Retire Sooner? Or Later? What Would You Do?

[present]

I did mean the average Thai citizen salary of course

[farang prince]

This is really a great forum. Thanks for all the replies. There are certainly many points of view to consider, and I have learned a lot about retiring in Thailand, and in a way, about myself.

I have spent most of my life thrusting myself into situations and dealing with them, without much foresight. If I felt like doing something, I did it. If I felt like going somewhere, I went. I only considered consequences as they arose.

This is different. It's not just another adventure. Back in post #3 of this thread, twix38 suggested long term visiting to test the waters before making any commitment. That is starting to sound reasonable.

My BA is English. I have a TESOL certificate and enjoyed teaching. I started in Bangkok and Chiang Mai in the 80's, when it was a relatively uncrowded hustle, unlike now. In 1995-96 I took graduate courses and got a California state certificate and taught night school here for several years. I could dust that off. My wife is a Network Systems Administrator, but I don't know how that would apply in Thailand.

We are not prepared to sell our home here. The market is in the toilet and we owe a ton anyway. We can rent it to cover the payments and not much more. My wife's parents are still living, in their 80's and in failing health. We both actually have jobs we don't hate. San Diego is a pretty nice place to live.

We will be in the region again this November-December, and plan to spend time in Chiang Mai. I admit I have not been there since 1988, and I know it has changed dramatically. I have a feeling more will be revealed then, and in the next year or two.

We have friends returning later today from a fact-finding trip to Costa Rica-Panama-Nicaragua, and will be pumping them for their impressions, to respond to those who suggested Central America. And we are driving down to Ensenada for lunch and back up through Tecate today, and sure, Mexico is the obvious option, but there is just nothing like SEAsia, really. Is there?

Thanks again. This forum is an incredible resource. I'm sure I'm not the only one helped by the thoughtful and incisive replies this thread has generated.

Oldboy, I'm glad that you found some of the posts to be of value. There are some old heads in here who have gone through the same crossroads as you are now experiencing and their insight is invaluable. Peace Blondie spent a lot of time in Central America and based on previous postings, wasn't to enamored with the experience. I've been in Panama, El Salvador, Guatemala, and Nicaragua and I wouldn't recommend any of those places as retirement havens. Costa Rica, on the other hand, is lovely and has a stable government (at the moment). Might be worth an investigative trip there. I don't know about you, but Mexico was never a viable option for me. There has to be a reason millions of Mexicans cross the border illegally to come north, rather than millions of Americans going south. And as for that wacky suggestion that you consider going to Iraq as a contractor...don't. Seems like you've already used up plenty of luck and that place is the ultimate dice roll. Good luck to you and your wife.

[philliphn]

My advice is to wait the 2 or three more years so that you will have the increased amount to live on. Two or three years is not that much longer.

Having said that, I am not without some sympathy for you. I must say however most people these days know the importance of planning for retirement. You didn't plan very well. The price for that in your case is 2 or 3 more years of work. PAY THE PRICE!

I myself must work at a very difficult stressful job for 3 more years. Believe me where I work 3 years is a long time. However, I have saved money for retirement. I have managed to accumulate a decent amount in various investment vehicles. This despite my only really being a middle class income person and only having one income. I also will qualify for a State pension. At the time of my retirment, I will have 29 years of State service. At retirement I will be 55 years old.

[cobra]

If you can retire now, why even question it.

Life is too short. Do it Now!

Many often make errors in assuming any additional net one more year of saving for retirement will yield.

Often it's not that significant, just as important are personal issues, health, quality of life, etc

Personally I intend pulling the plug as soon as it's feasible, I also order dessert first ...

Good luck

[PeaceBlondie]

Oldboy, thanks for all the additonal info in your latest post. You sounded impulsive before, making critical decisions too fast, without the right data. But if you have a BA, and have taught EFL in Thailand before (even eons ago), you could make it here doing that teaching, on a B visa. Heck, on a very lucky day in Chiang Mai you might even get a work permit and a visa extension. Still, if I were you, I'd wait the extra two years because the difference in numbers sounds crucial. Sure enough, Costa Rica seems to be the exception in all of Central America, but it's the most expensive country in the region, and you still have security/theft problems. I've never been to Baja, either state, but I hear that La Paz is nice, but the Cabos are just too touristy. I lived in rural Nicaragua, and in Chiapas, Mexico; you'd have to learn Spanish (I know a great school on a lake in Nicaragua; several, in fact).

