Mandatory Health Ins.-The Latest?

[Gsxrnz]

@Gsx

This thread is about people moving to Thailand, you haven't, so you don't have their problems.

Worldwide health Insurance for tourists is a doddle.

I've lived in Thailand for 2 1/2 years apart from 18 weeks when I was in NZ. So I think I live here and do have their problems. My point is that I have coverage and go out of my way to incur costs to ensure that the cover remains valid. In other words, I recognise the importance of health cover and not only pay the premiums but also incur additional costs to maintain the best possible coverage through managing my residency position. Anybody "living" here can do the same if they choose to or want to.

Many people aren't happy to defraud their insurance companies.

Many people would be scared of getting caught.

You are dead right, and at the same time many people are able to comply with both the law and the terms of their insurance policies as I thought I had quite clearly explained.

[AnotherOneAmerican]

@Gsx

This thread is about people moving to Thailand, you haven't, so you don't have their problems.

Worldwide health Insurance for tourists is a doddle.

I've lived in Thailand for 2 1/2 years apart from 18 weeks when I was in NZ. So I think I live here and do have their problems. My point is that I have coverage and go out of my way to incur costs to ensure that the cover remains valid. In other words, I recognise the importance of health cover and not only pay the premiums but also incur additional costs to maintain the best possible coverage through managing my residency position. Anybody "living" here can do the same if they choose to or want to.

Many people aren't happy to defraud their insurance companies.

Many people would be scared of getting caught.

You are dead right, and at the same time many people are able to comply with both the law and the terms of their insurance policies as I thought I had quite clearly explained.

Your idea of compliance and your insurance companies idea of compliance, may not actually be the same.

[theblether]

@Blether

Having read some of your more revealing posts. I doubt very much if you would ever be able to buy the kind of insurance you are suggesting everyone should have.

You prior health record wouldn't allow you anything beyond tourist short term repatriation insurance.

What are you going to do?

Straight answer to a straight question?

I'm a sterling asset millionaire. I also earn serious money over and above my assets. How else would I be able to swan around the world for 6 months of the year?

Now I can assure you I'm going to get flamed the life out of for telling you that.

You still wouldn't be able to get that mandatory insurance policy.

Well to deal with my particular circumstances, I've made it clear in the past that I will never permanently relocate to Thailand. I'll not repeat the same old arguments as we'll end up off topic more than usual and it'll become a festival of theblether bashing.

That's me really going to get it now.

[theblether]

Don't rely upon getting smart with your insurance companies, Uberimes Fides comes in to play which means that you are obliged to declare all material of interest to your coverage.

We all know stories of people who were unjustly denied coverage because of some minor infraction, it's a poor plan.

[swissie]

So, in short and returning to my question as the the OP: Nothing in the pipeline as far as this is concerned in theThai parliament, I gather.

Thanks & cheers.

[Gsxrnz]

@Gsx

This thread is about people moving to Thailand, you haven't, so you don't have their problems.

Worldwide health Insurance for tourists is a doddle.

I've lived in Thailand for 2 1/2 years apart from 18 weeks when I was in NZ. So I think I live here and do have their problems. My point is that I have coverage and go out of my way to incur costs to ensure that the cover remains valid. In other words, I recognise the importance of health cover and not only pay the premiums but also incur additional costs to maintain the best possible coverage through managing my residency position. Anybody "living" here can do the same if they choose to or want to.

There, I disagree with you. I have cobbled together a career where I have generally been covered under an employer's health care and/or COBRA coverage. Still am. But if I were to shop for health insurance in the private market today at age 56, just about every part of my anatomy would be excluded for pre-existing conditions. Fortunately, I expect to be employer covered until I'm old enough to not care any more (just kidding, but you get the drift)

So the statement that "anyone living here" can get coverage is nowhere near universally true. Anyone looking forward 20 years ago to see themselves living in Thailand with a wife and kids could have made those plans, but who'da thunk it?

