Exodus Of Western Expats From Pattaya

[Jingthing]

Not if they keep grandfathering, which so far, they have done. In the US they don't have a retirement visas, but they break up families everyday with deportation rulings. I think with expatriation, anything short of permanent residence (which some countries do offer to expat retirees) is not very secure most anywhere.

Edited February 21, 2011 by Jingthing

[ExpatJ]

I disagree about Thailand. The retirement visa system here is very coherent and consistent. If you have the funds, you must deal with the extensions annually, but your success or failure is totally predictable based on whether you met the clearly defined rules or not. Will the required funds be raised in future? Of course. However, in the past such increases have been accompanied with a GRANDFATHERING clause allowing those already in the system to use the older, lower levels. It is true you are only a one year tether here, and staying here one year or thirty years on that status makes no difference to your status, and that there is no path towards permanent residence in the retirement system. There are a number of countries with retirement visa systems that offer much more than Thailand, but Thailand offers a bank account qualifying option (very rare), reasonable financial levels to qualify, and most countries don't offer ANY retirement visa system at all.

That all said, the elephant in the room in Thailand is political instability and the still existent risk of social meltdown/civil war.

If you are looking for a system that has lower financial requirements than Thailand and also countries that offer easy paths towards permanent residence or even a second passport, yes those exist in the world (generally in Latin America).

. Some countries do make it very easy for retirees, like Cambodia. You get the impression that they really want us. I have never gotten that impression from Thai Immigration officials, but perhaps I should remove my war paint before entering the immigration office

I

[ExpatJ]

I disagree about Thailand. The retirement visa system here is very coherent and consistent. If you have the funds, you must deal with the extensions annually, but your success or failure is totally predictable based on whether you met the clearly defined rules or not. Will the required funds be raised in future? Of course. However, in the past such increases have been accompanied with a GRANDFATHERING clause allowing those already in the system to use the older, lower levels. It is true you are only a one year tether here, and staying here one year or thirty years on that status makes no difference to your status, and that there is no path towards permanent residence in the retirement system. There are a number of countries with retirement visa systems that offer much more than Thailand, but Thailand offers a bank account qualifying option (very rare), reasonable financial levels to qualify, and most countries don't offer ANY retirement visa system at all.

That all said, the elephant in the room in Thailand is political instability and the still existent risk of social meltdown/civil war.

If you are looking for a system that has lower financial requirements than Thailand and also countries that offer easy paths towards permanent residence or even a second passport, yes those exist in the world (generally in Latin America).

I understand what you are saying. But, contrary to popular belief, "grandfathered-in" rules can be changed by the govt. at any moment. The phrase might make people feel better, but there really is no permanent security associated with it. And there are other problems associated with those rules.

Correct me if I am wrong, but a "retiree" might at one point have a retirement visa grandfathered in at 800K. Then he might choose to drop it in favor of a marriage visa/extension grandfathered in at 400K. Then the govt. raises the bar on the retirement visa to 1600K per year (extreme hypothetical scenario). Then he gets divorced (no more marriage visa). And now must get another retirement visa. BUT now he is not grandfathered in at 800K and must show 1600K to qualify.

I think that scenario is possible, but I am not sure. My point is that "visa security" for retirees is evaporating worldwide, including Thailand. Some countries do make it very easy for retirees, like Cambodia. You get the impression that they really want us. I have never gotten that impression from Thai Immigration officials, but perhaps I should remove my war paint before entering the immigration office

I think the point is that the Thai government does not really want the types of retirees for whom 800K or even 1600 K is a challenging sum- a western retiree who only just meets the minimum fund requirement on a basic national home country pension and who spends minimum baht per day is not any benefit to Thailand or its economy really. Quite understandably they dont go out of their way to make life any easier for this group of retirees, and why should they from their perspective?

[Awohalitsiktoli]

I think the point is that the Thai government does not really want the types of retirees for whom 800K or even 1600 K is a challenging sum- a western retiree who only just meets the minimum fund requirement on a basic national home country pension and who spends minimum baht per day is not any benefit to Thailand or its economy really. Quite understandably they dont go out of their way to make life any easier for this group of retirees, and why should they from their perspective?