You have almost compelling reasons to stay there a few more years: jobs you like, parents in failing health, San Diego. The best time to come here is when you hate your job, parents are dead, and you find yourself living in a ghetto.

[sceadugenga]

What I'd consider is the quality of life I had at the present. Do you enjoy your job? In that case wait the two years, if not grab the money and run. A little bit of visa inconvenience will only help to keep you young and active.

[RedQualia]

(PS . I'm confused by your assertion you never expected to live this old. You're early sixties? What do you do for a living? Professional stuntman?)

Not exactly. But I'm a Vietnam War veteran, both Army and Navy. I was a mine worker, a teamster and an industrial electrician. I have been a yacht racer and a commercial fisherman. I am a lifetime motorcyclist and no stranger to crashes. I have been hit by cars twice as a pedestrian. I have been stabbed in the chest and hit in the head with a baseball bat. I have had thirteen broken bones (not counting fingers and toes) and seven trauma operations. I have had over a thousand stitches in my body.

Evidently I am immortal, but sadly, not invulnerable to serious injury.

And now I'm a middle manager, with all the associated stresses and hazards. Hardest thing I ever did.

I'm in the camp that recognizes no one lives forever. I suspect quality of life to seriously decline as one approaches and proceeds through their 80s, however far they may. I'd like to be able to cover the repairable items, I suppose, but am not too fond of simply falling apart, slowly, over time. When it's time to go, it's time to go.

That said, spent some time visiting a hospital in Chaiyaphum not too long ago, watching people die. One fellow was in a ward of 20-30 people. Looked quite distinquished when they carried him by. At least he'd been in a room, unlike the people stacked on the balconies being bathed and such by their family members in front of everyone else. The other fellow was "more fortunate." Younger, dying of prostate cancer. "More fortunate," because he went relatively quickly, and could afford an air conditioned room in which to spend his final moments.

I mean, there's dying, and then there's dying (move over, Hunter S. Thompson).

Look into whether medical coverage through the VA is available to you anywhere in Thailand. Seems slightly possible.

Lemmee know how you're gonna unload that turkey of a house you have in SD. Really. I don't want it, but I'm curious (in the same boat).

Edited July 9, 2007 by RedQualia

[Oldboy]

OP here again. Just a small update before this thread fades away. Someone suggested that my original estimates of our projected retirement income seemed low. I did the research and it turns out I was low-balling slightly. The actual numbers are bolded in the quote below.

My wife and I had not planned on getting this old, but it has happened, and we are setting it up to live in Thailand, probably Chiang Mai, when we quit working. We are trying to decide when that will be. Sooner, or later?

We could do it as soon as September 2008 with 500K THB in the bank and a combined monthly income of 35K THB 40K THB. We could squeak by on the retirement visa financial requirement with that. If we forego a planned trip to the region this year, we could have another 125K THB in the bank. After two years, our monthly income would increase to 55K THB 67.5K THB. So, that's the "sooner" scenario.

Or, we could wait. If we retire in 2010, our monthly will be 65K THB 75K THB and we should have an even million THB banked. That's the "later" scenario. Every year we put it off, our monthly retirement income goes up, and we bank more.

If we wait until 2012, our monthly retirement income would be 87.5K THB.

2008 (ages 62/60)= 40K (increasing to 67.5K in 2010)

2010 (ages 64/62)= 75K

2012 (ages 66/64)= 87.5K

2014 (ages 68/66)=100K

I don't feel like the new numbers make much of a difference. We will visit the region again this November-December, and probably wait until at least 2010, although we will stay flexible.

A day spent in Mexico yesterday caused us to rule it out. Again. We will see our friends who just got back from Panama-Nicaragua-Costa Rica tomorrow, but I am unenthusiastic about those countries, too.

Working until we die and traveling often is always an option. We both have jobs we don't hate, with no mandatory retirement.