Ok, the point is that you have coverage and therefore you planned for it early in life to some extent, and even if you leave your employer you could more than likely take over their health policy privately.

My statement "Anybody living here can do the same if they choose to or want to" meant that they could have travel insurance and manage their residency position in relation to that policy to maintain coverage, subject to pre-existing conditions obviously.

[Gsxrnz]

I've lived in Thailand for 2 1/2 years apart from 18 weeks when I was in NZ. So I think I live here and do have their problems. My point is that I have coverage and go out of my way to incur costs to ensure that the cover remains valid. In other words, I recognise the importance of health cover and not only pay the premiums but also incur additional costs to maintain the best possible coverage through managing my residency position. Anybody "living" here can do the same if they choose to or want to.

Gsx

This thread is about people moving to Thailand, you haven't, so you don't have their problems.

Worldwide health Insurance for tourists is a doddle.

Many people aren't happy to defraud their insurance companies.

Many people would be scared of getting caught.

You are dead right, and at the same time many people are able to comply with both the law and the terms of their insurance policies as I thought I had quite clearly explained.

Your idea of compliance and your insurance companies idea of compliance, may not actually be the same.

[Gsxrnz]

Don't rely upon getting smart with your insurance companies, Uberimes Fides comes in to play which means that you are obliged to declare all material of interest to your coverage.

We all know stories of people who were unjustly denied coverage because of some minor infraction, it's a poor plan.

Good advice. I have an annual review with my broker and go out of my way to inform him of all relevant facts. I hate the annual medical checkup though, particularly the manual check for prostate cancer.

[whiteman]

This probably sounds pompous (Blether, can I borrow your flameproof suit?), but I made serious sacrifices when I was younger to make sure I am well protected with life insurances, health insurances, travel insurances etc. I commenced policies at a young age when it was obvious there were no pre-existing conditions etc. I'm still making sacrifices today to ensure that I am as well protected as I can - and believe me the premiums get more the older you get.

Some policies expire at 70, some at 78, so when I get there in 20 odd years I'm striving to ensure I have enough savings to live comfortably and the ability to pay for health care.

It's very rare for a private health insurance policy taken out in one country, to be valid in (or when you move to) another country.

Same for travel insurance, only valid when you travel on business or on holiday, not valid when you move to another country.

You must have chosen very carefully, or not read the fine print.

I do fine print for a living. Travel Insurance covers me anywhere in the world except NZ (and Antarctica, but no real plans of travelling there due to the very infrequent flight schedule and far from healthy climate). My Health insurances, Loss of Income Insurances and Accident Insurances in NZ partially cover while overseas and cover me 100% if/when I repatriate myself home, either voluntarily or as the result of an illness or accident sustained overseas. Death cover of course applies worldwide.

Edit: The Travel policy I have doesn't differentiate in the way you suggest. I'm not a resident of Thailand, my country of residence is NZ. Regardless, the Insurer allows for long term travelling and that's what I am technically doing - I have regular trips home to ensure I am a NZ tax resident in accordance with NZ tax laws (and therefore definition of residency) etc.

He talks and I quote when you move to live here your travel and income replacement cover will only cover you for a certain amount of time travel cover is usually up to 12 months and the income protection has a built in sabatical allowance but it will not be full covereage for you may not be working to the same earnings as b4 when in Thailand that is if you can get a job here. Your health cover will become nile and void if you live in another country but they will still take your prems off you but if you got sick here they would not pay you over here. The only way there coverage would help you as long as you kept paying the NZ one prems is if you could get back to the N.Z. and then you could use it to go to a private hospital.

How I know all this is because like you I am a from the N.Z too and had 2 covers for some time both in each country till I decided that this place Thailand was to be my home. Also you can freeze the heath cover payments depending on the amount of time you have been with them I think it is for 2 year after 10 years coverage . Also I sold this cover for 30 years with AXA HEALTH AND LIFE INSURANCE AND INCOME PROTECTION.

