Why Some People Need To Get Out More....

[473geo]

Leave the land ownership laws as they are, they are not there to hinder the married man and stop him owning the land his house is on, they protect the Thai individual from the investment houses that would see many small farmers eventually becoming tennants in their own country, if they could afford the rent!

I am amazed that people moan and bitch without taking into account the broader effect on the rural Thai, just to enhance their sense of 'ownership' and security

I would suggest that the right of a married man to own his own home in his own name is a fundamental human right.

He can, just the wife owns the land beneath it......

Edit: and of course this is the very point where it is applicable to state

If you don't like it.......

Edited July 14, 2012 by 473geo

[theblether]

Leave the land ownership laws as they are, they are not there to hinder the married man and stop him owning the land his house is on, they protect the Thai individual from the investment houses that would see many small farmers eventually becoming tennants in their own country, if they could afford the rent!

I am amazed that people moan and bitch without taking into account the broader effect on the rural Thai, just to enhance their sense of 'ownership' and security

I would suggest that the right of a married man to own his own home in his own name is a fundamental human right.

He can, just the wife owns the land beneath it......

It would be better if he could own it

Being able to own the land your house sits on and possibly up to a rai of land would barely have an effect on rural Thai farmers

[MJP]

Leave the land ownership laws as they are, they are not there to hinder the married man and stop him owning the land his house is on, they protect the Thai individual from the investment houses that would see many small farmers eventually becoming tennants in their own country, if they could afford the rent!

I am amazed that people moan and bitch without taking into account the broader effect on the rural Thai, just to enhance their sense of 'ownership' and security

Yup. It would be bad, very bad.

I did buy farmland (which still gets worked), residential in the countryside and seaside condo development land. Not for me but for the kids both now and for when they're older. No age of majority on freehold, I thought it was a good way of saving for them if something happened to me.

Blether, yes the 90 day reporting thing is awful, I'd forgotten about that, so apologies.

[theblether]

Leave the land ownership laws as they are, they are not there to hinder the married man and stop him owning the land his house is on, they protect the Thai individual from the investment houses that would see many small farmers eventually becoming tennants in their own country, if they could afford the rent!

I am amazed that people moan and bitch without taking into account the broader effect on the rural Thai, just to enhance their sense of 'ownership' and security

Yup. It would be bad, very bad.

I did buy farmland (which still gets worked), residential in the countryside and seaside condo development land. Not for me but for the kids both now and for when they're older. No age of majority on freehold, I thought it was a good way of saving for them if something happened to me.

Blether, yes the 90 day reporting thing is awful, I'd forgotten about that, so apologies.

No problem, re the land, I don't want to see agricultural land bought up in swathes by greedy overseas developers, so protecting that land is of paramount importance. That's a separate issue from a marital home.

Go into your local clubhouse and tell them you bought your marital home but you can't legally own it and they will think your a nutter That policy is inexcusable.

Just as inexcusable as greedy Thai developers buying up the coastline and forests for resort development. It's just hypocritical..............and to regard it as otherwise is apologist.

[473geo]

Leave the land ownership laws as they are, they are not there to hinder the married man and stop him owning the land his house is on, they protect the Thai individual from the investment houses that would see many small farmers eventually becoming tennants in their own country, if they could afford the rent!

I am amazed that people moan and bitch without taking into account the broader effect on the rural Thai, just to enhance their sense of 'ownership' and security

I would suggest that the right of a married man to own his own home in his own name is a fundamental human right.

He can, just the wife owns the land beneath it......

It would be better if he could own it

Being able to own the land your house sits on and possibly up to a rai of land would barely have an effect on rural Thai farmers

I believe given the correct situation you can own about a rai, but it is something along the lines of investing capital in Thailand from memory....might be proved wrong on that by the real legal beavers

Aplogies I added an edit to my post as you guys were scribing, but don't think it did anything other than keep the comment on topic

I understand where you are coming from, but why force Thailand to buy into the 'global village' era, I think MJP sums it up in the buying land for the children. There is a choice for foreigners, this is not available to the poor Thai unless they saddle themselves with a husband and move abroad.

Hence I repeat if the foreigner doesn't like the rules which are in place to benefit the Thai people.....use the options available to you or make the best of what is available and get on with life

Edited July 14, 2012 by 473geo

[MJP]

Leave the land ownership laws as they are, they are not there to hinder the married man and stop him owning the land his house is on, they protect the Thai individual from the investment houses that would see many small farmers eventually becoming tennants in their own country, if they could afford the rent!