Yes........I think I know where you are coming from. So why not raise to bar from 800,000 to 30,000,000 baht per year.

That will force every retiree bum out of the country who is not a millionaire. That, I am sure, will greatly help Thailand's economy.

Of course, since millionaires don't spend money at the vast majority of places in Thailand that cater to non-millionaires, we might have a problem with this economic plan.

Come to think of it, it will totally ruin the economy. Maybe we should rethink this

[typhoon42]

Not if they keep grandfathering, which so far, they have done. In the US they don't have a retirement visas, but they break up families everyday with deportation rulings. I think with expatriation, anything short of permanent residence (which some countries do offer to expat retirees) is not very secure most anywhere.

They only get deported by an immigration judge after he/she has been given one chance and they screw up again (felony). They are "removed" if they are here without proper visas or nothing at all.

[Mobi]

The fact remains that unless you have a resident permit, (RP), all foreigners are only allowed to stay in Thailand for a maximum of one year at a time. Even the so-called 'retirement visa' is shown in you passport as an 'extension of stay'. You are only 100% safe until that extension expires and there is no guarantee that upon the next renewal of your application for extension to stay, that you won't be refused for a whole range of reasons, least of all a change in the extension or 'retirement' rules. Yes, sometimes visa requirements are 'grandfathered' but there is no guarantee that this will always be the case.

This 'uncertain visa renewal' situation is, as far as I can determine similar in Cambodia and even Vietnam - the only difference being that these countries issue visas for less than a one year period, although we know that it is possible to renew visas in Cambodia without leaving the country and anecdotal evidence suggests that this also may be possible in Vietnam.

The very reason that I am interested in this topic is because I am fully aware that one day, the Thais might refuse to renew my visa and I will then need to find an alternative country to move to. This uncertainty is always with me, and it should be with every farang living here who does not have a RP.

OK, I agree that at the present time, the visa situation is slightly more favourable in Thailand as it is possible to obtain a one year extension, as opposed to 30-90 day extensions in the other 2 countries. But if I was to look into my crystal ball and try and assess which country is the most likely to change it's rules and make it harder for foreigners to live in their country over the next 5-10 years, then it has to be Thailand by a very clear margin. Cambodia and Vietnam are still openly welcoming foreigners to their shores, whereas for years now, Thailand have been becoming increasingly anti-foreigner.

The situation in these SE countries is far removed from that of, say, Europe, where it is much harder to obtain a visa to stay there, but once issued, is usually good for 'indefinite stay' in that country. Once you are there, you have no fears of being kicked out one day, as we have here.

[ExpatJ]

The fact remains that unless you have a resident permit, (RP), all foreigners are only allowed to stay in Thailand for a maximum of one year at a time. Even the so-called 'retirement visa' is shown in you passport as an 'extension of stay'. You are only 100% safe until that extension expires and there is no guarantee that upon the next renewal of your application for extension to stay, that you won't be refused for a whole range of reasons, least of all a change in the extension or 'retirement' rules. Yes, sometimes visa requirements are 'grandfathered' but there is no guarantee that this will always be the case.

This 'uncertain visa renewal' situation is, as far as I can determine similar in Cambodia and even Vietnam - the only difference being that these countries issue visas for less than a one year period, although we know that it is possible to renew visas in Cambodia without leaving the country and anecdotal evidence suggests that this also may be possible in Vietnam.

The very reason that I am interested in this topic is because I am fully aware that one day, the Thais might refuse to renew my visa and I will then need to find an alternative country to move to. This uncertainty is always with me, and it should be with every farang living here who does not have a RP.

OK, I agree that at the present time, the visa situation is slightly more favourable in Thailand as it is possible to obtain a one year extension, as opposed to 30-90 day extensions in the other 2 countries. But if I was to look into my crystal ball and try and assess which country is the most likely to change it's rules and make it harder for foreigners to live in their country over the next 5-10 years, then it has to be Thailand by a very clear margin. Cambodia and Vietnam are still openly welcoming foreigners to their shores, whereas for years now, Thailand have been becoming increasingly anti-foreigner.

