On 11/11/2025 at 10:56 AM, JimCM said:

You are a racist.

The UK has grown more diverse, and this has brought enormous benefit in terms of culture, economy, innovation and social vitality.

When you blame “immigrants” or “Muslims” as a group for crime, you betray the principle that individuals are responsible for their actions - not whole ethnicities or religions.

Encouraging integration, opportunity, fairness and justice is what makes a society safe, not scapegoating.

As an immigrant yourself, your hypocrisy is outstanding.

Crime is overwhelmingly committed by British-born citizens.

Poverty, inequality, exclusion matter far more in many cases than immigration status. People who feel excluded or disadvantaged may turn to crime; addressing that is far more productive than blame.

lets go back to a time before diversity, when the streets were safer,

I was never asked if I wanted a diverse country, its been forced on us by "Successive governments"

53 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

They think it's their "GOTCHA" moment.

 

Bless. 😀😄

 

The irony is that I am not even against immigration as long as it is legal, strictly controlled in terms of numbers/background checks and also skills based. I've made that clear many times but they ignore it since it does not suit their agenda that anyone against uncontrolled, mass illegal immigration is Adolf Hitler.  😀

 

My position on LEGAL immigration does not of course change the fact that by any definition, I myself am not an immigrant but an expat. 

 

The definition of expat literally describes my exact circumstances. 😀

 

 

 

 

If you work here until you retire, have property and local gf, which you do, decide to retire here on you long-term visa, are you still Not an immigrant?

Fyi in Thailand the law states.

 

“Immigrant” means any alien who enters the Kingdom.

 

https://royalthaipolice.go.th/downloads/laws/laws_03_03-03.pdf

56 minutes ago, steve187 said:

lets go back to a time before diversity, when the streets were safer,

I was never asked if I wanted a diverse country, its been forced on us by "Successive governments"

Just as well Thailand's immigration regulations are so lax, no normal Thai was asked if they wanted you here, but that's different is it?

Maybe your money builds Thailand lol.

Same as Johhny, who is a factory worker immigrant.

 

 

8 minutes ago, JimCM said:

Fyi in Thailand the law states.

 

“Immigrant” means any alien who enters the Kingdom.

 

https://royalthaipolice.go.th/downloads/laws/laws_03_03-03.pdf

In Thailand, an expat is not an immigrant. An expat is a foreigner living in the country long-term on a non-immigrant visa — such as Non-B (work), Non-O (family or retirement), Elite, or LTR — meaning their stay is temporary, renewable, and requires 90-day reporting. They intend to stay for years or even decades, but not permanently, and they must leave if their visa or work permit ends. In contrast, an immigrant has Permanent Residency (PR) or Thai citizenship — a rare status granted to only 100 people per nationality per year, requiring at least three years of legal work, high income, Thai language skills, and a rigorous application.

 

Source......

Immigration Act B.E. 2522 (1979) – The core law governing visas and residency in Thailand. It defines non-immigrant visas (temporary stays) and permanent residency (ถิ่นที่อยู่ถิ่นถาวร).

36 minutes ago, mikeymike100 said:

 

In Thailand, an expat is not an immigrant. An expat is a foreigner living in the country long-term on a non-immigrant visa — such as Non-B (work), Non-O (family or retirement), Elite, or LTR — meaning their stay is temporary, renewable, and requires 90-day reporting. They intend to stay for years or even decades, but not permanently, and they must leave if their visa or work permit ends. In contrast, an immigrant has Permanent Residency (PR) or Thai citizenship — a rare status granted to only 100 people per nationality per year, requiring at least three years of legal work, high income, Thai language skills, and a rigorous application.

 

Source......

Immigration Act B.E. 2522 (1979) – The core law governing visas and residency in Thailand. It defines non-immigrant visas (temporary stays) and permanent residency (ถิ่นที่อยู่ถิ่นถาวร).

