Thailand Urged To Provide Incentives For Women To Produce 'Qualitative' Children

[WEBLEDINK]

Automatic visas to couples who have a Farang father who stays with the wife and child

Now that is an instant way to get better quality babies and more of them

Amen! Better education is what I am giving mine now, but having to do this long distance as it is so hard to spend time with the family due to the restrictive Visa's. Will end up taking my quality child to my country to live life and another qualitative child will be lost!

[Thai at Heart]

Quality children starts with responsible parents.

How many chidren are being abandoned into the care of grandparents or other relatives, and how many husbands walk out of their pregnant wives?

Arjan is spending too much time with his books and computer and lacking fieldwork.

If there was not an unwritten law that decrees the poor people of the north will be the migrant workers of Thailand the parents of these children would be home everynight with their kids. Build the <deleted> factories where the labour force is and not only on the land of the chosen few. How much actually gets exported from Rayong etc. Through the North there is EWEC and if governments take their foot of the development of this road it will allow industry to come North. Give the incentives for the foreign businesses to open shop up North. Silly me I thought I was back in the west for a moment, ignore this post only dreaming

You make valid points. More could and should be done to shift some industry up north. Feasibility would require a better infrastructure. On the other hand, Thailand competes regionally with some pretty low-cost countries. The additional transportation costs associated with an Issan-based factory or industrial park could put the cost of production up enough that Thailand can no longer be competitive in the world market. These are not easy problems to solve. The same goes for the minimum wage. It's hard to compete when most of your nearest neighbors have lower labor costs than you.

The best way to compete with your lower cost neighbours is to be better educated. Thailand still spends more on defence than on education I believe. Qualitatively better education is far more important than qualitatively better people. Not everyone will be Einstein, but I also doubt he was self educated also.

As for the rationale for moving industries closer to the working population, they missed that boat years ago by continually caving into the trucking companies and neglecting to build a decent train network. Endless political meddling has screwed that pooch.

Can you believe that the largest paper pulp factory in the region used to ship PULP by ROAD for paper production from Isaan to Bangkok for about 30 years? Now I wish I had had that trucking contract. Not one of the sugar factories in Isaan is on a train line? And as for rice, well, of course that principally goes by road. And they wonder why they might not be as competitive as they should be.

[yllorco]

Yeah, the government needs to improve the quality of children, since a lot of my Mathayom 6 students cannot pass my pratom 6 level tests.

By the way, where can I sign up for producing "qualitative" babies? LOL.

[Deeral]

Sounds a bit like Eugenics???

AH would be proud of them!

[inthepink]

Automatic visas to couples who have a Farang father who stays with the wife and child

Now that is an instant way to get better quality babies and more of them

Amen! Better education is what I am giving mine now, but having to do this long distance as it is so hard to spend time with the family due to the restrictive Visa's. Will end up taking my quality child to my country to live life and another qualitative child will be lost!

If you have a wife and child here then it is extremely easy to get a visa so not really sure what you mean by restrictive? Care to elucidate?

[TAWP]

If you have a wife and child here then it is extremely easy to get a visa so not really sure what you mean by restrictive? Care to elucidate?

Visa to visit, yes, but surely you would like to live here full time with your family?

Without having to go out of the country every 90 days? Or have to put up money in a crappy account and then report to the police every 90 days?

It is less of a hassle moving to Europe than moving to Thailand in a mixed relationship.

[Deeral]

Marryingin many countries gives you residency, property rights and evencitizenship,

in Thailand it actually de-enfranchises the THAI woman

[inthepink]

If you have a wife and child here then it is extremely easy to get a visa so not really sure what you mean by restrictive? Care to elucidate?

Visa to visit, yes, but surely you would like to live here full time with your family?

Without having to go out of the country every 90 days? Or have to put up money in a crappy account and then report to the police every 90 days?

It is less of a hassle moving to Europe than moving to Thailand in a mixed relationship.