We are resistant to staying home and saving, even for a few years. It's hard for lifelong carefree grasshoppers to start behaving like sensible industrious ants. Even with winter coming on fast.

[farang prince]

Actually, Oldboy, your new numbers look a LOT better, especially by 2010. You will appreciate the difference in monthly income once you get here. By the way, what Army outfit were you with in The Nam? I was 1st Cav, 2/5 and was in country 67-69 for two back-to-back tours of duty.

[Mobi]

Old Boy, the increase in the cost of living in LOS by 2010 will more than eat up any upward adjustments in the numbers you have quoted.

I wonder what exchange rate you have used? If the dollar continues it's downward slide (there is a thread predicting 30 Baht/dollar in the near future), you will be way, way, short of sufficient income.

Please re-think your retirement plans, or come up with an idea to get rich quick - if not, forget about Thailand - IMHO.

[JimGant]

A choice to retire early -- but not take social security -- doesn't seem to apply to the OP's situation, but since the subject of 'when to take Social Security" has surfaced in this thread, the following article may be of some interest to others. Basically, it says: If you can retire at age 62, but don't need to take SS early, you should do so anyway. Here's a quote from the article, followed by the link to the complete article:

A simple analysis compares total expected lifetime benefits depending on whether a retiree chooses early retirement at age 62, normal retirement at age 66, or delayed retirement at age 70. A more realistic analysis compares retirees using early Social Security benefits to defer drawing down on retirement savings, allowing those savings to build for a longer period of time.

The analyses suggest that in all cases except for those with very low expected investment returns from individual retirement savings, it is economically beneficial for retirees to take Social Security benefits at age 62 and use these benefits to defer taking withdrawals from their retirement savings.

Taking SS Early

Edited July 10, 2007 by JimGant

[retiree]

Basically, it says: If you can retire at age 62, but don't need to take SS early, you should do so anyway.

Uhh.... not exactly. That part of the analysis is based on the assumption that:

" The balance in the retiree’s tax-deferred retirement account at age 62 is $500,000. "

However, even the 'simple analysis,' which doesn't take savings into account, is misleading when it says that:

" ... the retiree in this example who expects to live past 81 years will collect more lifetime Social Security benefits by delaying Social Security collection until 70. "

Lifetime benefits are not the issue for the retiree without substantial savings. Rather, available yearly income is. Delaying SS until 70 provides about 75% more inflation-adjusted income per year, from age 70 on, than early retirement does.

Note that the underlying problem is analogous to the St. Petersburg Paradox

(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St._Petersburg_paradox ). The paradox arises when a mathematically calculated expected value seems to point to an obvious choice -- but only if one ignores the downside of an outcome that is probabilistically less likely, but could have devastating consequences if it occurs.

In the case of early vs. late SS payments, the marginal utility (i.e. what it means to your lifestyle) of an early payment must be weighed head-to-head against the marginal utility of extra income at an advanced age, even if the odds say that you probably won't live to receive it. Personally, I'm willing to forgo something that has a high expected value but low utility now, in favor of getting high utility -- albeit low expected value -- later on.

Retiree

[jinjok]

i always hate these posts...

i have so much money... what should i do? WAh wah

i semi retired at 33, retired at 43. i will burn my cash down to the point of nothing by 65. minimal govt pension kicks in at 62. inheretence ??? about same time.

some dopes live to work. they have no love in their life and no love for life. they are quite happy toiling away. it fills th eempty viod that should be their LIFE. i have two friends, millionaires - never stop work. never holiday. they will not know what to do with themselves!

i have few regrets -

earn as much as you can and when you have difficulty commanding good wages and can tolerate the work - i always say.. never quit but let the job/career take you out. for me in i.t. it was early in life, luckily i planned somewhat.

something else... there are loads of farang here now who live big fat excessive lives. for this you need a matching bank account. all of the wiseguys in the financial media woiuld lead you to believe youll never save enough. if you are one of these - maybe you wont.

but heres a secret - if you can live simply you know exactly the money needed and can make it happen. while i have been living past ten yrs on 15-20k baht a month there are a bunch of losers dreaming and scraping the money for the 45k lifestyle. they will come here with their big money and equal big demands and live as they did back home.

anyone can have a great, simple life for b30k a month

retiree: i am not willing to forgo a payout -that may well not even be there for some pie-in-sky number drawn on a bankrupt nation. take it and run!

