Should There Be Tighter Restrictions On Thai Nationals Living Abroad ?

[MJP]

I see the ulterior motive in the OP's thread, but I'll bite. Every country has a right to create laws pertaining to foreigners that is both fair and humane, AND protects the interest of its citizens. If, say, the USA were to create laws that were detrimental to foreigners, Thai or otherwise, said foreigners have the option of residing or not residing in the USA. They understand the laws, they make the decision. Simple enough.

It is exactly the same in Thailand.

Yup. Imagine the land price bubble here, especially agricultural land if foreigners could own freehold. The Arabs would buy the place up for their own needs and Thais would be in a dire situation.

It's the Wests fault it's been so lax on immigration and foreign property ownership (UK in particular) but it's more than a bit tricky for a Thai to get into these countries, there certainly seems to be anti-Thai sentiment at UK immigration.

It's a shame all round really as countries don't actually exist.

[MAJIC]

Indeed Tigerfish,

the same as we get ,Zilch!

[MJP]

why specifically Thai Nationals, and not others - Uzbekhistanis, Indians, Americans, Manxmen?

\

Because this forum is about Thailand

And because a lot of us living in Thailand suffer discrimination when it comes to running a company or owning the house we live in.

You try to be funny but you just show you know nothing about our problems.

Retire to a safe distance, better for everybody

Pretty pretty sparkles!

So you reckon different laws should apply to Thais in the UK than to Manxmen, or Chinese Republicans, or Cambodians? Now that would be discrimination; to apply restrictions uniformly to all foreigners is protectionism. We (Tigerfish and I) are lucky enough to have grown up in one of the most open and welcoming societies in the world, and protectionism and discrimination are anathema to us - free markets based on gunboat diplomacy helped our forefathers create the modern economy and paint the world pink. Our former now-republican colonies across the water in Ireland and further afield have prospered thanks to the rule of common law and rights to property that were established many centuries ago. Sadly, most Thais have yet to see the benefits of that global economic miracle because of the near-feudal social mores that apply here, and the bureaucratic and ill-thought protectionist nationalist regulations. To be honest, it was a mistake for us to establish our office here, based on hype and hubris, but hindsight is no way to drive forward...

Anyway, I really feel for your problems, and I share your pain.

SC

I do agree with much of this. Asia on the whole is immature when it comes to global trade and Thailand is certainly no exception. Protectionism has become a religion in the East and Western politicians have been either too weak or complicit, enjoying the low inflation in imported goods, to tackle what is fundamental to trade imbalances and a dysfunctional global economy.

I'd caution against investment here, it's not stable and it's not developed far enough politically as a newly industrialized country to warrant being taken that seriously. I say that with a heavy heart as I have children that will grow up here and on a selfish level hope Thailand does progress. I will add that it's not all bad and domestically they do have quite a lot right (I mean our own countries are hardly a model of great economic success right now).

There was a good article recently in Moneyweek that I can't post here in the interests of Thai Visa, but needless to say it warned about the risk element. Most of you here will have already figured out what the main issues are.

But with respect to land ownership I do think that to completely open the market up to foreigners would be a disaster for the Thai people. They don't enjoy (what was) the easy leverage Westerners and those from oil rich states have. It would drive the gulf between extremely rich and very poor even wider in the long run and would likely result in violent revolution.

[oswald]

[quote) I believe that some US states do not allow foreigners to own land, and therefore Taiwan, which exercises reciprocity, will only allow US residents of certain states to own property there. The things some people believe, eh? Is there no end to gullibility?

(unquote)

I'm not aware of any state not allowing foreigners to own land, with the possible exception of Hawaii

Are there any more? Just curious.

[JurgenG]

why specifically Thai Nationals, and not others - Uzbekhistanis, Indians, Americans, Manxmen?

\

Because this forum is about Thailand

And because a lot of us living in Thailand suffer discrimination when it comes to running a company or owning the house we live in.

You try to be funny but you just show you know nothing about our problems.

Retire to a safe distance, better for everybody

Pretty pretty sparkles!