I thought you could extend a non-imm 'o' visa based on monthly income? As for 90 day reporting you can do that by post so it's more of a minor annoyance than a major hassle.

Marryingin many countries gives you residency, property rights and evencitizenship,

in Thailand it actually de-enfranchises the THAI woman

Disenfranchises them in what way?

Edited July 17, 2010 by inthepink

[Deeral]

If you have a wife and child here then it is extremely easy to get a visa so not really sure what you mean by restrictive? Care to elucidate?

Visa to visit, yes, but surely you would like to live here full time with your family?

Without having to go out of the country every 90 days? Or have to put up money in a crappy account and then report to the police every 90 days?

It is less of a hassle moving to Europe than moving to Thailand in a mixed relationship.

I thought you could extend a non-imm 'o' visa based on monthly income? As for 90 day reporting you can do that by post so it's more of a minor annoyance than a major hassle.

Marryingin many countries gives you residency, property rights and evencitizenship,

in Thailand it actually de-enfranchises the THAI woman

Disenfranchises them in what way?

THailand does not like duel passports /citizenship and any property they own is in a grey area - technically they can't even buy a house with their husband's money. In short if they marry a foreigner they loose their full citizenship rights.

[inthepink]

THailand does not like duel passports /citizenship and any property they own is in a grey area - technically they can't even buy a house with their husband's money. In short if they marry a foreigner they loose their full citizenship rights.

They can buy property with your money if you give it to them as a gift and sign a declaration stating it was their money before you married, i.e. renounce any legal claim to it.

It is possible for a Thai national to have dual nationality so I'm not sure what you mean on that point...

Edited July 17, 2010 by inthepink

[Deeral]

THailand does not like duel passports /citizenship and any property they own is in a grey area - technically they can't even buy a house with their husband's money. In short if they marry a foreigner they loose their full citizenship rights.

They can buy property with your money if you give it to them as a gift and sign a declaration stating it was their money before you married, i.e. renounce any legal claim to it.

It is possible for a Thai national to have dual nationality so I'm not sure what you mean on that point...

Actually not wholly true.

as you are probably aware the law and its enforcement in thailand is inconsistent and unclear - but one thing that is clear is that a woman's right to own property that is paid for by a foreigner is eroded even if that foreigner is her husband. - hence disenfranchised.

She also looses or may loose her Thai citizenship and if she lives abroad will have to apply for a visa to live in her country of birth.

you might want to look at the pronouncements a few months ago by the governor of Phuket regarding this.whether or not it is renforced it destabilises the woman's rights.

[inthepink]

THailand does not like duel passports /citizenship and any property they own is in a grey area - technically they can't even buy a house with their husband's money. In short if they marry a foreigner they loose their full citizenship rights.

They can buy property with your money if you give it to them as a gift and sign a declaration stating it was their money before you married, i.e. renounce any legal claim to it.

It is possible for a Thai national to have dual nationality so I'm not sure what you mean on that point...

Actually not wholly true.

as you are probably aware the law and its enforcement in thailand is inconsistent and unclear - but one thing that is clear is that a woman's right to own property that is paid for by a foreigner is eroded even if that foreigner is her husband. - hence disenfranchised.

She also looses or may loose her Thai citizenship and if she lives abroad will have to apply for a visa to live in her country of birth.

you might want to look at the pronouncements a few months ago by the governor of Phuket regarding this.whether or not it is renforced it destabilises the woman's rights.

You are claiming that a Thai woman can lose her Thai nationality simply by marrying a foreign national? Sorry but that is complete and utter rubbish. In any case, why would she need dual nationality if the intent was for the couple to live in Thailand?

Regarding the purchasing of land, I think you are probably referring to the director general of the land department's comments on a visit to Phuket when he was talking about confiscating land that had been bought with foreigners money. Among the things he said was the following comment:

“If the Thai spouse has enough money to buy the house that is fine, but if the Thai has no money and uses money given to him or her by a foreigner to acquire property, that is against the law."