Edited July 10, 2007 by jinjok

[Jingthing]

Yes, Jin, if you can swing it.

People who don't take social security benefits the very minute they become eligible are very strange animals to me.

[Fore Man]

Yes, Jin, if you can swing it.

People who don't take social security benefits the very minute they become eligible are very strange animals to me.

I can think of a very good reason...if you are drawing any earned (US) income when you also start to draw SS dollars, then you will be heavily penalized by offsetting taxes levied against that SS income. Why hand so much back to Uncle Sam instead of waiting when your working years are over and then your SS could be increased by roughly 5% annually until your 66th birthday at then at the reduced rate for 65+ year-olds? Reaching the other decision to wait until 70 calls for a lot of self-examination and a bit of luck, hoping that you could beat the actuarial odds stacked against you. Not an easy decision as whatever you do will greatly affect your QOL during your later years....at a time that you wish not to be dependent on others for your welfare. We bailed out of San Diego 3 years ago to live in Pattaya for 6 months and instantly regretted it for many cogent reasons which I will not bore you with here....even after we had traveled there many times on holidays. Since my wife is a Northern gal, we took a close look at CM and fell in love with the area...and never regretted our decision to move here. I have been extremely fortunate to hold down a well-paying job (US-based) ever since moving away from San Diego, and count my lucky stars for each and every day that paycheck continues to roll in...even when I have to denominate that income into increasingly expensive Baht. As a final note I have to believe that the original poster is woefully shy of savings and income to enjoy much of a life here in CM. It could easily be done in the outer provinces but your overall quality of life would not amount to much...after the exciting and multifaceted lifestyle they have led in San Diego, there is not too much for a Farang couple to do out in the hinterlands...plus less than ideal medical care available. The spouse's inability (assumed) to converse well in Thai would place a heavy toll on her too. It would be a pretty banal existence. Better work and save until they drag you out by the heels than to live like a pauper in the LOS.

Edited July 10, 2007 by skyman

[ChiangraiTony]

To be honest you would always be struggling to meet the visa requirements, finance-wise, should you retire to Thailand

Putting it bluntly (and i'm sorry to be the bearer of bad tidings here) you are borderline now. Just think to what it will be like should the Baht continue its slow, but steady climb back up to what it was pre 1997

Could you meet the financial requirements at an exchange rate of say, 25 TBH to the Dollar?

Would you be able to meet any increases the Thai authorities impose on the requirements....say to a million Baht a year for a retirement visa?

Only you can answer those questions, but, if you are honest with yourself, i think your answer will be "no"

So, in all honesty, i wouldnt consider retiring to LOS..........better to see it as a nice place for a few weeks/months per year, with no looking over your shoulder, waiting for the day the hammer falls, and you will be forced to either look elsewhere in the region (cheaper) or to return home to US

Its OK flying by the seat of your pants, when you are in your 20's, 30's and early 40's, but not at an age when all you want to do is potter about.

What i suppose i am saying is we all have to cut our coat according to our cloth, and, to be brutally frank, you seem to not have enough cloth to have a comfortable retirement in LOS

Penkoprod

[ChiangraiTony]

I have been stabbed in the chest and hit in the head with a baseball bat. I have had thirteen broken bones (not counting fingers and toes) and seven trauma operations. I have had over a thousand stitches in my body.

You'll get bored in Chiang Mai. Have you considered Iraq?

[ChiangraiTony]

I AM READING THIS AND IT'S GETTING FUNNIER ALL THE TIME.

[JimGant]

Uhh.... not exactly. That part of the analysis is based on the assumption that:

" The balance in the retiree’s tax-deferred retirement account at age 62 is $500,000. "

The author uses "$500,000" as an example -- to better plot his fancy graphs -- but the analysis works with different amounts too, as the basic premise is that, with certain expected returns, it is better to finance post retirement needs with early SS payments rather than drawdown retirement savings. Of course, the definitive phrase is "expected returns," which, although mathematically predictable within standard deviation boundaries, can be anything but predictable, especially in the short term, which, unfortunately, is the term entered into by retirees.