So you reckon different laws should apply to Thais in the UK than to Manxmen, or Chinese Republicans, or Cambodians? Now that would be discrimination; to apply restrictions uniformly to all foreigners is protectionism. We (Tigerfish and I) are lucky enough to have grown up in one of the most open and welcoming societies in the world, and protectionism and discrimination are anathema to us - free markets based on gunboat diplomacy helped our forefathers create the modern economy and paint the world pink. Our former now-republican colonies across the water in Ireland and further afield have prospered thanks to the rule of common law and rights to property that were established many centuries ago. Sadly, most Thais have yet to see the benefits of that global economic miracle because of the near-feudal social mores that apply here, and the bureaucratic and ill-thought protectionist nationalist regulations. To be honest, it was a mistake for us to establish our office here, based on hype and hubris, but hindsight is no way to drive forward...

Anyway, I really feel for your problems, and I share your pain.

SC

You're right, of course we can't apply different restriction to different people according to their country of origin, as you say protectionism and discrimination are anathema to us, and that's a good thing.

Actually I would prefer additional import duties on goods coming from countries that don't give foreign citizen the same rights that we give to their citizen in our own countries.

[JurgenG]

But with respect to land ownership I do think that to completely open the market up to foreigners would be a disaster for the Thai people. They don't enjoy (what was) the easy leverage Westerners and those from oil rich states have. It would drive the gulf between extremely rich and very poor even wider in the long run and would likely result in violent revolution.

I don't think so. Following the first oil crisis in the 70's people said the Arab will buy everything in Europe. Then later it was the Japanese. Then, according to where you live in Europe, it's the British, the Dutch, the German.... who snatch all the nice properties and push the prices up. But at the end they come and go and it doesn't really change anything in the long term.

Near where I live in Isaan, in less than 15 years prices went for 40,000 / rai to 500,000 and even 1 Million for top location. No foreigners are involved, only Thais

[MJP]

But with respect to land ownership I do think that to completely open the market up to foreigners would be a disaster for the Thai people. They don't enjoy (what was) the easy leverage Westerners and those from oil rich states have. It would drive the gulf between extremely rich and very poor even wider in the long run and would likely result in violent revolution.

I don't think so. Following the first oil crisis in the 70's people said the Arab will buy everything in Europe. Then later it was the Japanese. Then, according to where you live in Europe, it's the British, the Dutch, the German.... who snatch all the nice properties and push the prices up. But at the end they come and go and it doesn't really change anything in the long term.

Near where I live in Isaan, in less than 15 years prices went for 40,000 / rai to 500,000 and even 1 Million for top location. No foreigners are involved, only Thais

Yes, I guess they can blow their own bubbles. I was thinking primarily of agricultural capacity. It has risen round here too. The West is going to blow their next bubble with all that QE money rushing into emerging market bonds in any case.

[WAYNEandAEI]

I for one are very happy with the situation in Thailand in regards to land /business ownership...The day foreigners are permitted to own land and develope that land is the day I leave Thailand forever....all it will create is over developed over price property.

[lazygourmet]

ah, so you mean reciprocal treatment?

I guess you are implying then that foreign visitors wanting to go on holiday to Thailand should be made to:

- stand in line outside an embassy for 4 hours waiting for an appointment they booked 4 months previously

- Need to produce evidence of their entire financial and social standing to get a visa

- Deal with a nasty arrogant big haired lady (aren't they all?) who will look at you, decide you are low class (probably a prostitute) and deny your visa

- Actually check if you have a conviction of any type and then ban you for life

If you are lucky to run than gauntlet, then on arrival in Thailand you'll be quizzed to see if you have sufficient funds, be told that your three month 'holiday' has turned into a 2 week visit cause no one takes three month holidays...and that your next visa run is out of the question as you won't be allowed re-entry.

Yep...I'm sure the TV brains trust would be all for reciprocation.

Serious answer though is that national governments decide what is in their best interest. Other countries, mainly in the west, have determined that it is in their national interests to have relatively free flow of capital, and to allow access to labour and realestate markets (subject to certain restriction).