So, nothing to do with disenfranchising women is it?

Edited July 17, 2010 by inthepink

[animatic]

If we are to go along with this strange assertion from some posters that the average Westerner in Thailand can provide a better upbringing for children because they have more money, and therefore should be encouraged to settle here because their offspring will be superior to those of all-Thai families then shouldn't the UK government be neutering people who live on council estates and don't earn much money? (An unfortunate side effect of such a policy would be a huge reduction in the number of British people coming to live in Thailand though)

The continual comments about the level of intelligence of Thai people is extremely silly too. The last time I was in the UK it was full of stupid people. Half the people I talked to seemed to think I live in Taiwan which doesn't say much for their education or intelligence.

According to a table of national IQ estimates that I found online, the USA ranks 19th in the world. The top five places are Hong Kong, South Korea, Japan, Taiwan and Singapore. So perhaps the USA and other Western countries should start offering incentives for nationals of these countries to come and mate with their less intelligent natives?

I agree with you, but i doubt that 'they' will understand.

You agree with the notion that IQ should dictate if people get benefits and can get off-springs?

Alright.

Will you still do this when I post the IQ chart that outlines the national average across the world?

Ps. I think any regulation or benefits based on percieved average IQ is pure non-sense. Ds.

Well Kissdani was certaintly right about you not being able to understand my post.

I'm not talking about testing people's IQ before giving them benefits at all. I didn't even mention benefits in my post. I'm saying that if you think the Thai govenrment should encourage Western men to come here and mate because they produce better babies then why not be more selective in the West? People have argued that there are economic benefits to marrying a Westerner so they should make it easier for them to live here. Well, there are economic benefits to not marrying some factory worker in the UK earning a pittance so why not stop them breeding so we can have more qualitative babies there too?

Furthermore, if these Western men are so intelligent and successful then why are they happy to come here and marry farm girls with little education? I have nothing against farming families but if someone from the supposedly developed West is intellectually satisfied with a relationship like that then they obviously aren't all that bright themselves. The middle class in Thailand may be much smaller than in some countries but there are plenty of well educated ladies out there to meet if you're up to the challenge, although I fear many foreigners living here are not.

Incidentally, if you look at the Gini coeffficient for countries around the world you will see that the gap between the rich and the poor is not all that different here than it is in the USA (my apologies for mentioning some verifiable facts).

Please bear in mind size of population and area when making value judgements.

Example. If you take Singapore and it's population and plopped it down over NYC, or Boston / Cambridge,

and then compared by population size/ density and IQ, plus add a 'creativity index',

you might find a significantly better rank than 19th.

One reason western men help make better babies, is because a higher percentage

will stick around, and value intelligent children. It only takes basic observation to see

the high percentage of abandoned Thai ladies with children....

and that reflects more badly on the men than the ladies.

Yes to the Gini Coefficient also.

[inthepink]

Please bear in mind size of population and area when making value judgements.

Example. If you take Singapore and it's population and plopped it down over NYC, or Boston / Cambridge,

and then compared by population size/ density and IQ, plus add a 'creativity index',

you might find a significantly better rank than 19th.

One reason western men help make better babies, is because a higher percentage

will stick around, and value intelligent children. It only takes basic observation to see

the high percentage of abandoned Thai ladies with children....

and that reflects more badly on the men than the ladies.

Yes to the Gini Coefficient also.

Well, I guess neither of us has firm figures to back our opinions up but I would disagree that Western men are more likely to stick around, not the ones who come to Thailand anyway. There are many Thai women left raising a luuk kreung on their own after the father does a runner.

I have to admit I don't fully understand what you're trying to say about population size / density regarding the IQ rankings...could you reword it? (maybe I'm being a bit thick this morning)

[animatic]

Please bear in mind size of population and area when making value judgements.