This statement is not accurate. Being a permanent resident or even a naturalized Thai citizen does not automatically exclude someone from being considered an expat. The term “expat” is a social and cultural label, not a legal one. It generally refers to a foreigner living in a country long-term, regardless of their visa or citizenship status. While many expats stay on non-immigrant visas (Non-B, Non-O, Elite, LTR), a foreigner with Permanent Residency or even naturalized Thai citizenship can still be described as an expat because they live in Thailand as someone originally from another country and often retain cultural, social, or economic ties to their home country.

Legal status distinguishes temporary residents from permanent residents or citizens, but it does not redefine the social identity of someone as an expat. Many expats in Thailand eventually acquire PR or even citizenship yet remain part of the expat community, attending expat events, speaking in expat networks, and maintaining cultural ties to their home countries.

1 hour ago, JimCM said:

If you work here until you retire, have property and local gf, which you do, decide to retire here on you long-term visa, are you still Not an immigrant?

 

Of course I wouldn't be an immigrant. 😄

 

Owning property here is irrelevant. I have more property in the UK than I do here. I hold a British passport. I live in Thailand on a temporary basis for a work assignment. My visa states very clearly NON IMMIGRANT and has an expiry date. I even imported the money from the UK to buy my condo (despite having the funds already in a Thai bank) so that I would have the necessary paperwork to repatriate the funds when I sell it and leave. Everything about me screams Expat.

 

Give up. You're embarrassing yourself.

 

7 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Of course I wouldn't be an immigrant. 😄

 

Owning property here is irrelevant. I have more property in the UK than I do here. I hold a British passport. I live in Thailand on a temporary basis for a work assignment. My visa states very clearly NON IMMIGRANT and has an expiry date. I even imported the money from the UK to buy my condo (despite having the funds already in a Thai bank) so that I would have the necessary paperwork to repatriate the funds when I sell it and leave. Everything about me screams Expat.

 

Give up. You're embarrassing yourself.

 

Are the Laos, Cambodian, Burmese, Indian, Japanese working in your factory expats?

53 minutes ago, JimCM said:

The term “expat” is a social and cultural label, not a legal one.

 

But we are talking about the term "Immigrant".

 

You are either Immigrant or non immigrant. My passport, a legal document, states very clearly from Thai immigration department that I am non immigrant. My visa has an expiry date. 

 

I'm afraid that legal document trumps someone trying to score a cheap point with illogical word salad pedantry on an anonymous forum. 😄

 

Your GOTCHA moment failed James. Stop digging. 😄

Just now, JimCM said:

Are the Laos, Cambodian, Burmese, Indian, Japanese working in your factory expats?

 

Don't have any. 

 

We do have an American expat though. He's on a non-immigrant visa as well. We also had an Australian expat for a while but he returned to Australia to retire a couple of years ago. 

1 hour ago, JimCM said:

This statement is not accurate. Being a permanent resident or even a naturalized Thai citizen does not automatically exclude someone from being considered an expat. The term “expat” is a social and cultural label, not a legal one. It generally refers to a foreigner living in a country long-term, regardless of their visa or citizenship status. While many expats stay on non-immigrant visas (Non-B, Non-O, Elite, LTR), a foreigner with Permanent Residency or even naturalized Thai citizenship can still be described as an expat because they live in Thailand as someone originally from another country and often retain cultural, social, or economic ties to their home country.

Legal status distinguishes temporary residents from permanent residents or citizens, but it does not redefine the social identity of someone as an expat. Many expats in Thailand eventually acquire PR or even citizenship yet remain part of the expat community, attending expat events, speaking in expat networks, and maintaining cultural ties to their home countries.

"Expat" is NOT a neutral social label in Thailand — it is a practical, legal, and cultural shorthand for non-immigrant visa holders only.
The Royal Thai Immigration Bureau, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and Board of Investment never refer to Permanent Residents or Thai citizens as “expats.” They use:

“Expatriate” → exclusively for Non-B, Non-O, Elite, LTR visa holders

“Permanent Resident” → for PR certificate holders

“Thai citizen” → for naturalized foreigners
→ Source: Immigration Act B.E. 2522, BOI Guide to Foreigners, Elite Visa official docs.