Nevertheless, with an expected return of 5% -- which could be achieved today nearly risk-free with CDs -- it would appear that taking early SS is an excellent option, even for the risk-adverse types. (But, if you plan to live past age 89, you may want to consider delayed SS to cover the cost of your Pampers.)

Lifetime benefits are not the issue for the retiree without substantial savings. Rather, available yearly income is

Agreed. But this article addresses those fortunate enough to be able to retire -- and NOT take early SS benefits, living instead off their investments, if they so opted. Even better would be the retiree having all three legs of the ideal financial situation -- a pension, investments, and SS. And if that pension is a government one, i.e., it's indexed for inflation, this retiree has many options, including being as risky or conservative as he wants with his investments, knowing that two legs of his retirement cashflow cover inflation. In this case, he could end up with the 'super good life' or maybe just the 'good life.' Nice situation to be in.

n the case of early vs. late SS payments, the marginal utility (i.e. what it means to your lifestyle) of an early payment must be weighed head-to-head against the marginal utility of extra income at an advanced age,

Agreed. The marginal 'disutility' of outliving your income, because you took early SS and your investments tanked (regardless of the 'expected return' predicted by your Quicken program) could be very rude. And being risk-adverse at age 70 seems prudent (unlike at, say, age 55). So, retiring at age 62, burning up your investments to live off of -- and before they tank -- then collecting at age 70 an SS check of 76% greater value, would seem to be a good, conservative plan. Even moreso if you're risk adverse, have a pension, and the marginal utility between a 'good life' and a 'super good life' is not really a factor. (Plus, who's to say, maybe your investments will exceed 'expected returns' and you end up with a bonus.)

Anyway, plenty of ways to skin this SS cat. In the end, however, you really don't know which model to choose -- until you know your check-out date......

[PeaceBlondie]

In the case of the OP - and when the rubber hits the road, we can only make decisions on an individual basis, or in this case a married couple - it's easy to tell them to both work many more years. But that's not what they want! Also, they're not financially secure enough to delay something like a pension (SS) that can start sooner. I say 2010 is about all they're willing to wait, and then they can make it in Chiang Mai city.

[RagingBrit]

Forget it, you haven't enough funds.

Farangs considering living in Thailand permanently must be financially prepared for the long-term future.

Inflation is high in Thailand, plus your medical care, you will suffer more health problems as with age. Possible visa fee & stake rises, exchange rates can plummet, bank interest rates do go down.

Better to go down in your home country, where you have social security back up than a big time loser in (LOS) and a burden to people in Thailand.

On the information given, you would never last as a long term resident in Thailand.

Edited July 14, 2007 by RagingBrit

[Jingthing]

Social security pays the same whether living in the US or as an expat, and cost of living increases are not frozen. It is not a dole or welfare program for older people, it is an entitlement enjoyed by rich and poor. The amount paid is tied to the person's lifetime contributions. And the same money still buys more in Thailand than the US, even if the baht were 25 to the dollar.

Edited July 14, 2007 by Jingthing

[RagingBrit]

Thailand is not a final grazing field for knackered old financially border line farangs or a place of stay for those on hard times in the West because it’s cheaper here to live, nor is it promoted as such.

The government gives pleasure as a favour in issuing visas on a yearly or to some, three yearly basis for those that are reasonably in good heatlh, able to invest in Thailand or have some skills beneficial to it’s industries for the benefit of Thailand and it’s people.

It’s that simple.

For the Farangs that fit this criteria, Thailand is worth considering as a place of retirement.

[Jingthing]

Thailand is not a final grazing field for knackered old financially border line farangs or a place of stay for those on hard times in the West because it’s cheaper here to live, nor is it promoted as such.

The government gives pleasure as a favour in issuing visas on a yearly or to some, three yearly basis for those that are reasonably in good heatlh, able to invest in Thailand or have some skills beneficial to it’s industries for the benefit of Thailand and it’s people.