The situation in these SE countries is far removed from that of, say, Europe, where it is much harder to obtain a visa to stay there, but once issued, is usually good for 'indefinite stay' in that country. Once you are there, you have no fears of being kicked out one day, as we have here.

I think your assessment is correct- though i believe as more foreigners go to Cambodia and vietnam they will also increasingly become anti-foreigner. I think the anti-foreigner sentiment in Thailand is actually quite understandable, unfortunately the reality is that a large portion of the foreigners who come to Thailand are some of the scummiest, meanest, nastiest people from our home countries- Thai's interact with these people and understandably are not overly keen on keeping the doors wide open even if it means some 'good' foreigners get thrown out as well (frankly id do the same in their position).

Edited February 22, 2011 by ExpatJ

[carmine]

Expats are leaving vthe whole of the country in droves, not just Pattaya. Loads have left samui in the last three months and it seems like it's set to continue.

[homeseeker]

Good post Mobi and he writes:

"whereas for years now, Thailand have been becoming increasingly anti-foreigner."

Yes and the reason for that is that the ruling class in Thailand(ie Chinese/Thais) are terrified that their control over the country might be interfered with by the white man, hence it is necessary to make sure that the population is anti foreigner plus for the most part laws are designed and interpreted to work in favour of the Thais to the detriment of the westerners.

[Lancelot]

The fact remains that unless you have a resident permit, (RP), all foreigners are only allowed to stay in Thailand for a maximum of one year at a time. Even the so-called 'retirement visa' is shown in you passport as an 'extension of stay'. You are only 100% safe until that extension expires and there is no guarantee that upon the next renewal of your application for extension to stay, that you won't be refused for a whole range of reasons, least of all a change in the extension or 'retirement' rules. Yes, sometimes visa requirements are 'grandfathered' but there is no guarantee that this will always be the case.

Exactly.

One reason that I would not buy real estate here is because why on earth would I want to invest in a long term asset when my permission to stay is only short term?

[Lancelot]

Double post-opps!

Edited February 22, 2011 by Lancelot

[Mobi]

I think your assessment is correct- though i believe as more foreigners go to Cambodia and vietnam they will also increasingly become anti-foreigner. I think the anti-foreigner sentiment in Thailand is actually quite understandable, unfortunately the reality is that a large portion of the foreigners who come to Thailand are some of the scummiest, meanest, nastiest people from our home countries- Thai's interact with these people and understandably are not overly keen on keeping the doors wide open even if it means some 'good' foreigners get thrown out as well (frankly id do the same in their position).

Yes, overall I tend to agree with you. I also happen to believe that there was a time (as now exists in Cambodia and Vietnam) that the presence of foreigners and all the foreign exchange they brought into the country was acknowledged as a desirable thing by the 'Powers that be'.

However, as I have stated earlier in this thread, Thailand is no longer a third world country and and within the next ten years will become more and more 'first world'. The plain fact is that Thailand's economy is in very good shape, with tourism a mere 6-7% of GDP and this, despite all the political upheavals. Just imagine how the economy and tourism is going to forge ahead if they manage to get some stability into the government?

The plain fact is that they really don't need retirees any more, (if indeed they ever did), and very little will be lost if they slowly start to raise the bar and ease most of them out of Thailand and onto pastures new.

Personally I am reasonably optimistic that I will be able to 'ride' any visa changes and be able to live out my days here, but I will always be ready for the unexpected.

[Ulysses G.]

Expats are leaving vthe whole of the country in droves, not just Pattaya. Loads have left samui in the last three months and it seems like it's set to continue.

If they are the ones that do nothing but whine about how terrible Thailand is, that is a good thing.

