors but the overstayers and the visa reqs are designed to prove at least that you aren't likely to overstay (because of your reasons for visiting and your financial situation).

Now draw the parallel with my situation and the new regs (no more 400k in the bank but 40k/month income). If the reason was to stop those illegally working (is this the reason, steveromagnino?) why aren't they asking for proofs that I am regularly sending and spending into the country my money from abroad? Why haven't they got serious with Thai employers who illegally employ foreigners and continue to do so practically with total impunity??

Incidentally, you had your chance with the investment VISA and you didn't take it.

Yeah too bad you lost your one chance now say hello to your wife and children and f.uck off back home, right?

And besides, nothing is written in stone here... A problem with an annual extension and you're out or you may simply be denied to be grandfathered next year like it's happening with those supporting Thai children or is mooted to be going to happen for those still using the 400k in the bank...

Times change. Be careful not to overestimate your own value - there are probably people posting here in this very thread that are richer, bigger spenders, bigger tax payers and probably more willing to devote time to helping others....than you. Just having money is far from the be all and end all of immigration - NZ went through that lesson years ago.

Ahem... it isn't me the one maintaining that having money is the be all and end all of immigration...

Have you followed my advice and actually read the thread before posting yet another reply here?

Well i know of about 10 that i can think of whose timing I know, and a total of around 50 non Thais (men and women) who have acquired citizenship; I know of another perhaps 20? with PR.

It takes me a (short) walk to a local "ethnic" market to meet as many PR and citizenship holders as the ones you have met in all of your life in Thailand...

Apparently being married and working plus speaking Thai and having contributed something to Thai society are looked upon favourably.

Nope, the real key is WORKING in Thailand.

How many men do you know holding PR or citizenship who have never worked/had business in Thailand?

How many men do you know holding PR or citizenship who have got them by annual extensions of stay based on marriage (not possible anymore without working anyway) or retirement?

By way of comparison, NZ requires 5 years with PR (during which there are considerable restrictions on travel, language test, etc) before being able to apply to become a citizen. To get PR takes additional time beyond that; I don't know of anyone recently that has done it; I think (but am not 100% sure) that it is an application and perhaps a year of processing. So...total about 6 years or more. To get citizenship as the result of marrying a New Zealand in theory can be as short as 2 years,

We are moving the focus on the lenght of the process, eh..? So, what's the average lenght of time those very many PR and CT holders you know have had to wait to get their PRs and CTs?

but can be denied as can PR or even access to the country; it is not a given right AFAIK.

"AFAIK" being the operative word here...

Again, test of language, good character etc. This is shortened down to 2 years with marriage, hence the rash of mail order marriages leading to NZ's fine status as a whoremeister town. Great role model.

Are you saying that Western countries shouldn't grant PR and citizenship to their citizens' spouses (and their spouses' children) any more?

BTW, besides it being deeply discriminatory and sexist, shouldn't Thailand stop favoring Thai men's foreign wifes since it's supposed to encourage/facilitate "marriages of convenience"..?

BTW, lest you think 6-10 years here is unbearable....I found this at MPI, which gets us a little closer to a fairer comparison:

'Despite a relatively restrictive naturalization policy that requires, among other things, 10 years of residence, more foreigners are choosing to assume Italian nationality. The number of naturalizations has increased steadily from 7,442 in 1995 to 11,570 in 1999. More than 84 percent of the naturalizations are due to marriage with an Italian citizen. With more than a decade of steady increases in immigration, the country is likely to witness many more naturalizations'

From the same website:

In 1985, the number of foreign-born people in Italy holding a residence permit was estimated at approximately 423,000. By 1991, that number had more than doubled, reaching 896,800. In 2000, the foreign population had reached nearly 1,388,200, with some 850,700 immigrants in Italy for employment reasons. Morocco and Albania combined account for more than 20 percent of the stock of the foreign population in 2000, but there have been some shifts in other, smaller populations. For example, South Americans and immigrants from China continue to increase in numbers.