 

PR and citizenship TERMINATE the legal status that defines "expat" life.
Once you get PR:

No more visa renewals

No 90-day reporting

No work permit needed

Can buy land, vote in local elections, open unrestricted bank accounts
→ You are no longer "expatriated" — you are a legal resident.
→ Source: Immigration Bureau PR Handbook (Section 42–45)

 

Expat communities EXCLUDE PR holders and citizens — by design.

ASEAN NOW (Thaivisa): PR threads are titled “I’m no longer an expat”

Bangkok Expat Facebook groups: Rules say “Non-immigrant visa holders only”

InterNations Thailand: Surveys ask “What visa do you hold?” — PR/citizens are categorized separately
→ Real expats know: Once you get PR, you graduate — you’re out of the visa-run club.

 

No PR holder or Thai citizen calls themselves an "expat" in Thailand — because it’s absurd.

A naturalized Thai (e.g., ex-American with Thai passport) is not at the immigration counter every 90 days.

A PR holder doesn’t pay 1,900 THB for a re-entry permit.

They don’t join “Expat Tax Seminars” — they file as Thai tax residents.
→ If they say “I’m an expat,” locals laugh. Expats correct them.

 

Your claim collapses under basic logic:

If every foreigner in Thailand is an “expat” (including PR and citizens), then the word means nothing.

But it does mean something: temporary, visa-dependent, non-permanent status.

PR and citizenship are the opposite — they are permanent integration.

1 hour ago, JimCM said:

The term “expat” is a social and cultural label, not a legal one. It generally refers to a foreigner living in a country long-term, regardless of their visa or citizenship status.

 

Wrong again. 😄

 

Expat is short for Expatriate. The term "expatriate" is commonly used in employment law and tax law. It is relevant for individuals working abroad, as well as for businesses that send employees overseas. Legal issues may arise regarding labor rights, tax obligations, and immigration status.

 

Give up James. 😆

4 hours ago, steve187 said:

lets go back to a time before diversity, when the streets were safer,

I was never asked if I wanted a diverse country, its been forced on us by "Successive governments"

 

Thats because it was never your choice !!! - rather arrogant of you to assume it is.

 

I gather you refuse medical care from 40% of the NHS because they are not 'generationally 'white' British' ????

 

 

2 hours ago, JonnyF said:

 

Of course I wouldn't be an immigrant. 😄

 

Owning property here is irrelevant. I have more property in the UK than I do here. I hold a British passport. I live in Thailand on a temporary basis for a work assignment. My visa states very clearly NON IMMIGRANT and has an expiry date. I even imported the money from the UK to buy my condo (despite having the funds already in a Thai bank) so that I would have the necessary paperwork to repatriate the funds when I sell it and leave. Everything about me screams Expat.

 

Give up. You're embarrassing yourself.

 

Let's settle this once and for all.

 

It's "migrant". You can call yourself an "expat" too, if you wish.

5 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

Let's settle this once and for all.

 

It's "migrant". You can call yourself an "expat" too, if you wish.

 

I am an expatriate having moved to Thailand on a temporary non immigrant visa after being offered an assignment to setup a factory in Thailand by my UK employer.

 

Refer below for clarification. It really is crystal clear and is indeed settled once and for all. Sorry to ruin your little "gotcha" moment though. 😆

 

4 hours ago, steve187 said:

lets go back to a time before diversity, when the streets were safer,

I was never asked if I wanted a diverse country, its been forced on us by "Successive governments"

How far back are you thinking?

15 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Cuisine: From Indian curries and Pakistani biryanis to Chinese takeaways, Lebanese wraps, Nigerian jollof rice, and Polish pierogi – or you prefer egg and chips ?