[Awohalitsiktoli]

However, as I have stated earlier in this thread, Thailand is no longer a third world country and and within the next ten years will become more and more 'first world'. The plain fact is that Thailand's economy is in very good shape, with tourism a mere 6-7% of GDP and this, despite all the political upheavals. Just imagine how the economy and tourism is going to forge ahead if they manage to get some stability into the government?

The plain fact is that they really don't need retirees any more, (if indeed they ever did), and very little will be lost if they slowly start to raise the bar and ease most of them out of Thailand and onto pastures new.

Personally I am reasonably optimistic that I will be able to 'ride' any visa changes and be able to live out my days here, but I will always be ready for the unexpected.

I have to respectfully disagree with you on several points:

1) Thailand is an LDC and has a long way to go before attaining "first world" status.

2) Thailand's economy is hurting badly--income inequality (the rich own virtually everything), government debt, very low annual average GDP growth over the past decade, foreign investment going to better places in the region, huge amount of underemployment (e.g. college graduates working for low wages at fast-food places), inflation, etc.

3) Tourism represents far more than 6-7% of GDP; the official figure does not include all of the businesses (including informal economy) that are associated with and benefit by tourism. My guess is that you can easily double the official figure to arrive at a realistic percentage of GDP related to tourism. That is not insignificant by any measure.

4) Thailand's political problems are not setting in motion a series of events that will lead to first world status in ten years (just the opposite).

5) No country needs retirees unless they represent a mass of human beings (which they never do). But it is economically foolish to not want them and the money they spend. There are huge numbers of businesses in Thailand that depend on foreign tourists and retirees for survival (e.g., condos; real estate agencies; bars; airline corporations; restaurants that cater to foreigners, etc).

The real issue is not so much retirees as it is foreigners in general. If the govt. goes after retirees, it will most certain go after all foreigners. And that is precisely what the Thai govt. has been doing with its visa rule changes over the past ten years.

One thing I do agree with: We need to plan for the unexpected. That is one reason why the info. on Cambodia and Vietnam is interesting here. I have never felt "secure" here.

[carmine]

Expats are leaving vthe whole of the country in droves, not just Pattaya. Loads have left samui in the last three months and it seems like it's set to continue.

If they are the ones that do nothing but whine about how terrible Thailand is, that is a good thing.

Can't argue with that.

i actually think that a lot of expats who start business' up here lack the business acumen required and when things get tough, as they did last year with the problems in Bangkok, they have found themselves unable to deal with the drop in business revenues.

Edited February 22, 2011 by carmine

[ExpatJ]

However, as I have stated earlier in this thread, Thailand is no longer a third world country and and within the next ten years will become more and more 'first world'. The plain fact is that Thailand's economy is in very good shape, with tourism a mere 6-7% of GDP and this, despite all the political upheavals. Just imagine how the economy and tourism is going to forge ahead if they manage to get some stability into the government?

The plain fact is that they really don't need retirees any more, (if indeed they ever did), and very little will be lost if they slowly start to raise the bar and ease most of them out of Thailand and onto pastures new.

Personally I am reasonably optimistic that I will be able to 'ride' any visa changes and be able to live out my days here, but I will always be ready for the unexpected.

I have to respectfully disagree with you on several points:

1) Thailand is an LDC and has a long way to go before attaining "first world" status.

2) Thailand's economy is hurting badly--income inequality (the rich own virtually everything), government debt, very low annual average GDP growth over the past decade, foreign investment going to better places in the region, huge amount of underemployment (e.g. college graduates working for low wages at fast-food places), inflation, etc.

3) Tourism represents far more than 6-7% of GDP; the official figure does not include all of the businesses (including informal economy) that are associated with and benefit by tourism. My guess is that you can easily double the official figure to arrive at a realistic percentage of GDP related to tourism. That is not insignificant by any measure.

4) Thailand's political problems are not setting in motion a series of events that will lead to first world status in ten years (just the opposite).

5) No country needs retirees unless they represent a mass of human beings (which they never do). But it is economically foolish to not want them and the money they spend. There are huge numbers of businesses in Thailand that depend on foreign tourists and retirees for survival (e.g., condos; real estate agencies; bars; airline corporations; restaurants that cater to foreigners, etc).