But, don't be fooled. Contrary to what the Murdoch press may have you believe, being an immigrant in your home country is rarely easy. I'm sure the OP has actually examined what it would be like for him to migrate back to his home country. I'm sure he'd probably wouldn't qualify!

By the way, not later than last evening, I got spotted in a restaurant by two of my local immigration officers.

They bought me drinks and we ended up together in a karaoke bar...

I doubt that Belgian government officials would give the same treatment to visiting Thai nationals.

[Soutpeel]

I do agree with much of this. Asia on the whole is immature when it comes to global trade and Thailand is certainly no exception.

I am pretty sure China and countries like Japan would disagree with you on that point....

[Forethat]

On a similar topic, the Norwegian government recently declined a submission from a group of Saudi Muslims for rights to build a Mosque in Norway with reference to the lack of freedom of religion in Saudi Arabia. Atrocious, if you ask me.

http://islamineurope.blogspot.com/2010/10/norway-no-saudi-mosques-as-long-as.html

[bermondburi]

ah, so you mean reciprocal treatment?

I guess you are implying then that foreign visitors wanting to go on holiday to Thailand should be made to:

- stand in line outside an embassy for 4 hours waiting for an appointment they booked 4 months previously

- Need to produce evidence of their entire financial and social standing to get a visa

- Deal with a nasty arrogant big haired lady (aren't they all?) who will look at you, decide you are low class (probably a prostitute) and deny your visa

- Actually check if you have a conviction of any type and then ban you for life

If you are lucky to run than gauntlet, then on arrival in Thailand you'll be quizzed to see if you have sufficient funds, be told that your three month 'holiday' has turned into a 2 week visit cause no one takes three month holidays...and that your next visa run is out of the question as you won't be allowed re-entry.

Yep...I'm sure the TV brains trust would be all for reciprocation.

Serious answer though is that national governments decide what is in their best interest. Other countries, mainly in the west, have determined that it is in their national interests to have relatively free flow of capital, and to allow access to labour and realestate markets (subject to certain restriction).

But, don't be fooled. Contrary to what the Murdoch press may have you believe, being an immigrant in your home country is rarely easy. I'm sure the OP has actually examined what it would be like for him to migrate back to his home country. I'm sure he'd probably wouldn't qualify!

I think you are exaggerating here, in my experience of Thais getting visas to go abroad it was not like you described.

" standing outside an embassy for four hours for an appointment booked four months previously "

What country does that ?

I grew up with many immigrants in my home country and I think they are doing just fine. I've known many Africans who were very settled in the UK with good jobs and families. In fact if you look at the most recent large scale immigration to the UK over the past fifteen years it has mainly been immigration from former eastern bloc countries that are now part of the EU, so these new immigrants have total freedom of movement without a need for a visa either. You're out of date with what you are saying.

[flying]

I'm not aware of any state not allowing foreigners to own land, with the possible exception of Hawaii

Are there any more? Just curious.

Foreigners can own land in any State of the USA including Hawaii.

Perhaps some were thinking of territories of the US? Such as Samoa, Guam or the Philippines

As to the OP original question......It would never happen in most western countries as it would be considered discrimination to single out a race for stricter rules than the rest.

The US for instance may not be easy to get into ( unless you swim across from Mexico )

But once in & on a green card ....the first thing they give you & yes you get it even before the green card is a work permit & a SS number.

Uncle Sam does not care where your from as long as you contribute the taxes

The nice thing for legal immigrants in the US is after the 2 year card they get a 10 year card. But in reality just one year into the 10 year card or 3 years total from acceptance they can become US citizens. That frees them up to travel freely most of the world on a US passport while retaining their original country of origin citizenship.

Yes I am sure many who retire to Thailand get bitter that they will probably never get citizenship or equal rights but they need to remember it is essentially a monarchy. As other have mentioned...it would be disaster for the Thai population if that ever changed.

[bermondburi]

well ask a simple question on this forum and the usual suspects turn it into a mud slinging pissing contest.

"Ask a simple question".....that's one of the more disingenuous comments you've made. And that's saying a lot. Be honest Fish, you're not really asking a question. You're making a statement. And your statement is that you would like to get back at the Thai government by making life more difficult for all those Thais living overseas just because YOU don't believe you're being treated fairly in Thailand. Well boo-f*cking-hoo. You're singing the same old tired song. And guess what buddy, it will NEVER happen.