It’s that simple.

For the Farangs that fit this criteria, Thailand is worth considering as a place of retirement.

OK, I basically agree with you, but think you are exaggerating your claim.

First of all, find me one place where the Thai government PROMOTES retirement here for any wealth level, rich, middle class, or poor. I have not seen one place. Yes, they offer a visa, but that is it. There is no formal program to assist or encourage retirees, such as the Malaysia, My Second Home program. So, in effect, we all invite ourselves, and frankly, we are constantly reminded of that reality.

Secondly, while it is true that a farang at a poverty level may not qualify for or live well in Thailand, the reality still exists that for many they can increase their quality of life by making the move. The government really doesn't say anything about this, one way or another, as long as the applicant can meet the current visa requirments. It is a personal decision.

Also, lets get real. People don't retire in Thailand for the temples. They moslty come here and other tropical countries to improve their standard of living. This means different things for different wealth levels, but the impulse is the same, and there is nothing wrong with it. If you don't believe this, imagine the baht and Euro being 1 to 1. Now count the number of farang retirees in Thailand (on your fingers).

This is actually on a micro level just a matter of globalization. Individuals shopping for the best retirement deal for themselves. If you were openly a garment factory today, would you open it in the USA, France, Thailand, or Vietnam? Correct answer: Vietnam.

As far as extensions based on retirement, there are absolutely no health requirements. So on that point, you are wrong. If you drag your bum to immigration for your annual meeting, that is good enough.

Edited July 14, 2007 by Jingthing

[PeaceBlondie]

Good point: the Thai government never officially invited me here; I came on my accord, without so much as an old Honda Accord. Nor does the government give me any assurances beyond the one-year point, one year at a time. There's always the permanent residency, but that started its countdown anew when I lost my passport. And, there's always Thai citizenship. Otherwise, we goes down to the Man every year and wais him hopefully.

[peekint]

I would agree with all the posters who assert that the Thai Government is less than "Welcoming" to any sort of outsider. The xenophobia stems from their fear of foreign radical ideas (like questioning authority? improving education? expecting government accountability?) might infect the local populace.

That said, a country, especially this one, is made up of a government and its people, and you will find the people of Thailand extremely pleased to have you here, quite helpful, and sincerely friendly.

The only two valid "risk" points I have heard brought up are the exchange risk and the deposit requirement risk. Let me briefly elaborate.

Exchange Risk: Assuming you have the minimum required to make the B800,000 (or whatever, in combination with your income) at some point, and then LEAVE it in the bank and don't touch it, there is no exchange risk. Baht are Baht. If, on the other hand, you need to transfer that amount in each year, and the Baht strengthens, you may find yourself unable to meet the requirement at some time in the future. It sounds like your intention, however, is to bank the funds in Thailand and leave them there, and live off your pension. It's a good plan, and eliminates this risk.

Deposit Requirement Risk: The size of the deposit required has continued to increase over the years, and the word on the street is that B1M is on the horizon, just awaiting the next change of government. If you have no ability to increase your deposit when required, your retirement in Thailand may be abruptly terminated on your next renewal.

As long as you understand those two risks, I would say, do it as soon as you can. Don't listen to all these folks who say "you can't live on..." some figure. I suspect they are living farang lifestyles and not taking advantage of the freedom and economy of "lightening up the load".

You can rent a very very nice two-story townhouse in trendy Niman area for between B10-12K. Good wholesome food, especially veggies, are practically free compared to what you pay in the US. Personally, I still buy meat in the big markets - specifically, Carrefour - for sanitation reasons, but even then, the cost of chicken or pork is a fifth what it costs you in San Diego. Health care is so cheap as to be laughable - my several emergency room visits have cost me each about B300 (I'm quite tall and bang my head a lot ... hahaha), and I'm going for a complete "50 year old time" physical at Chiang Mai University next week, for 100 bucks (my very cursory physical in the US when I was 45 cost me over USD500)

You decide whether you need cable TV, how many air conditioners running how many hours (I have two air conditioners - one for guests, one for the Master Bedroom - and neither runs any time but at night, and probably not more than 20 days out of the year. Fans cost about 500B and do just fine in Chiang Mai.