The real issue is not so much retirees as it is foreigners in general. If the govt. goes after retirees, it will most certain go after all foreigners. And that is precisely what the Thai govt. has been doing with its visa rule changes over the past ten years.

One thing I do agree with: We need to plan for the unexpected. That is one reason why the info. on Cambodia and Vietnam is interesting here. I have never felt "secure" here.

Your post is just factually wrong on many issues and i think misguided in others.

1) Thailand is not an LDC according to the LDC definition- its classified as a middle income country by the world bank (who determine these classifications).

2) The US has a greater income inequality than Thailand to put things in perspective

3) The 6-7% of GDP from tourism includes most related businesses

4) Thailand's political problems are an issue- but the people who have the most to lose- i.e. those foreign individuals and companies who are still investing billions into Thailand - disagree with you that it will have a long term negative effect on the countries long term development.

5) Yes retiree money would be nice for the country- but i think many thai's are fed up with the mean, scummy ,nasty foreigners who flock to thailand and don't want these types staying here indefinitely (unfortunately the 'good'foreigners are adversely affected.)

[ExpatJ]

However, as I have stated earlier in this thread, Thailand is no longer a third world country and and within the next ten years will become more and more 'first world'. The plain fact is that Thailand's economy is in very good shape, with tourism a mere 6-7% of GDP and this, despite all the political upheavals. Just imagine how the economy and tourism is going to forge ahead if they manage to get some stability into the government?

The plain fact is that they really don't need retirees any more, (if indeed they ever did), and very little will be lost if they slowly start to raise the bar and ease most of them out of Thailand and onto pastures new.

Personally I am reasonably optimistic that I will be able to 'ride' any visa changes and be able to live out my days here, but I will always be ready for the unexpected.

I have to respectfully disagree with you on several points:

1) Thailand is an LDC and has a long way to go before attaining "first world" status.

2) Thailand's economy is hurting badly--income inequality (the rich own virtually everything), government debt, very low annual average GDP growth over the past decade, foreign investment going to better places in the region, huge amount of underemployment (e.g. college graduates working for low wages at fast-food places), inflation, etc.

3) Tourism represents far more than 6-7% of GDP; the official figure does not include all of the businesses (including informal economy) that are associated with and benefit by tourism. My guess is that you can easily double the official figure to arrive at a realistic percentage of GDP related to tourism. That is not insignificant by any measure.

4) Thailand's political problems are not setting in motion a series of events that will lead to first world status in ten years (just the opposite).

5) No country needs retirees unless they represent a mass of human beings (which they never do). But it is economically foolish to not want them and the money they spend. There are huge numbers of businesses in Thailand that depend on foreign tourists and retirees for survival (e.g., condos; real estate agencies; bars; airline corporations; restaurants that cater to foreigners, etc).

The real issue is not so much retirees as it is foreigners in general. If the govt. goes after retirees, it will most certain go after all foreigners. And that is precisely what the Thai govt. has been doing with its visa rule changes over the past ten years.

One thing I do agree with: We need to plan for the unexpected. That is one reason why the info. on Cambodia and Vietnam is interesting here. I have never felt "secure" here.

Your post is just factually wrong on many issues and i think misguided in others.

1) Thailand is not an LDC according to the LDC definition- its classified as a middle income country by the world bank (who determine these classifications).

2) The US has a greater income inequality than Thailand to put things in perspective

3) The 6-7% of GDP from tourism includes most related businesses

4) Thailand's political problems are an issue- but the people who have the most to lose- i.e. those foreign individuals and companies who are still investing billions into Thailand - disagree with you that it will have a long term negative effect on the countries long term development.

5) Yes retiree money would be nice for the country- but i think many thai's are fed up with the mean, scummy ,nasty foreigners who flock to thailand and don't want these types staying here indefinitely (unfortunately the 'good'foreigners are adversely affected.)