Despite a relatively restrictive naturalization policy that requires, among other things, 10 years of residence, more foreigners are choosing to assume Italian nationality. The number of naturalizations has increased steadily from 7,442 in 1995 to 11,570 in 1999. More than 84 percent of the naturalizations are due to marriage with an Italian citizen. With more than a decade of steady increases in immigration, the country is likely to witness many more naturalizations.

Persons married to Italian citizens get naturalized in 6 months, Eu citizens in 4 years, stateless persons in 5 years, all the rest in 10 years. "Relatively restrictive naturalization policy" with respect to where?? Thailand?

In 2000 1,388,200 foreigners had PR which means that at the latest by 2005 ALL of them could be naturalized Italian. The most recent data that site has for naturalization is for 1999 and taking note of the pattern of the booming in immigration in the years considered you can easily figure out the rest...

Seems like Italy isn't that easy either; compare that number to NZ for instance. 84% due to marriage with foreigners....

Yes, in 1999 in case you haven't noticed...

10 years is about on par with Thailand....consider your point blown out of the water for the non married segment

1. in Italy EVERYBODY gets naturalized Italian at the latest after 10 years in Italy (spouses of Italian citizens get naturalized in 6 months, Eu citizens in 4 years, stateless persons in 5 years

whe gets naturalized Thai after 10 years), in Thailand it's at maximum 100 per nationality per year since the prerequisite is having PR and PR is limited to 100 per nationality per year.

2. amongst the few lucky (and, like in most cases, wealthy and/or well connected) ones who get naturalized who really gets it in 10 years?? I knew of a couple and they both managed to get it in slightly more than 15 years...

- or are you so self serving you only want to talk about the people in your own position of married, rich, not wanting to work and expecting equal treatment I note you haven't mentioned the Bossi-Fini Law; which apparently puts in a whole bunch of new restrictions; is that still in place over there? Seems like (and I admit Thailand's laws are xenophobic) Italy has a dose of xenophobia too.

"Apparently"... "seems"... Do you ever talk about something you actually know about? The changes the Bossi-Fini law (which has already been mentioned in this thread) introduced were aimed at better fighting the illegal immigration so it has nothing to do with legal immigrants. It seems even highdiver got it...

'Dismissing this like just something BAF is interested in means, besides other things, ignoring the plight of families risking to be split and children to be forced out of their homecountry/abandoned.

It's distustingly inhuman. It's the 3rd world.'

And yet you can easily come here and have to go through the inhumanity of either working, leaving every 90 days a MASSIVE burden of 4 DAYS PER YEAR, or set up a small company that enables you to pass some income through it, pay tax and allow you to stay for the monster set up cost of probably less than 1/100th of your frequently commented upon (by you) net worth!

What does the cheating of Thai laws my money makes possible have to do with the plight of those without my net worth?

Looking beyond one person's plight........ there are countless families split up for various reasons which are far more tragic than your own unwillingness to work; e.g. in NZ a pop star retiree was denied PR having already spent 1m+ dollars on his house because he had a pacemaker; his wife however was given PR. Families with disabled children are routinely denied PR to avoid being a drain on the system and this is fairly standard. The lack of sympathy, oh the inhumanity of it all.

<deleted> are you on? It seems you are talking about families wholly made up of foreigners!

Moreover, Italy and AFAIK most Western countries DON'T deny PR because of pacemakers and disabilities and can you please point out to me some sources showing NZ laws denying PR to persons with pacemakers and disabilities..?

Do you even have any children BTW or is this an entirely theoretical situation designed to somehow prove that Thailand is unreasonable?

I don't have one in this exact moment but it's of course only natural to presume that I will have one in the not too distant future (especially, you know, since IT'S PLANNED) so that, besides being further proof of Thailand's inhumanity, isn't just a theoretical situation at all...