But to answer your "simple question," NO. Not only should it not happen, it won't happen. No country is going to single out Thais just because a bunch of whiney expats complain on TV that they're just, oh so freakin oppressed. Just like the Thais will not single out any particular nationality. A farang gets treated the same as a Korean or a Nigerian.

I hope I've answered your "simple question."

A farang doesn't really get treated the same as other nationalities. Probably a lot better in fact. Thinking back to the last time I was in Laos there are signs clearly stating that visas will not be granted to Afghans , Paskistanis , and Bangladeshis. So if anything we have got it pretty good. There are many people the Thais clearly want a lot less than us. People from two countries with borders with Thailand spring immediately to mind.

[bunta71]

ah, so you mean reciprocal treatment?

I guess you are implying then that foreign visitors wanting to go on holiday to Thailand should be made to:

- stand in line outside an embassy for 4 hours waiting for an appointment they booked 4 months previously

- Need to produce evidence of their entire financial and social standing to get a visa

- Deal with a nasty arrogant big haired lady (aren't they all?) who will look at you, decide you are low class (probably a prostitute) and deny your visa

- Actually check if you have a conviction of any type and then ban you for life

If you are lucky to run than gauntlet, then on arrival in Thailand you'll be quizzed to see if you have sufficient funds, be told that your three month 'holiday' has turned into a 2 week visit cause no one takes three month holidays...and that your next visa run is out of the question as you won't be allowed re-entry.

Yep...I'm sure the TV brains trust would be all for reciprocation.

Serious answer though is that national governments decide what is in their best interest. Other countries, mainly in the west, have determined that it is in their national interests to have relatively free flow of capital, and to allow access to labour and realestate markets (subject to certain restriction).

But, don't be fooled. Contrary to what the Murdoch press may have you believe, being an immigrant in your home country is rarely easy. I'm sure the OP has actually examined what it would be like for him to migrate back to his home country. I'm sure he'd probably wouldn't qualify!

I get your point

But once you're in, you're treated the same way locals are

My gf can own land in Europe, USA, Australia ... But as a foreigner, in Thailand, I can't.

The OP has a point, if I had the power I would lobby my government to deny Thai citizens the right to own land or run companies until Thailand gives us the same rights.

Exactly my sentiments. I don't see a valid reason why I cannot own my own reasonably small plot of dirt. Have some limitations to satisfy the fearful so the falang do not "take over" Thailand. I will even wear a shirt while driving just to appease the fearful. If I were able to I would have my government confiscate all foreign politicians land and houses in my country until they give us the same treatment. Again I am only talking about one residence with limitations so the fearful are not so scared.

[robblok]

ah, so you mean reciprocal treatment?

I guess you are implying then that foreign visitors wanting to go on holiday to Thailand should be made to:

- stand in line outside an embassy for 4 hours waiting for an appointment they booked 4 months previously

- Need to produce evidence of their entire financial and social standing to get a visa

- Deal with a nasty arrogant big haired lady (aren't they all?) who will look at you, decide you are low class (probably a prostitute) and deny your visa

- Actually check if you have a conviction of any type and then ban you for life

If you are lucky to run than gauntlet, then on arrival in Thailand you'll be quizzed to see if you have sufficient funds, be told that your three month 'holiday' has turned into a 2 week visit cause no one takes three month holidays...and that your next visa run is out of the question as you won't be allowed re-entry.

Yep...I'm sure the TV brains trust would be all for reciprocation.

Serious answer though is that national governments decide what is in their best interest. Other countries, mainly in the west, have determined that it is in their national interests to have relatively free flow of capital, and to allow access to labour and realestate markets (subject to certain restriction).

But, don't be fooled. Contrary to what the Murdoch press may have you believe, being an immigrant in your home country is rarely easy. I'm sure the OP has actually examined what it would be like for him to migrate back to his home country. I'm sure he'd probably wouldn't qualify!