[tropo]

Expats are leaving vthe whole of the country in droves, not just Pattaya. Loads have left samui in the last three months and it seems like it's set to continue.

If they are the ones that do nothing but whine about how terrible Thailand is, that is a good thing.

I don't think the whiners are the ones leaving. Typically whiners prefer to stay and whine.

It's like Englishmen who live in Australia and NZ who constantly complain but never leave.

[Tolley]

I doubt very much that retirees will be forced to leave Thailand by any government legislation re change in visa rules.

It is more likely that retirees will leave Thailand because they are tired of the place or they have financial difficulties.

In the short term there could be political unrest but historically this has had very little impact on the day to day lives of most people.

Of course it is sensible to keep your options open and i maintain that all things being equal you really shouldn't retire in Thailand unless you can afford to retire in your home country. That way you always have a bolt hole to go back to.

[Jingthing]

Many people don't exactly "choose" to retire (libertarian purists/Ayn Rand groupies notwithstanding). They get burned out, they get too old, the employment options in their industry dries up, and a million other personal circumstances that lead to being older with no work. Most "retirees" in the world don't have as much money as they'd like and most are living in their home countries. If not Thailand, there are other countries globally that are expat retirement options, low cost, attractive visa options, sometimes even access to government health care and special social benefits. Having any kind of pension means many more country options than just living on assets. So if you need to or want to leave Thailand, the home country is not usually the ONLY option that you have. I don't believe we should bother thinking so much why Thailand wants us or may not want us later; that's their decision to put out a welcome mat or to take it away. It isn't in our control to influence that.

Edited February 22, 2011 by Jingthing

[Awohalitsiktoli]

Your post is just factually wrong on many issues and i think misguided in others.

1) Thailand is not an LDC according to the LDC definition- its classified as a middle income country by the world bank (who determine these classifications).

2) The US has a greater income inequality than Thailand to put things in perspective

3) The 6-7% of GDP from tourism includes most related businesses

4) Thailand's political problems are an issue- but the people who have the most to lose- i.e. those foreign individuals and companies who are still investing billions into Thailand - disagree with you that it will have a long term negative effect on the countries long term development.

5) Yes retiree money would be nice for the country- but i think many thai's are fed up with the mean, scummy ,nasty foreigners who flock to thailand and don't want these types staying here indefinitely (unfortunately the 'good'foreigners are adversely affected.)

We really disagree on virtually every point.

I will say you are right that the World Bank does classify Thailand as a MIC. But it might help to clarify "facts" by pointing out that some people believe the MICs category was introduced only to make it appear that the "global economic system" is working (which it isn't for most people).

Actually, I prefer the old-school categories of underdeveloped and developed.....makes more sense and is far less misleading. Throw out the artificial middle category of MICs and you end up with Thailand as "underdeveloped" or alternatively an LDC.

By the way, in case people think it is great that Thailand is now in the MICs category, they should know that MIC countries account for about 50% of the world's population and are home to about 33% of people on the planet living on less than US$2 per day. Let's break out the champagne!

I will not to argue the other points as we are getting off topic.

[ExpatJ]

Your post is just factually wrong on many issues and i think misguided in others.

1) Thailand is not an LDC according to the LDC definition- its classified as a middle income country by the world bank (who determine these classifications).

2) The US has a greater income inequality than Thailand to put things in perspective

3) The 6-7% of GDP from tourism includes most related businesses

4) Thailand's political problems are an issue- but the people who have the most to lose- i.e. those foreign individuals and companies who are still investing billions into Thailand - disagree with you that it will have a long term negative effect on the countries long term development.

5) Yes retiree money would be nice for the country- but i think many thai's are fed up with the mean, scummy ,nasty foreigners who flock to thailand and don't want these types staying here indefinitely (unfortunately the 'good'foreigners are adversely affected.)

I will not to argue the other points as we are getting off topic.