Example. If you take Singapore and it's population and plopped it down over NYC, or Boston / Cambridge,

and then compared by population size/ density and IQ, plus add a 'creativity index',

you might find a significantly better rank than 19th.

One reason western men help make better babies, is because a higher percentage

will stick around, and value intelligent children. It only takes basic observation to see

the high percentage of abandoned Thai ladies with children....

and that reflects more badly on the men than the ladies.

Yes to the Gini Coefficient also.

Well, I guess neither of us has firm figures to back our opinions up but I would disagree that Western men are more likely to stick around, not the ones who come to Thailand anyway. There are many Thai women left raising a luuk kreung on their own after the father does a runner.

I have to admit I don't fully understand what you're trying to say about population size / density regarding the IQ rankings...could you reword it? (maybe I'm being a bit thick this morning)

"There are many Thai women left raising a luuk kreung on their own after the father does a runner."

But that pales on comparison to the Thai men ditching their ladies once the baby shows up.

Think of comparing the island state of Singapore with the USA

10 mjillion people vs 310 million people... numbers can't corrollate.

Now take an urban area in USA the size of Singapore and lay Singapore over it by area and population

Using Boston Cambridge, about the same size an population.

But containing Harvard, MIT, UMASS, Northeastern, Emmerson and several other top shelf learning institutions.

Then add the Rt. 128 Technology circle and the start-up associated with the region and existing major players,

suddenly Singapore doesn't really look like top 5 and a SIMILAR sized and populated area easily jumps places up the range.

Plop Hong Kong down over Greater New York City, a similar change in ranking takes place.

Now, if you add a percentage of S. Asia to Hong Kong to make

a similar balanced 310 million population and area demographic ( no gerrymandering)

how would you suppose the the rankings might range out?

You see my point.

As to seeing the ratios of farang male parents to Thai male parents; well no doubt that

depends on the cross sections of Thai society that you traverse in your time here.

One must ask; why there is such as high, observable,percentage of Thai ladies with a baby

now looking for a farang man and not another Thai man? Root cause?

And lets leave out the bargirl looking purely for cash argument.

[animatic]

THailand does not like duel passports /citizenship and any property they own is in a grey area - technically they can't even buy a house with their husband's money. In short if they marry a foreigner they loose their full citizenship rights.

They can buy property with your money if you give it to them as a gift and sign a declaration stating it was their money before you married, i.e. renounce any legal claim to it.

It is possible for a Thai national to have dual nationality so I'm not sure what you mean on that point...

Actually not wholly true.

as you are probably aware the law and its enforcement in thailand is inconsistent and unclear - but one thing that is clear is that a woman's right to own property that is paid for by a foreigner is eroded even if that foreigner is her husband. - hence disenfranchised.

She also looses or may loose her Thai citizenship and if she lives abroad will have to apply for a visa to live in her country of birth.

you might want to look at the pronouncements a few months ago by the governor of Phuket regarding this.whether or not it is renforced it destabilises the woman's rights.

That is only so if she' takes citizenship' in another country that makes her renounce her Thai citizenship.

Being a resident alien in another country, for any amount of time, doesn't make you lose your Thai rights.

That said, she can re-apply for Thai citizenship and get it quickly, since she has history of being a Thai citizen.

Disenfranchisement means to lose your right to vote.

And that doesn't happen based on marriage to a foreigner,

just renouncing your citizenship to take another country's

[Deeral]

I won't get involved in semantics - enfranchise has braoder usages -

so we will change that to "disempowerment and loose rights in your own country"

[inthepink]

"There are many Thai women left raising a luuk kreung on their own after the father does a runner."

But that pales on comparison to the Thai men ditching their ladies once the baby shows up.