I get your point

But once you're in, you're treated the same way locals are

My gf can own land in Europe, USA, Australia ... But as a foreigner, in Thailand, I can't.

The OP has a point, if I had the power I would lobby my government to deny Thai citizens the right to own land or run companies until Thailand gives us the same rights.

Exactly my sentiments. I don't see a valid reason why I cannot own my own reasonably small plot of dirt. Have some limitations to satisfy the fearful so the falang do not "take over" Thailand. I will even wear a shirt while driving just to appease the fearful. If I were able to I would have my government confiscate all foreign politicians land and houses in my country until they give us the same treatment. Again I am only talking about one residence with limitations so the fearful are not so scared.

Yes to make sure we wont take it all over just limit it to a small plot with a house on it. It can be done if they really want it but the truth is they don't care at all.

[samran]

double post

Edited February 24, 2011 by samran

[samran]

Exactly my sentiments. I don't see a valid reason why I cannot own my own reasonably small plot of dirt. Have some limitations to satisfy the fearful so the falang do not "take over" Thailand. I will even wear a shirt while driving just to appease the fearful. If I were able to I would have my government confiscate all foreign politicians land and houses in my country until they give us the same treatment. Again I am only talking about one residence with limitations so the fearful are not so scared.

I see a valid reason, though you probably don't like what it is. It is called Democracy.

Foreign land ownership is really the 'third rail' of Thai politics. You touch it and you die.

Many politicians from my personal experience in private very rarely have a huge problem with foreign ownership. Indeed, there was a attempt in 1998 (I think it was..) where it almost became law.

But, those who attempt to liberalise the laws are vilified by political opponents, and many, many Thai's have a strong view on this matter. It is an easy vote winner, and those who would like to do something about it simply remain quiet.

Where it counts however foreigners are allowed to own land. BOI promoted companies can own 100% of a property.

I'm afraid individual property owners are a long way off from receiving attention on this point. I don't thing they should hold their collective breath either.

Australia, one of the more 'enlightened' countries on foreign ownership, still has the foreign investment review board - and limits which only allow purchases of new builds (though there have been some revisions). Recent house price rises in Australia have been blamed on 'the Chinese', so there are elements of Xenophobia even there.

We all know what the ideal in Thailand might ought to look like, especially in terms of land ownership.

Unfortunately, it is one area where Thai's - apathetic and divided on other issues - generally agree wholeheartedly about it.

You might want to blame the politicians on this one. I don't. This issue, like few others in Thailand, is genuinely commanded by the 'will of the people'.

[jdinasia]

Bina pretty well pegs it with her post above. Do I fault Thais for protectionism on land issues? No.

[Forethat]

Why should there be restrictions for Thais abroad due to their unwillingness to allow capital to flow into their own country? Most people tend to believe that if Thailand would only allow foreign ownership of land, they would be able to acquire ocean side property at bargain prices.

There are plenty of countries who take equal measures of protecting their nation against foreign ownership, the difference tend to be that most of them are stable politically and financially. Typically, these countries are not highly thought of or attractive in a migration. Who wants to live in Saudi Arabia? Who wants to migrate to Israel? In Thailand the situation is different. I say: do whatever it takes to generate some income and invest every single dime back in education, education and education. Do whatever it takes to encourage diversity.

I know a lot of people in UK who complains about immigrants and foreigners, though my belief is that immigrants enrich. Like every country in the world, Thailand needs to stop isolating themselves from the outside world; they dont always know best, they are not smartest. The smartest one is the one who understands the true value of diversity - and diversity is the reason Thailand should allow foreign interests to enter the scene. Diversity is what will bring this country forward - unfortunately, isolation is holding it back.