I am amazed that people moan and bitch without taking into account the broader effect on the rural Thai, just to enhance their sense of 'ownership' and security

Yup. It would be bad, very bad.

I did buy farmland (which still gets worked), residential in the countryside and seaside condo development land. Not for me but for the kids both now and for when they're older. No age of majority on freehold, I thought it was a good way of saving for them if something happened to me.

Blether, yes the 90 day reporting thing is awful, I'd forgotten about that, so apologies.

No problem, re the land, I don't want to see agricultural land bought up in swathes by greedy overseas developers, so protecting that land is of paramount importance. That's a separate issue from a marital home.

Go into your local clubhouse and tell them you bought your marital home but you can't legally own it and they will think your a nutter That policy is inexcusable.

Just as inexcusable as greedy Thai developers buying up the coastline and forests for resort development. It's just hypocritical..............and to regard it as otherwise is apologist.

Same as Blighty. We're all priced out with 70% of the land owned by 1% of the population, a rigged property market kept artificially high as the BoE buy their own bonds. Developer land banks and 'landowners' with EU subsidy.

At least in Thailand, the rural poor get Sor Nor Sam title land, gratis.

[theblether]

Hence I repeat if the foreigner doesn't like the rules which are in place to benefit the Thai people.....use the options available to you or make the best of what is available and get on with life

I'm a pragmatic sort, just like you Geo, and I agree with what you said here wholeheartedly. The thing is though, then we get threads like this where people start boasting about how well connected and integrated into Thai society they are, they start arguing about micro-definitions.

Face the reality, the odds are stacked against you from the get go, by living in Thailand you are accepting a set of rules that you would never accept in your home country. Don't go boasting about stupid irrelevant things when the foundation of your life is built on sand.

" Hi, my name is Johnny Farang, I've lived in Thailand for 10 years and I've got lots of Thai friends ".....................whoop de whoo, give me strength........that's playground talk

[473geo]

Hence I repeat if the foreigner doesn't like the rules which are in place to benefit the Thai people.....use the options available to you or make the best of what is available and get on with life

I'm a pragmatic sort, just like you Geo, and I agree with what you said here wholeheartedly. The thing is though, then we get threads like this where people start boasting about how well connected and integrated into Thai society they are, they start arguing about micro-definitions.

Face the reality, the odds are stacked against you from the get go, by living in Thailand you are accepting a set of rules that you would never accept in your home country. Don't go boasting about stupid irrelevant things when the foundation of your life is built on sand.

" Hi, my name is Johnny Farang, I've lived in Thailand for 10 years and I've got lots of Thai friends ".....................whoop de whoo, give me strength........that's playground talk

Understand, but I'll just let that go over my head if you don't mind, I'm sure you may prompt a response from others

[theblether]

Leave the land ownership laws as they are, they are not there to hinder the married man and stop him owning the land his house is on, they protect the Thai individual from the investment houses that would see many small farmers eventually becoming tennants in their own country, if they could afford the rent!

I am amazed that people moan and bitch without taking into account the broader effect on the rural Thai, just to enhance their sense of 'ownership' and security

Yup. It would be bad, very bad.

I did buy farmland (which still gets worked), residential in the countryside and seaside condo development land. Not for me but for the kids both now and for when they're older. No age of majority on freehold, I thought it was a good way of saving for them if something happened to me.

Blether, yes the 90 day reporting thing is awful, I'd forgotten about that, so apologies.

No problem, re the land, I don't want to see agricultural land bought up in swathes by greedy overseas developers, so protecting that land is of paramount importance. That's a separate issue from a marital home.

Go into your local clubhouse and tell them you bought your marital home but you can't legally own it and they will think your a nutter That policy is inexcusable.

Just as inexcusable as greedy Thai developers buying up the coastline and forests for resort development. It's just hypocritical..............and to regard it as otherwise is apologist.

Same as Blighty. We're all priced out with 70% of the land owned by 1% of the population, a rigged property market kept artificially high as the BoE buy their own bonds. Developer land banks and 'landowners' with EU subsidy.

At least in Thailand, the rural poor get Sor Nor Sam title land, gratis.