If it is the latter, then YES I agree Thailand has some fairly strict laws in place, which are necessary as Thailand has unfortunately not got the pulling power for the world's winners as say the USA might have.

And the reasons for that is exactly this kind of culture which produces this kind of laws... They (and you) can't see it and that's why they aren't going to have that "pulling power for the world's winners" anytime soon...

Again, the intent is right, but the execution is probably a little heavy handed.

The intent isn't clear (let alone right) at all, you have no idea of their intents and you are failing to prove whatever it is that you want to prove!

1. You previously said that the reason for the last changes in their immi laws is they want working people not that they want to stop the world's losers from coming here.

2. You failed to prove even this theory (they want working people) since you aren't explaining how come non-working pensioners have it the most easy of all.

You say so yourself that :

'Funny you say that, many folks back in the first world would think of ANYONE voluntarily choosing to live in a third world country as a "loser"... '

Yes and with the 3rd world thinking behind their immigration and foreign business laws they do nothing but reinforce their status and everyone's opinion of them!

Yet ironically, you are the one wanting to talk about living here coming from the first world! I wonder whether you are one of the 'many folks' you speak of 5555555555555

Reading the thread (likely for the first time) you may discover that I have a Thai wife...

Do you think that a vanilla single flavour immigration policy around the world would work, when it is obvious to anyone that country policies already differ markedly in land ownership, rights, dual citizenship, handling same sex relationships, refugee handling, etc etc? Or is it simply that you wish Thailand would have the same policies as Italy?

If they want to keep themselves in the third world with their immigration and foreign business laws they are free to go ahead but immigration laws about spouses and parents of ANY country's citizens definitely should follow the same basic human rights principles. No question about it.

Surely each country offers different attractions, and therefore should develop an immigration policy that matches what they wish to acheive. For instance, NZ has a brain drain, and therefore encourages working educated affluent, and actually gets loads of non working rich ;-( Thailand wants skilled labour, not louts...we already have a ton of louts! This is a country's right, and any sane, logical person would consider such issues in deciding where to live, as you have done in deciding that despite being a European millionaire and extolling the virtues of Italy, that you would like to like and work as a nurse in USA, since you did not take up the opportunity for an investment visa when it was available, and refuse to set up a company to pay tax enabling you to stay OR to actually work.

If they want to keep themselves in the third world with their immigration and foreign business laws they are free to go ahead but immigration laws about spouses and parents of ANY country's citizens definitely should follow the same basic human rights principles. No question about it.

'True, I hear if it wasn't for Thailand's open doors policy Gates and Buffet would have already made the move...'

Most amusing. have you read a list of the millionaires and billionaires that spend time here; some even buying property? hel_l, we have a few sportsmen, business people and stars living in some of the developments I consult to. They don't seem to be having trouble with Thai immigration law. Now with regards to actually working here; well I don't see Gates and Buffet living and working in Italy either...no idea what point you are trying to make here.

Let's go a small step at a time OK?: does Thailand now have an "open door" policy? What kind of people is it attracting? Why?

And about those "millionaires and billionaires that spend time here"... Are they moving here or spending any significant amount of time here? Are they consistently (as in in significant numbers) asking for PR and citizenship?

'You mean New Zealand doesn't grant PR and citizenship to spouses and parents of New Zealanders?'

No. AFAIK NZ does not give PR to parents of NZers. It is far easier for spouses but not entirely automatic; far easier than Thailand for instance.

"The objective of Family Category policy is to allow individuals to maintain and be part of a family unit, while reinforcing the governments overall objectives in immigration policy. The category is therefore broken up into a number of sub-categories including spouse and de-facto partner policy, parent policy, dependent child policy, adult sibling and adult child policy.

Applicants seeking approval under the De Facto Partner policy (which includes homosexual relationships) will only be eligible for the grant of residence once the Principal Applicant has been living with the New Zealand citizen or resident spouse for a minimum of 12 months. However, an application for residence may be lodged with the INZ prior to the 12 month qualifying period and a decision will then be deferred until the couple have met the requisite 12 month period."