[Forethat]

well, lets try my country:

no thais whatsoever living here as immigrants if they arent married to someone here, or diplomats (or born here to 'legally employed/visa parents' (we are now as of today deporting quite a large amount of children (born after a certain date) with parent (who are here w/o visa/permit to stay since they left their employment, or arrived illegally w/o entrance permits etc).

any thais here are all on work visas that are employer specific and sector specific (if u have a visa for agriculture u cannot work in a restaraunt ,ever. no way to change over.). ; there is one group of wealthyish thais students here on a work/study visa and trust me, they are tracked everywhere.

buying land?!! youve got to be kidding! if u dont have two sane people to sign for your on any contracts, unless u pay in cash, there is no land/no house. might not even get to rent in a normal neighbhorhood.

the only way to get here is to work in agriculture or be a christian thai and come over on a travel tour of the holyland.

wanna reciprocate?

bina

israel

ehhhh, pardon my Hebrew - but somehow I cant imagine the queue of Gaza Strip property speculators, complaining about the stringent rules for immigrants, being that overly long...

[jdinasia]

Why should there be restrictions for Thais abroad due to their unwillingness to allow capital to flow into their own country? Most people tend to believe that if Thailand would only allow foreign ownership of land, they would be able to acquire ocean side property at bargain prices.

There are plenty of countries who take equal measures of protecting their nation against foreign ownership, the difference tend to be that most of them are stable politically and financially. Typically, these countries are not highly thought of or attractive in a migration. Who wants to live in Saudi Arabia? Who wants to migrate to Israel? In Thailand the situation is different. I say: do whatever it takes to generate some income and invest every single dime back in education, education and education. Do whatever it takes to encourage diversity.

I know a lot of people in UK who complains about immigrants and foreigners, though my belief is that immigrants enrich. Like every country in the world, Thailand needs to stop isolating themselves from the outside world; they dont always know best, they are not smartest. The smartest one is the one who understands the true value of diversity - and diversity is the reason Thailand should allow foreign interests to enter the scene. Diversity is what will bring this country forward - unfortunately, isolation is holding it back.

I feel that you are missing the "picture" here. Thailand is a developing nation that already has HUGE land reform issues in front of it to just get some balance for the poor. Allowing foreign ownership of land would only exacerbate that problem. Sure, I'd love to own a couple of hundred rai in Nakhon Nayok near Khao Yai National park! Alas, I have to settle for using my partner's land in the future.

Would the taxes from land sales fund education? Probably not, but funding education isn't the issue in Thailand. Changing the education system is the issue.

Does immigration help a country? Sometimes! Immigration isn't the issue here either. Have a proper education and drive and Thailand is doable by most people. When the average uneducated and unqualified backpacker from abroad has more opportunity to travel and spend time in Thailand than the vast majority of Thai university graduates do of going to farangland even for a backpacking trip, then the need for protectionism shows itself clearly.

Now ----- if you want to bring 20 million Baht into the country and establish a company under the BOI --- you will find that the rules change in some meaningful ways for foreigners. That's the income and revenue that matters AND the investment amounts required are still on the low side, but reasonable for a developing nation like Thailand.

[Forethat]

Now ----- if you want to bring 20 million Baht into the country and establish a company under the BOI --- you will find that the rules change in some meaningful ways for foreigners. That's the income and revenue that matters AND the investment amounts required are still on the low side, but reasonable for a developing nation like Thailand.

I know for a fact that most international trade councils present in Thailand does NOTHING but fight Thai regulation preventing companies from investing BILLIONS of Baht....

[jdinasia]

Now ----- if you want to bring 20 million Baht into the country and establish a company under the BOI --- you will find that the rules change in some meaningful ways for foreigners. That's the income and revenue that matters AND the investment amounts required are still on the low side, but reasonable for a developing nation like Thailand.

I know for a fact that most international trade councils present in Thailand does NOTHING but fight Thai regulation preventing companies from investing BILLIONS of Baht....

You are cherry-picking from my post ---- but hey ..... I'll accept that you skipped the land reform issues entirely which is what I was addressing from your previous post and just address foreign investment on a large scale.

Billions and Millions are a different animal entirely --- the macro level things change for a country where foreign investment outweighs local investment and sucks the GDP dry and I assume you know that.

Billions and they want to see JV's

[Kwasaki]

BUT --- Thailand does make it rough on some people that are legitimately married to stay together here and that should be corrected.

Out of curiousity who would those some people be ???