Yes I agree with that, I was in discussion with a close friend about that very subject yesterday. We've spent 30 years trying modern banking methods only to discover that the methods that were in operation for two hundred years before worked best. We got too smart for ourselves by trying to find new ways of making money, then it all went bust.

Thailand has a great advantage in it's agricultural land ownership policy, I would never contest that. I do contest the regulation re the marital home though, that's a nonsense.

edited for clarity.

Edited July 14, 2012 by theblether

[theblether]

Hence I repeat if the foreigner doesn't like the rules which are in place to benefit the Thai people.....use the options available to you or make the best of what is available and get on with life

I'm a pragmatic sort, just like you Geo, and I agree with what you said here wholeheartedly. The thing is though, then we get threads like this where people start boasting about how well connected and integrated into Thai society they are, they start arguing about micro-definitions.

Face the reality, the odds are stacked against you from the get go, by living in Thailand you are accepting a set of rules that you would never accept in your home country. Don't go boasting about stupid irrelevant things when the foundation of your life is built on sand.

" Hi, my name is Johnny Farang, I've lived in Thailand for 10 years and I've got lots of Thai friends ".....................whoop de whoo, give me strength........that's playground talk

Understand, but I'll just let that go over my head if you don't mind, I'm sure you may prompt a response from others

It wasn't directed at you Geo, you're not that type of man, you have a good handle on life in Thailand, and you have continually made the right choices for your family.

.

Edited July 14, 2012 by theblether

[MJP]

Hence I repeat if the foreigner doesn't like the rules which are in place to benefit the Thai people.....use the options available to you or make the best of what is available and get on with life

I'm a pragmatic sort, just like you Geo, and I agree with what you said here wholeheartedly. The thing is though, then we get threads like this where people start boasting about how well connected and integrated into Thai society they are, they start arguing about micro-definitions.

Face the reality, the odds are stacked against you from the get go, by living in Thailand you are accepting a set of rules that you would never accept in your home country. Don't go boasting about stupid irrelevant things when the foundation of your life is built on sand.

" Hi, my name is Johnny Farang, I've lived in Thailand for 10 years and I've got lots of Thai friends ".....................whoop de whoo, give me strength........that's playground talk

They accept it because it is (was) cheap, the sun shines and they get their rocks off. It's not scientific but it works.

[473geo]

Thing is Blether, in reality you are making a fuss about a house that a foreigner can build without taking the credit card to it's limit, is it really that important, or is it the fact that it is usually best if the marriage fails to pack a bag and walk away? Even then, is it the loss of the money?, loss of the home? loss of the entitlement to stay?...........life is not without risk......unless you choose a safe haven.......soooooooooooo......if....

Edited July 14, 2012 by 473geo

[473geo]

It wasn't directed at you Geo, you're not that type of man, you have a good handle on life in Thailand, and you have continually made the right choices for your family. Read over the topic though and you would wonder at the mental age behind some of the posts. Cringe-worthy.

.

No need to apologise, I read the whole thread and don't disagree with your comment, but somehow I can't see that line of discussion leading anywhere useful

[theblether]

Thing is Blether, in reality you are making a fuss about a house that a foreigner can build without taking the credit card to it's limit, is it really that important, or is it the fact that it is usually best if the marriage fails to pack a bag and walk away? Even then, is it the loss of the mone?, loss of the home? loss of the entitlement to stay?...........life is not without risk......unless you choose a safe haven.......soooooooooooo......if....

I wouldn't say it;s a fuss, rather than a fair observation. The rules are unnecessarily draconian against the farang male, I believe the rules for farang females are different, ie fairer.

Marriage is one of the corner stones of life, and your marital home is ordinarily at the centre of your marriage. It doesn't matter about the value, the value goes way beyond the financial into the symbolic and emotional. This is why the loss of your marital home can be especially painful as it's full of symbolism and memories.

A system that is sexist and punitive against one of the partners in a marriage is fundamentally flawed. There is no need for it.

[473geo]

Thing is Blether, in reality you are making a fuss about a house that a foreigner can build without taking the credit card to it's limit, is it really that important, or is it the fact that it is usually best if the marriage fails to pack a bag and walk away? Even then, is it the loss of the mone?, loss of the home? loss of the entitlement to stay?...........life is not without risk......unless you choose a safe haven.......soooooooooooo......if....

I wouldn't say it;s a fuss, rather than a fair observation. The rules are unnecessarily draconian against the farang male, I believe the rules for farang females are different, ie fairer.