The only "tough" requirements are those which apply to parents of ADULT NZers...

Seeing how well you are (NOT) informed about NZ laws I am even more interested in those sources about denying PR to spouses and children on the basis of pacemakers and disabilities...

BTW just FYI in the interests of pointing out some more interesting points about NZ, up until 1987 NZ had a favouritism policy, to ensure a larger number of white people came to NZ than non whites; just 50 years ago my own grandparents and mother paid a poll tax, a penalty, for being not white, when they went to NZ. There is a points scheme test; BTW my guess is that given what you have described, you would be unable to migrate to NZ at all with your unwillingness to work unless you were married to a New Zealander.

Well, since you are interested in history (not the topic of this thread) in 1987 Thailand was still stripping citizen's rights off its own FEMALE citizens who married foreigners...

Excuse me if it appears "somewhat" bigger to me than trying to control the social balance and making up of a very small country of just 4 million people (today, how many in 1987?), less than 80% of whom were "whites"...

'3. Nice gateway? Yes. Ever opened a world atlas and seen how Italy is positioned with respect to the sources of much of that illegal immigration and the rest of the Western Europe? No, I guess...'

Yep, as far as I can tell, Italy is about in the middle; yes it has a lot of problems controlling illegal immigration because it is a magnet for people wanting to come in and work and earn cash. Same as THailand has a problem with large numbers of non productive people wanting to come here. Both countries are taking steps to control their respective problems.

You may want to recheck about Italian laws and their enforcement upon Italian employers of illegal immigrants and the corresponding situation in Thailand...

Thailand IS NOT trying seriously to stop illegal immigrants, it's just exploiting them as much as it can.

And even when those migrant workers are LEGAL, Thailand laws are designed to exploit them as much as possible and then send them back home (not even "theoretical" PR and citizenship for Burmese, Laotians, Cambodians etc).

Part of Italy's problem also stems from the reality that actually becoming legal is, according to immigration forums, relatively taxing, combined with a relatively low chance of getting caught.

True, Italian police aren't busting into condos to check everyone's passport nor are they checking every foreigner's passport when they randomly lock up entire discos to piss test everyone (another thing they don't do)... Are you suggesting they should start imitating Thailand?

But sure, feel free to comment on my knowledge of geography - Italy is not exactly very relevant or interesting to me - economically, culturally or in sport.

So you haven't any interest in arts, literature, architecture, history, fashion, design, sport cars, football, motorcycling, cuisine, apparel etc etc etc

Well, since you know so little about Italy you might find it strange to learn that as a G7 member Italy is rather important (economically and politically) to quite a few people, countries and economies...

I'd hate to think Thailand actually would even consider Italy as a role model for anything when there are so many better choices that are a whole lot more relevant!

You mean Singapore, Brunei and the United Arab Emirates?

Your main point:

'I will repeat here what I usually write when comparing our GFs'/BFs'/spouses' homecountry with our own: the only effective way to deal with the problems foreigners have in our home countries and that we have in foreign countries is RECIPROCATING the s.hit we get anywhere in the world outside of our tiny, fragile Western bubble of civilization. And if that means kicking out of my home country my Thai wife because we don't have a combined monthly income of 6/7 times the average Italian wage (as Thailand does), so be it.'

Please let us know when you choose to do that; after all it is your own suggestion regarding what you would have to lose in doing so:

'Reciprocating Thailand's (among other things) immi and ownership rules it is (or should be...) very clear what Thailand would lose but what exactly do we stand to lose (provided they wouldn't quickly do an about face when realized we are serious about it)? '

Whether Thailand welcomes or doesn't welcome tourists and foreigners....well you only need look at the numbers of tourist visitors (and resulting damage to the country) plus eager queue of foreigners wanting to come here to do various jobs (some good some bad) to know that supply of foreigners is not the issue. In other words...I think the officials will still be able to sleep tight knowing you went to USA instead of coming here :-)

1. when have tourists come into the equation?