Well that's because there are 30 million Thai males here and there are nowhere near that amount of Westerners

Re. your IQ/population argument, you have a good point but although Singapore may have a small population you are ingoring the fact that Japan (127 million) and Korea (71 million) were in the top five. It's hard to be precise though as, upon further investigation, I have found some variations in the results of surveys that have been conducted. The second one I looked at lists China in 4th position and the USA in 15th which would totally blow your population size / density defence out of the water if it is correct.

EDIT: As to why single Thai mothers are looking for a Westerner and not a Thai man for their second husband, I would say that this is largely due to the misconception held by many Thai people from the lower classes that Western men are more faithful and that they are all wealthy.

(By the way, thanks for taking the time to reword your post, I didn't get a lot of sleep last night)

Edited July 17, 2010 by inthepink

[inthepink]

I won't get involved in semantics - enfranchise has braoder usages -

so we will change that to "disempowerment and loose rights in your own country"

Whichever way you put it you are wrong. Firstly it is not specifically women as the same law applies to men and secondly they do not lose any rights that they had before they got married.

[Deeral]

OK - I'll check it out - butI think you need to too.

[inthepink]

Well, that's the situation as far as I understand it but I'm far from infallible, so checking is always a good idea.

[animatic]

en·fran·chise –verb

1. to grant a franchise to; admit to citizenship, esp. to the right of voting.

2. to endow (a city, constituency, etc.) with municipal or parliamentary rights.

3. to set free; liberate, as from slavery.

dis·fran·chise

transitive verb

: to deprive of a franchise, of a legal right,

or of some privilege or immunity; especially : to deprive of the right to vote

Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.

Just so the concept is clear.

[crazyOZ80]

thaivisa is really amazing.... it won't allow author to edit his own text.... amazing....

Automatic visas to couples who have a Farang father who stays with the wife and child

Now that is an instant way to get better quality babies and more of them

If you don't like it then don't post on it ! Simple... Or read it

[TAWP]

If you have a wife and child here then it is extremely easy to get a visa so not really sure what you mean by restrictive? Care to elucidate?

Visa to visit, yes, but surely you would like to live here full time with your family?

Without having to go out of the country every 90 days? Or have to put up money in a crappy account and then report to the police every 90 days?

It is less of a hassle moving to Europe than moving to Thailand in a mixed relationship.

I thought you could extend a non-imm 'o' visa based on monthly income? As for 90 day reporting you can do that by post so it's more of a minor annoyance than a major hassle.

Which requires a monthly taxed income as shown on paper. Of a higher level than a thai family is required to carry.

While to get to Europe you actually don't have to have any job at all, any income or savings, if family connections can be proven.

As I have done both I can firmly say it was easier to move to Europe and live instead of the other way around.

Which sounds backwards when people say that Europe is so restrictive...

[TAWP]

I won't get involved in semantics - enfranchise has braoder usages -

so we will change that to "disempowerment and loose rights in your own country"

Whichever way you put it you are wrong. Firstly it is not specifically women as the same law applies to men and secondly they do not lose any rights that they had before they got married.

Often the comments refer to the older laws that had these things, when a women marrying a foreigner and taking a foreign name could lose the right to own land etc.

Now a days it will only mean slightly more hassle as the name is foreign, but the wife still has a right to own it.

[inthepink]

If you have a wife and child here then it is extremely easy to get a visa so not really sure what you mean by restrictive? Care to elucidate?

Visa to visit, yes, but surely you would like to live here full time with your family? Without having to go out of the country every 90 days? Or have to put up money in a crappy account and then report to the police every 90 days? It is less of a hassle moving to Europe than moving to Thailand in a mixed relationship.

I thought you could extend a non-imm 'o' visa based on monthly income? As for 90 day reporting you can do that by post so it's more of a minor annoyance than a major hassle.

Which requires a monthly taxed income as shown on paper. Of a higher level than a thai family is required to carry. While to get to Europe you actually don't have to have any job at all, any income or savings, if family connections can be proven. As I have done both I can firmly say it was easier to move to Europe and live instead of the other way around. Which sounds backwards when people say that Europe is so restrictive...