Marriage is one of the corner stones of life, and your marital home is ordinarily at the centre of your marriage. It doesn't matter about the value, the value goes way beyond the financial into the symbolic and emotional. This is why the loss of your marital home can be especially painful as it's full of symbolism and memories.

A system that is sexist and punitive against one of the partners in a marriage is fundamentally flawed. There is no need for it.

Life is series of chapters, as you close one another opens, people cope with the closure much better if they minimise their attachment to material things, perhaps the system is little protectionist.........but if one is aware of the rules and the possible outcome.....and still takes the gamble?

I've just this minute had to hedge on a bet, a little over ambitious at the outset.....but nothing ventured....

[theblether]

perhaps the system is little protectionist.........but if one is aware of the rules and the possible outcome.....and still takes the gamble?

Then up to them......I choose not to join them

[MJP]

perhaps the system is little protectionist.........but if one is aware of the rules and the possible outcome.....and still takes the gamble?

Then up to them......I choose not to join them

Is the right choice unless you have children. Definitely rent, it's very cheap in any case.

[TommoPhysicist]

It would be better if he could own it

Being able to own the land your house sits on and possibly up to a rai of land would barely have an effect on rural Thai farmers

A married man can never really own his own home, anywhere in the world.

In the west, the judge hands it to the woman, in Thailand at least it is a direct donation.

[MJP]

It would be better if he could own it

Being able to own the land your house sits on and possibly up to a rai of land would barely have an effect on rural Thai farmers

A married man can never really own his own home, anywhere in the world.

In the west, the judge hands it to the woman, in Thailand at least it is a direct donation.

. . . and even those who don't get divorced still don't really own it. Property taxes in the West are a rent (extortion) you still pay to the government and if you don't / can't pay those taxes they will ultimately take your house by force (at gun point actually, if a siege ensues). Even Hillary Clinton noted that because of this people don't really own their own homes.

At least in LOS, the kids own the house and the council tax is thirteen pence a year. My dustbin is still collected and with more regularity than in Blighty.

[robertson468]

you people really expect to be ever integrated in the thai society?

how many real Thai Friends do you have?

is your Relation with your Thai Spouse a non financial one?

I have many Thai Friends, whom I value a great deal, who in turn appreciate that I try to speak and learn as much Thai as possible. My Wife is Thai and she is a working Wife with her own business. Me? I'm just a retired old farang slob living the life of larry on my wife's earnings. Love it, love it, love it.

[HeavyDrinker]

It's been interesting to see how this topic has meandered from the counting of one's Thai friends to the old "house" issue.

That's the beauty of internet forums for me.

The nub of the OP was that finding a solution to many of the basic problems one encounters here with the Thais is really a very simple thing to do.

You need neither billions of Thai mates nor a house to do this but carry on and thanks for the interesting reading....

[rubik101]

aBoomerAbroad; I lived in Germany for ten years and never once considered I was 'integrated' even though I was married to a German woman and spoke the language. So the question of integration is irrelevant.

Here, I have Thai friends, some I meet and eat with fairly regularly. I speak only a little Thai so they speak English with me but it seems they are pleased with that as they are learning English all the time. I don't mind the free lessons. As to the number, as you question, does it make a difference if it's one or thirty-one, so again, a pointless question.

My new wife is with me because she loves me and I love her. Financial? Yes, I support her, the same as I would support my wife if I lived in the UK and had an English wife, so your question is once again pointless.

If you don't like it here then I suggest you.....

[thaibeachlovers]

you people really expect to be ever integrated in the thai society?

how many real Thai Friends do you have?

is your Relation with your Thai Spouse a non financial one?

You can always tell a newbie ,same old hackneyd bullshit, i have quite a few thai friends so have many other westerners i know and not one has "baught" his wife , just get out more and stay away from the bars.

Thanks for saying what I was thinking!

[thaibeachlovers]

It would be better if he could own it

Being able to own the land your house sits on and possibly up to a rai of land would barely have an effect on rural Thai farmers

A married man can never really own his own home, anywhere in the world.

In the west, the judge hands it to the woman, in Thailand at least it is a direct donation.

You really nailed it. Classic!

[F1fanatic]

I agree with the Thais 100% on foreigners owning land - married or not. Thailand is for the Thais and foreigners married to a Thai can live on the land owned by their wife. If only Western countries would adopt the same laws to stop their countries being sold to wealthy foreigners!