Well you raised the topics in the first place , but yes i agree

[moo9]

Thailand was never really foreignerfriendly same as any other SE countries. You are tolerated as long as you bring benefit. Ever worked for a Thai company with a decent farang salary and noticed the greedy talks and looks? I do not blame the Thai but with a little more intelligence, openess and tolerance they could be the retirement paradise, creating many jobs etc.

Sometimes they even do not care the competiveness of countries like Vietnam. Thais generally are narrow minded, not caring of global trends and to their misfortune, whether it's red or yellow, the politics support these attitudes.

But I would not panic....still a much better place to live here if you can adapt and accept.

Edited February 22, 2011 by moo9

[Jingthing]

Thailand is friendlier to foreigners than Burma!

[dananderson]

Can anyone tell me if retiree's are counted as tourists as it relates to GDP?

[Jingthing]

Can anyone tell me if retiree's are counted as tourists as it relates to GDP?

A bigger issue is how revenues from the cash underground economy are clearly not counted in revenues from tourism. Remember, prostitution doesn't exist in Thailand. Also keep in money that foreigners money is like found money, and it isn't a zero sum game either. A million baht of such new money has a lot more impact, including job creation than just ONE million baht.

Edited February 22, 2011 by Jingthing

[mark45y]

Can anyone tell me if retiree's are counted as tourists as it relates to GDP?

A bigger issue is how revenues from the cash underground economy are clearly not counted in revenues from tourism. Remember, prostitution doesn't exist in Thailand. Also keep in money that foreigners money is like found money, and it isn't a zero sum game either. A million baht of such new money has a lot more impact, including job creation than just ONE million baht.

You are so correct. But almost no one understands it. If a Thai comes from Chiang Mai to Pattaya and spends 100 baht how much money goes into the Thai economy? If a Brit comes to Pattaya and spends 100 baht how much money goes into the Thai economy?

[ExpatJ]

Thailand was never really foreignerfriendly same as any other SE countries. You are tolerated as long as you bring benefit. Ever worked for a Thai company with a decent farang salary and noticed the greedy talks and looks? I do not blame the Thai but with a little more intelligence, openess and tolerance they could be the retirement paradise, creating many jobs etc.

Sometimes they even do not care the competiveness of countries like Vietnam. Thais generally are narrow minded, not caring of global trends and to their misfortune, whether it's red or yellow, the politics support these attitudes.

But I would not panic....still a much better place to live here if you can adapt and accept.

I think the populations of most countries are narrow minded and not caring of global trends especially people in small towns in US/UK.

And regarding the thai's attitude to foreigners- take a look at Bangkok,Phuket and look at the large numbers of scummy, mean, obnoxious foriegners who are there- would any country want to encourage these people to stick around?- i dont think so.

[ESB7]

Good post Mobi and he writes:

"whereas for years now, Thailand have been becoming increasingly anti-foreigner."

Yes and the reason for that is that the ruling class in Thailand(ie Chinese/Thais) are terrified that their control over the country might be interfered with by the white man, hence it is necessary to make sure that the population is anti foreigner plus for the most part laws are designed and interpreted to work in favour of the Thais to the detriment of the westerners.

So the recent change in law that a foriegn MAN can get Citezenship after a mere 3 years is anti foriegn???............yes double pricing etc etc will always exist but Thailand most people are leaving due to exchange rates...thats evident in the amount of tourists/expats from countries with strong currencies that are here and keep coming............Pattaya is crammed full with Russians, Arabs, Indians

[ESB7]

Thailand was never really foreignerfriendly same as any other SE countries. You are tolerated as long as you bring benefit. Ever worked for a Thai company with a decent farang salary and noticed the greedy talks and looks? I do not blame the Thai but with a little more intelligence, openess and tolerance they could be the retirement paradise, creating many jobs etc.

Sometimes they even do not care the competiveness of countries like Vietnam. Thais generally are narrow minded, not caring of global trends and to their misfortune, whether it's red or yellow, the politics support these attitudes.

But I would not panic....still a much better place to live here if you can adapt and accept.

You could google 'immigration UK 60s'....maybe an insight as to the views of westerners only 50years ago........