A monthly income of around £800 i.e. £9600 a year. If one of these superior, well educated western men that a Thai girl would be lucky to have can't even manage that then I don't see that they are much of a catch. I can't speak for the whole of Europe but as far as the United Kingdom goes you do need to prove that you have somewhere to live and can support your partner before they will grant them a visa, whether it be with your money or your family's. And again, if you can't support your own wife then what good are you? (not you personally of course) The UK is much more restrictive as far as getting a tourist visa goes but a lot easier to get ILR and citizenship if that is something that the immigrant desires. Edited July 17, 2010 by inthepink

[TAWP]

A monthly income of around £800 i.e. £9600 a year. If one of these superior, well educated western men that a Thai girl would be lucky to have can't even manage that then I don't see that they are much of a catch. I can't speak for the whole of Europe but as far as the United Kingdom goes you do need to prove that you have somewhere to live and can support your partner before they will grant them a visa, whether it be with your money or your family's. And again, if you can't support your own wife then what good are you? (not you personally of course) The UK is much more restrictive as far as getting a tourist visa goes but a lot easier to get ILR and citizenship if that is something that the immigrant desires.

Why post the amount in pounds? No-one cares how much it is in pound, an extreme minority deals in that currency.

The point was not if the amount was low for you or me, but that the amount is higher than a normal Thai man is expected to earn.

The point is also that there is no income-level if we bring a partner to Europe. Being able to show to provide, well, not so much in Scandinavia, the most important aspect they cared for was that the relationship wasn't fake.

And one does not have to leave the country to extend ones stay in Europe, one can apply from within the country of stay.

[animatic]

All countries have their Andy Capps and Born Losers.

Cartoons don't become cliche's with out the basis of historical fact,

but in general most farang men here take their head of the family roles seriously.

The ones most likely NOT to, are permanently out in the bar scene anyways

and few women would think of them as much of a catch anyway.

[inthepink]

A monthly income of around £800 i.e. £9600 a year. If one of these superior, well educated western men that a Thai girl would be lucky to have can't even manage that then I don't see that they are much of a catch. I can't speak for the whole of Europe but as far as the United Kingdom goes you do need to prove that you have somewhere to live and can support your partner before they will grant them a visa, whether it be with your money or your family's. And again, if you can't support your own wife then what good are you? (not you personally of course) The UK is much more restrictive as far as getting a tourist visa goes but a lot easier to get ILR and citizenship if that is something that the immigrant desires.

Why post the amount in pounds? No-one cares how much it is in pound, an extreme minority deals in that currency.

The point was not if the amount was low for you or me, but that the amount is higher than a normal Thai man is expected to earn.

The point is also that there is no income-level if we bring a partner to Europe. Being able to show to provide, well, not so much in Scandinavia, the most important aspect they cared for was that the relationship wasn't fake.

And one does not have to leave the country to extend ones stay in Europe, one can apply from within the country of stay.

I posted the amount in pounds because I am British and as far as an extreme minority dealing in the currency goes, that's one of the silliest things I've read in a long while. GBP/USD is the third most widely traded currency pair in the world accounting for roughly 14% of foreign exchange deals. So you personally might not care about it but don't presume to speak for the rest of the world.

My point was not to compare our income with what you believe a "normal" Thai man earns. For pages and pages on this thread there have been posters insisting that a Western man would make a better father than a Thai man owing to his superior education and income. Now you are complaining that the visa laws are restrictive because they require foreigners to supply proof of an annual income that is below the legal minimum wage in the UK and most other countries that have a minimum wage I would imagine.

You can't have it all ways.

EDIT: One does not have to leave Thailand to extend one's stay either....that is why we started talking about income in the first place!!!

Edited July 17, 2010 by inthepink

[Deeral]

"but in general most farang men here take their head of the family roles seriously." - oh my god! - do your children call you "Mater" and "Pater"?