The 90 day reporting thing though is a touch too far. If one has a visa for a year, then they should only need to report when they renew that visa - with the proviso that if they move, they need to report their new address.

[samsiam]

The best thing about being a guest...is that you can leave any time and you dun have to clean the toilet.

[HeavyDrinker]

The best thing about being a guest...is that you can leave any time and you dun have to clean the toilet.

You do at ours or the missus will come out and hand you a bog brush in front of everyone....

[Banzai99]

I won't be a hypocrite, yes I understand the Thai attitude to land ownership, I have no problem with that, ( although I think it could be tweaked to allow a married man to own his own home, as long as he sold it within one year of any subsequent divorce ).

I disagree, what will The Thai woman do when she gets older, lose her home to some Farang who has just met an 18 year old in the Bar ?

No , Farangs come to Thailand to take advantage of what they can, in many cases it's getting poor women easy cos you promise her security, so she should have that security.

I knew a Thai woman that had lived with a Farang for 10 years, rented apartment, she gave him the best years of her life only to be left when he met a younger girl in a bar, he took his belongings and left, all she had was the rent to pay, the guy must have been 65 she about 35, after 10 years in a Relationship with so many broken promises, she was left with nothing to compensate her for the 10 years with a man older than her father.

See it don't matter to the Farang, had has money coming in every month and he was always gonna take care of her, the usual <deleted>, " When I die, you'll be ok, I'll look after you"

Happily the young girl he met fleeced him good and proper, left Thailand with nothing.

Many Farangs ONLY stay with their older Thai wives BECAUSE she owns the house.

Edited July 15, 2012 by Banzai99

[chrisinth]

I won't be a hypocrite, yes I understand the Thai attitude to land ownership, I have no problem with that, ( although I think it could be tweaked to allow a married man to own his own home, as long as he sold it within one year of any subsequent divorce ).

I disagree, what will The Thai woman do when she gets older, lose her home to some Farang who has just met an 18 year old in the Bar ?

No , Farangs come to Thailand to take advantage of what they can, in many cases it's getting poor women easy cos you promise her security, so she should have that security.

I knew a Thai woman that had lived with a Farang for 10 years, rented apartment, she gave him the best years of her life only to be left when he met a younger girl in a bar, he took his belongings and left, all she had was the rent to pay, the guy must have been 65 she about 35, after 10 years in a Relationship with so many broken promises, she was left with nothing to compensate her for the 10 years with a man older than her father.

See it don't matter to the Farang, had has money coming in every month and he was always gonna take care of her, the usual <deleted>, " When I die, you'll be ok, I'll look after you"

Happily the young girl he met fleeced him good and proper, left Thailand with nothing.

Many Farangs ONLY stay with their older Thai wives BECAUSE she owns the house.

You have everybody nicely grouped together here. Perhaps you need to get out more ( ) and meet some of the people who are working over here, happily married with no intention of looking for a younger model. Actually, I am a little bit offended by your post in that you have concluded we all have the same agendas.

Not quite true. But, for the group you have concentrated on, yes, I can see your point.

[PaullyW]

I won't be a hypocrite, yes I understand the Thai attitude to land ownership, I have no problem with that, ( although I think it could be tweaked to allow a married man to own his own home, as long as he sold it within one year of any subsequent divorce ).

I disagree, what will The Thai woman do when she gets older, lose her home to some Farang who has just met an 18 year old in the Bar ?

No , Farangs come to Thailand to take advantage of what they can, in many cases it's getting poor women easy cos you promise her security, so she should have that security.

I knew a Thai woman that had lived with a Farang for 10 years, rented apartment, she gave him the best years of her life only to be left when he met a younger girl in a bar, he took his belongings and left, all she had was the rent to pay, the guy must have been 65 she about 35, after 10 years in a Relationship with so many broken promises, she was left with nothing to compensate her for the 10 years with a man older than her father.

See it don't matter to the Farang, had has money coming in every month and he was always gonna take care of her, the usual <deleted>, " When I die, you'll be ok, I'll look after you"

Happily the young girl he met fleeced him good and proper, left Thailand with nothing.

Many Farangs ONLY stay with their older Thai wives BECAUSE she owns the house.

Isn't it a guy's (or Thais lady's) right to leave if he wants to leave? I don't understand the support for law the props up relationships. If a Thai lady can't keep a man interested in the relationship, who is to blame for that?