2. if they are so damaging why are they still trying to attract them in ever bigger numbers?

3. isn't the damage the tourism industry does due to the Thais, their laws and their practices?

4. How are you answering the question: "Reciprocating Thailand's (among other things) immi and ownership rules it is (or should be...) very clear what Thailand would lose but what exactly do we stand to lose (provided they wouldn't quickly do an about face when realized we are serious about it)?"

BTW please let me know your budget for living on the 'average wage' that you have in mind here in Thailand; I could really do with a laugh of how a millionaire prefers to slum it. You sound very similar to my mother in that regard :-) You honestly think that 40,000b a month is too much to live on???? Mate, i have a lot of respect for someone willing to give up the basics in life; other than rice farmers who have no income (but can collect food and so on) living on 1/7th of 40,000b for 2 people....man good luck!

How do you manage to misread pretty much everything you read?

I used to spend an average of 150,000 baht/month and I have never said that 40,000b a month is too much to live on nor that I would like to live on it. This DOES NOT mean that it isn't possible to live on much less, proof is that the average Thai is living on 7700 baht/month... Should the UN urgently be sending humanitarian aids to help feeding the starving Thais?

In the countryside there are many older folks who help entire extented families on 25,000-35,000 baht/month and who quietly and happily go about their lives... Their single biggest expense and worry is keeping themselves legal.

I really think that you have lost touch with what the reality of life still is in most of Thailand (if you have ever had a clue, that is).

[BAF]

So... let me get this straight.

In your world, there are two options for immigration policies. Italian or Thai. There is no compromise, there is no other option, it is one of the other.

Is that correct??

NO.

Italy's immigration policies are in line with all the rest of the Western countries and Thailand's immigration policies are in line with many 3th and 4th world countries (by no means ALL and possibly not even MOST since MANY of them have much more liberal, tolerant, advanced and human policies).

There are other variations, several "shades of grey" so to speak. But it seems obvious to me that regarding issues like granting PR/citizenship to spouses of a country's citizens or allowing them to own land there aren't that many choices. Either you do or you don't...

Edited August 12, 2007 by BAF

[capaotung]

<br />The fact that there are even different countries is wrong already.

So true

[bloody tiger]

Maybe this Thai men who stand outside in the poring rain have to quite smoking, then they can stand inside like the rest of us......

Well, that's all dbrenn could came up with to make the Thais appear like poor victims: "queuing up outside a western embassy in the peeing rain just to get a tourist visa", as if it's something unique to Thais dealing with Western embassies and never mind that, for example, the visa section's waiting area of the Italian Embassy in Bangkok is thrice the size of the visa section's waiting area of the Thai Embassy in Rome...

In that other thread I didn't want to sound like I was ranting and have my post deleted so I ignored dbrenn's "poetic license" but still... LOL!

BAF,

I think you make a lot of good points and agree with you.

TNX voa

BLAH BLAH BLAH....well they don't need a big waiting room at the Thai embassy in Rome because all the Italians can come here without having to get a visa.......now why would it be that there is a huge waiting room at the visa section of the Italian embassy in bangkok???? I'll have a punt and say because its SO BLOODY hard for thais to get tourist entry Italy.......have a nice day

[otton]

The latest "No More Dependent Extension Of Stay If The Host Foreigner Has A Retirement Extension Of Stay Permit" imbroglio nicely proves the OP's point that 1 year extensions are no base on which build one's future (let alone one's family's future) and also nicely shows how stupid the suggestions given by many here to go the trick and loopholes route (ED visas, "fake" embassy certifications, 90 days non-IMMs) really were...

In Thailand, all it takes to blow one's (and one's family's) life away is an unexpected and unannounced overnight change of immigration laws which are enforced immediately (even before their publication in the official gazette) and which contain no grandfathering provisos.

This is already the second time it happens in less than a year. Somebody will never learn and somebody else is just now starting to wake up and smell the somtam...