[Forethat]

You are cherry-picking from my post ---- but hey ..... I'll accept that you skipped the land reform issues entirely which is what I was addressing from your previous post and just address foreign investment on a large scale.

Well, you have a point, and you also express an opinion. I even agree to some extent, so I cant see any reason to argue your point.

Billions and they want to see JV's

That's the pressing point, there's a difference in perception of what is a reasonable degree of JV....

[nocturn]

I think this kind of reciprocation is a bad thing. For example, a number of countries are matching the visa fees required of their nationals applying for US visas to their visas for US nationals, mostly tourists. That means raising the tourist visa fees to be very high. I think those countries are crazy as it just means they are scaring away a huge number of potential tourists over a kind of temper tantrum. In other words, I think this pisses off many Americans. It's OK if the tourist visa fee is one fee for everybody, but if it's 10 dollars for everyone and 200 for Americans, a lot of Americans are going to vote with their feet.

i am quite content to pay 45 dollars to get into Laos, knowing that for a Lao National to even apply for a visa to Canada would cost exactly the same.it is only fair.

I consider myself lucky to have the access to the world that i do. It is not my right.

[jdinasia]

BUT --- Thailand does make it rough on some people that are legitimately married to stay together here and that should be corrected.

Out of curiousity who would those some people be ???

IF (big if) you are legitimately married to a foreign national in many countries, then you have the right to stay in that country with your spouse and are often "fast-tracked" to citizenship. The only hoops required to jump through are usually just those to verify that the relationship is genuine. However, in Thailand and more particularly for foreign men married to Thai wives there are income and other restraints. Many countries are tightening up their entry requirements even for married couples but usually make it fairly easy to remain should you have a legitimate marriage. (no minimum income, no regular reporting etc ....)

Note --- being gay this just doesn't apply to me because there is no equivalent for gay marriage/civil unions here and I do not have issues with staying in Thailand even though I am below retirement age (employed director of a Thai company)

2nd note --- it is easier for foreign women married to Thai men (I think)

[jdinasia]

i am quite content to pay 45 dollars to get into Laos, knowing that for a Lao National to even apply for a visa to Canada would cost exactly the same.it is only fair.

I consider myself lucky to have the access to the world that i do. It is not my right.

I agree with the concept that you seem to be putting forward .. the feeling of a "right of entitlement" that does not exist for foreign nationals.

[bunta71]

Exactly my sentiments. I don't see a valid reason why I cannot own my own reasonably small plot of dirt. Have some limitations to satisfy the fearful so the falang do not "take over" Thailand. I will even wear a shirt while driving just to appease the fearful. If I were able to I would have my government confiscate all foreign politicians land and houses in my country until they give us the same treatment. Again I am only talking about one residence with limitations so the fearful are not so scared.

I see a valid reason, though you probably don't like what it is. It is called Democracy.

Foreign land ownership is really the 'third rail' of Thai politics. You touch it and you die.

Many politicians from my personal experience in private very rarely have a huge problem with foreign ownership. Indeed, there was a attempt in 1998 (I think it was..) where it almost became law.

But, those who attempt to liberalise the laws are vilified by political opponents, and many, many Thai's have a strong view on this matter. It is an easy vote winner, and those who would like to do something about it simply remain quiet.

Where it counts however foreigners are allowed to own land. BOI promoted companies can own 100% of a property.

I'm afraid individual property owners are a long way off from receiving attention on this point. I don't thing they should hold their collective breath either.

Australia, one of the more 'enlightened' countries on foreign ownership, still has the foreign investment review board - and limits which only allow purchases of new builds (though there have been some revisions). Recent house price rises in Australia have been blamed on 'the Chinese', so there are elements of Xenophobia even there.

We all know what the ideal in Thailand might ought to look like, especially in terms of land ownership.

Unfortunately, it is one area where Thai's - apathetic and divided on other issues - generally agree wholeheartedly about it.

You might want to blame the politicians on this one. I don't. This issue, like few others in Thailand, is genuinely commanded by the 'will of the people'.

A little history and political lesson there for me. I really do appreciate that . And I also never figured anything would change, just a matter of what I wish and something that could really change my life for the better. Mai pen rai