To summarize, consider how well you might be able to accept the two risks I mention above. Forget about advice about cost of living - it's not a problem at all. Then, decide and do.

Best of Luck.

[PeaceBlondie]

To summarize, consider how well you might be able to accept the two risks I mention above. Forget about advice about cost of living - it's not a problem at all. Then, decide and do.

Best of Luck.

Excuse me, but in the opening post, they say they only have 35,000 baht per month to live on in central Chiang Mai. You suggest a condo that costs a third of that, per month. If they wait until they have 65K baht, then it may be 'no problem at all."

[Dr. G]

35KBaht per month income

500KBaht savings

Not enough.

If you have bronchial problems you need to leave

Chaing Mai for 3 months (March April May) each year.

"The burning season"

g

[Oldboy]

Sawadee again,

Since I started this thread, much has happened, and plans have changed. A year ago, I was in a job I hated and looking for a way to escape. Since then my wife and I have made another trip to SE Asia (North Vietnam, Laos and Chiang Mai), and I have changed jobs. I am doing a job I enjoy at a great company for 30% more money than previously.

I will be content to vacation for the next five years, by which time our monthly retirement income will be around B100K and our savings well over B1M. Our next trip will be a month - Thailand from north to south, and through Malaysia to S'pore. We still like Chiang Mai best, but have friends retired in Phuket and Krabi and will look at those places as well.

As we now both have jobs we look forward to going to, for good money and with liberal time off, I am not as interested in expat life. If I can get to the region for a month every year, I think I will be content with that. It's nice to know that if something changes on the job front, we will be that much better positioned to make a move if we decide to. Mai pen rai.

Oldboy

[whatchamacallit]

To be honest you would always be struggling to meet the visa requirements, finance-wise, should you retire to Thailand

Putting it bluntly (and i'm sorry to be the bearer of bad tidings here) you are borderline now. Just think to what it will be like should the Baht continue its slow, but steady climb back up to what it was pre 1997

Could you meet the financial requirements at an exchange rate of say, 25 TBH to the Dollar?

Would you be able to meet any increases the Thai authorities impose on the requirements....say to a million Baht a year for a retirement visa?

Only you can answer those questions, but, if you are honest with yourself, i think your answer will be "no"

So, in all honesty, i wouldnt consider retiring to LOS..........better to see it as a nice place for a few weeks/months per year, with no looking over your shoulder, waiting for the day the hammer falls, and you will be forced to either look elsewhere in the region (cheaper) or to return home to US

Its OK flying by the seat of your pants, when you are in your 20's, 30's and early 40's, but not at an age when all you want to do is potter about.

What i suppose i am saying is we all have to cut our coat according to our cloth, and, to be brutally frank, you seem to not have enough cloth to have a comfortable retirement in LOS

Penkoprod

You make some good points, and thanks for your frankness. As I said in the OP, we did not prepare for this well at all. We didn't save, we traveled. We stayed in less well-paid jobs with lots of time off rather than take career paths that paid well but kept us working long hours and demanded levels of commitment we were unwilling to live with. As a result, we are ill-prepared for retirement, compared to many.

We live in San Diego. If we can't afford to retire to Thailand, then given the cost of living here in Southern California, we will just work until we die, or if we are forced to quit our jobs, just immediately kill ourselves.

Seriously, we know that we will just be getting by, living at a level that many would find unacceptable, but we have been traveling the region enjoyably, getting by on roughly the same amount. We are most interested in exploring more of Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar, hence a projected Chiang Mai base. We like the areas in the region that remind us of Thailand 25 years ago.

We will have medical/repatriation insurance, and several hundred thousand frequent flyer miles for any flights back to the states. We are active and in good health.

We have not lived our lives playing it safe by any measure, and it's just too late to start. If it doesn't work out, we can always come back and mooch off our kids.

If your 35K thb/month budget must include your food and lodging then that would REALLY be cutting it close. The past couple of months alone basic food and lodging have started to rise noticeably. I would therefore suggest you wait the extra 2 years which will nearly double your monthly budget and give you the funds you need for your retirement visa. Good luck!