 

Sorry but 'Indian food' has been here since colonial times. Not at all related to mass immigrantion post WW2 🤪

 

Quote

Anglo-Indian cuisine is the cuisine that developed during British rule in India, between 1612 and 1947, and has survived into the 21st century. Spiced dishes such as curry, condiments including chutney, and a selection of plainer dishes such as kedgeree, mulligatawny and pish pash were introduced to British palates. Anglo-Indian food arrived in Britain by 1747, with a recipe for "a Currey the Indian Way" in Hannah Glasse's The Art of Cookery Made Plain and Easy

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Indian_cuisine

10 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

I am an expatriate having moved to Thailand on a temporary non immigrant visa after being offered an assignment to setup a factory in Thailand by my UK employer.

 

Refer below for clarification. It really is crystal clear and is indeed settled once and for all. Sorry to ruin your little "gotcha" moment though. 😆

 

You haven't ruined anything. I used the United Nations definition. Likely the most accurate.

 

Migrant

 

"While there is no formal legal definition of an international migrant, most experts agree that an international migrant is someone who changes his or her country of usual residence, irrespective of the reason for migration or legal status. Generally, a distinction is made between short-term or temporary migration, covering movements with a duration between three and 12 months, and long-term or permanent migration, referring to a change of country of residence for a duration of one year or more."

 

https://refugeesmigrants.un.org/definitions

 

I see your definition says "permanently or for an extended period". Does that not cover you?

 

It also says "often" when referring to financial gain. Not "always". 

 

 

 

2 minutes ago, GanDoonToonPet said:

 

Sorry but 'Indian food' has been here since colonial times. Not at all related to mass immigrantion post WW2 🤪

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Indian_cuisine

Readily available Indian food, such as in restaurants and take aways, wasn't available until the 50s. I believe that's post WW2.

2 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

You haven't ruined anything. I used the United Nations definition. Likely the most accurate.

 

Migrant

 

"While there is no formal legal definition of an international migrant, most experts agree that an international migrant is someone who changes his or her country of usual residence, irrespective of the reason for migration or legal status. Generally, a distinction is made between short-term or temporary migration, covering movements with a duration between three and 12 months, and long-term or permanent migration, referring to a change of country of residence for a duration of one year or more."

 

https://refugeesmigrants.un.org/definitions

 

 

 

Fascinating. 😆 

 

We're in Thailand. My passport states non-immigrant. What does yours say? 

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

 

Fascinating. 😆 

 

We're in Thailand. My passport states non-immigrant. What does yours say? 

Fascinating. I've not mentioned "immigrant". Read what I said again.

 

I edited my post to add a little. Must have gone through just after you clicked "quote".

Just now, youreavinalaff said:

Fascinating. I've not mentioned "immigrant". Read what I said again.

 

Maybe you should stay on topic then. We are not discussing migration.  

2 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Maybe you should stay on topic then. We are not discussing migration.  

We are, since someone mentioned it and then you argued about terminology. I just thought it sensible to put it right. 

 

 

4 minutes ago, youreavinalaff said:

We are, since someone mentioned it and then you argued about terminology. I just thought it sensible to put it right. 

 

 

 

Migration doesn't even need to be a different country. It can be a different area of the same country. It doesn't even need to be a person, it can be a bird.  😆

 

Stop trying to deflect. We are discussing immigration vs expatriation.  

 

 

On 11/11/2025 at 3:27 PM, youreavinalaff said:

Was the suspect in this case an illegal? I've not seen anything suggesting he is. 

 

Did you know, a large number of illegal immigrants in UK are white Europeans? 

 

Your post is off topic.

Even if he wasnt it is obvious he is not ever going to assimilate into the country and culture. Kick him out.

33 minutes ago, GanDoonToonPet said:

15 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Cuisine: From Indian curries and Pakistani biryanis to Chinese takeaways, Lebanese wraps, Nigerian jollof rice, and Polish pierogi – or you prefer egg and chips ?