Edited September 8, 2007 by otton

[siamamerican]

After reading this thread, I'm confused. Of the posters that are bashing Thailand's visa and citizenship laws, how many actually want to become a Thai citizen??? Why were you denied?

Thailand is extremely accommodating to the bulk of farangs that choose to visit intermittently and stay for 30 to 90 days. With very little work and a little money, it is easy to get a one year visa.

For those that are married to Thais, in most cases, getting a visa for your partner to visit or live in your country isn't nearly as simple. Before posters chime in how their wife got a visa upon arrival and became a citizen, I know from personal experience it can be done, but it wasn't a simple process.

What I'm hearing from posters is that if you are married to a Thai or serious about living in Thailand, citizenship should be a right. It is beneath you to have to jump through hoops to make this a reality. Again, I don't understand the desire to become a Thai citizen, but I assume there is a benefit for certain individuals.

I always thought Thai citizenship was a possibility for some, just like it is in most other countries. What are the options available to farangs in regards to Thai citizenship?

If it is nearly impossible to become a Thai citizenship, I appologize for my lack of knowledge.

Edited September 9, 2007 by siamamerican

[otton]

After reading this thread, I'm confused. Of the posters that are bashing Thailand's visa and citizenship laws, how many actually want to become a Thai citizen??? Why were you denied?

Yes you are confused indeed.

1. This thread is much more about PR (and, maybe, property ownership rights and the right to work any job) than citizenship

2. WHO has been denied WHAT?!?

Thailand is extremely accommodating to the bulk of farangs that choose to visit intermittently and stay for 30 to 90 days.

Of course, it's all for their gain.

With very little work and a little money, it is easy to get a one year visa.

Letting aside that for most people is all but "very little work and a little money", 1 year extensions are the maximum that the vast majority of people can ever hope to get in Thailand.

For those that are married to Thais, in most cases, getting a visa for your partner to visit or live in your country isn't nearly as simple.

If you are trying to get her a tourist visa is of course not, since she is NOT a tourist... It's in the very first post of this thread, sure you have read it?

Before posters chime in how their wife got a visa upon arrival and became a citizen, I know from personal experience it can be done, but it wasn't a simple process.

HEEELLOOO?!? In Thailand in most cases IT CANNOT BE DONE AT ALL!! It's not a question of "simple" or "difficult"!

What I'm hearing from posters is that if you are married to a Thai or serious about living in Thailand, citizenship should be a right.

Who cares about citizenship? For moral reasons, I wouldn't want to be a Thai. I can't be proud to be Thai hence I don't want to become one.

What I want and what I think is only fair for me to be granted to (since my homecountry does to Thais and since I, and not only I, deem it to be a basic human right) is Permanent Residence and at least some minimal property ownership right.

It is beneath you to have to jump through hoops to make this a reality.

What about starting to make the Thais jump through some hoops too?

Again, I don't understand the desire to become a Thai citizen, but I assume there is a benefit for certain individuals.

I always thought Thai citizenship was a possibility for some, just like it is in most other countries. What are the options available to farangs in regards to Thai citizenship?

If it is nearly impossible to become a Thai citizenship, I appologize for my lack of knowledge.

First of all, you should (re?)read the whole thread...

[geriatrickid]

Explain this then. Australia requires everyone, except New Zealand citizens, to get a visa. At present, it will cost about $20. Why hasn't everyone retaliated against Australia? From experience, after the Irish and NZ passports, the Australian passport is one of the easiest in the world to travel on....

There's a big big difference with Australia. You can get an ETA online, valid for 90 days, within a minute or so. If Thailand did this, it would be a big help to people. I noticed Cambodia recently introduced its E-Visa. (I wouldn't be surprised if the Australians helped set that up.) I think alot of the visa complaints are related to the bureaucracy, ineptness and delays associated with the processing, not the need for the visa itself. Everyone understands that a country has to control its borders.