 

Sorry but 'Indian food' has been here since colonial times. Not at all related to mass immigrantion post WW2 🤪

 

Quote

Anglo-Indian cuisine is the cuisine that developed during British rule in India, between 1612 and 1947, and has survived into the 21st century. Spiced dishes such as curry, condiments including chutney, and a selection of plainer dishes such as kedgeree, mulligatawny and pish pash were introduced to British palates. Anglo-Indian food arrived in Britain by 1747, with a recipe for "a Currey the Indian Way" in Hannah Glasse's The Art of Cookery Made Plain and Easy

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anglo-Indian_cuisine

 

Got it—you want to cherry-pick your racism. The food’s fine, but the people aren’t?

 

Or is it that “there’s just too many of em” for it to be acceptable?

 

By the way, Indian cuisine is considered the national dish of the UK. If there’s ever been a clearer sign that multiculturalism can be a positive force, that’s it.

 

Fortunately, not everyone shares that kind of prejudice.

 

That’s not to say there aren’t challenges in communities of immigrants or non-White populations - but the issues they face are generated by socio-economics, not race. The same struggles, social environments, and types of crime are seen in predominantly White areas with similar circumstances. Race is rarely the problem; inequality is.

 

Also, to be clear - the Rotherham assaults mentioned earlier in the thread are a different issue. Those crimes were not about race, but rather a deeply ingrained misogyny tied to cultural attitudes, which should be addressed as a social and criminal issue, not a racial one.

34 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Stop trying to deflect. We are discussing immigration vs expatriation.  

 

 

55555. I posted the meaning from UN. 

 

No deflection, not from me anyway. 

29 minutes ago, Photoguy21 said:

Even if he wasnt it is obvious he is not ever going to assimilate into the country and culture. Kick him out.

Is it obvious? Has he never assimilated? You clearly have access to his full family and life history. Please share.

 

He's a British citizen. Where are you going to "kick him out" to?

29 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

 

Got it—you want to cherry-pick your racism. The food’s fine, but the people aren’t?

 

Or is it that “there’s just too many of em” for it to be acceptable?

 

By the way, Indian cuisine is considered the national dish of the UK. If there’s ever been a clearer sign that multiculturalism can be a positive force, that’s it.

 

Fortunately, not everyone shares that kind of prejudice.

 

That’s not to say there aren’t challenges in communities of immigrants or non-White populations - but the issues they face are generated by socio-economics, not race. The same struggles, social environments, and types of crime are seen in predominantly White areas with similar circumstances. Race is rarely the problem; inequality is.

 

Also, to be clear - the Rotherham assaults mentioned earlier in the thread are a different issue. Those crimes were not about race, but rather a deeply ingrained misogyny tied to cultural attitudes, which should be addressed as a social and criminal issue, not a racial one.

 

Do you feel better after that rant? Did you have a good cry?

 

I was simply making the point that we don't need to import 'foreigners' in order to be able to eat 'foreign food' any more. We may need immigrants to work in other industries like the NHS but we certainly don't need a million tandoori chefs every year.

 

34 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

By the way, Indian cuisine is considered the national dish of the UK. If there’s ever been a clearer sign that multiculturalism can be a positive force, that’s it.

 

Considered to be 'the' national dish of the UK by who? There is no officially recognised one. It's just a lame claim popularised by people obsessed with diversity and multiculturalism.

 

Ask anyone in another country to name a British dish and they will invariably say 'Fish and Chips' or 'English Breakfast' 🙂

5 hours ago, mikeymike100 said:

No PR holder or Thai citizen calls themselves an "expat" in Thailand — because it’s absurd.

A naturalized Thai (e.g., ex-American with Thai passport) is not at the immigration counter every 90 days.

A PR holder doesn’t pay 1,900 THB for a re-entry permit.

They don’t join “Expat Tax Seminars” — they file as Thai tax residents.
→ If they say “I’m an expat,” locals laugh. Expats correct them.

You are wrong. I know a few guys with PR and 2 with citizenship, they say they are still expats.

The PRs still need to pay for re entry permits.