So NZ health cover will not cover you here if you live here, travel cover will cover you upto 12 months unless they find out you live here then they will not pay your claim. Income protection will cover you for a certain time too while over seas but not for allways even if you still pay the prems it is in there fine print. You will be like me if you live in thailand need to have a health policy I have the NZI one but it is Thailand based and as you said before life cover is world wide you can die any where they dont mind and will pay out.

[impulse]

@Gsx

This thread is about people moving to Thailand, you haven't, so you don't have their problems.

Worldwide health Insurance for tourists is a doddle.

I've lived in Thailand for 2 1/2 years apart from 18 weeks when I was in NZ. So I think I live here and do have their problems. My point is that I have coverage and go out of my way to incur costs to ensure that the cover remains valid. In other words, I recognise the importance of health cover and not only pay the premiums but also incur additional costs to maintain the best possible coverage through managing my residency position. Anybody "living" here can do the same if they choose to or want to.

There, I disagree with you. I have cobbled together a career where I have generally been covered under an employer's health care and/or COBRA coverage. Still am. But if I were to shop for health insurance in the private market today at age 56, just about every part of my anatomy would be excluded for pre-existing conditions. Fortunately, I expect to be employer covered until I'm old enough to not care any more (just kidding, but you get the drift)

So the statement that "anyone living here" can get coverage is nowhere near universally true. Anyone looking forward 20 years ago to see themselves living in Thailand with a wife and kids could have made those plans, but who'da thunk it?

Ok, the point is that you have coverage and therefore you planned for it early in life to some extent, and even if you leave your employer you could more than likely take over their health policy privately.

My statement "Anybody living here can do the same if they choose to or want to" meant that they could have travel insurance and manage their residency position in relation to that policy to maintain coverage, subject to pre-existing conditions obviously.

I salute you for having taken the choices to keep yourself covered. I'm fine, too.

But a pink slip from an employer, an illness or accident, a change in marital status or any one of a hundred other circumstances could send the vast majority of us into a situation where health care becomes unaffordable. I'm fine today, but I live with the realization that I could be un-fine tomorrow if, for example my career field were to tank and I had to flip burgers or sell newspapers or some other no-healthcare-included job. Or if I fell in love with a women that had a special needs kid, or... or...

[theblether]

To me it's a cornerstone factor.

Anyone moving to Thailand should have their healthcare at the TOP of their agenda.

Unfortunately it normally ranks well down the list after wine, women, and song.

Then spins in the enchantress and then you find yourself in a long term relationship with both her and Old Father Time.

I know who the winner of that one is and so do you.

[Gsxrnz]

This probably sounds pompous (Blether, can I borrow your flameproof suit?), but I made serious sacrifices when I was younger to make sure I am well protected with life insurances, health insurances, travel insurances etc. I commenced policies at a young age when it was obvious there were no pre-existing conditions etc. I'm still making sacrifices today to ensure that I am as well protected as I can - and believe me the premiums get more the older you get.

Some policies expire at 70, some at 78, so when I get there in 20 odd years I'm striving to ensure I have enough savings to live comfortably and the ability to pay for health care.

It's very rare for a private health insurance policy taken out in one country, to be valid in (or when you move to) another country.

Same for travel insurance, only valid when you travel on business or on holiday, not valid when you move to another country.

You must have chosen very carefully, or not read the fine print.

I do fine print for a living. Travel Insurance covers me anywhere in the world except NZ (and Antarctica, but no real plans of travelling there due to the very infrequent flight schedule and far from healthy climate). My Health insurances, Loss of Income Insurances and Accident Insurances in NZ partially cover while overseas and cover me 100% if/when I repatriate myself home, either voluntarily or as the result of an illness or accident sustained overseas. Death cover of course applies worldwide.

Edit: The Travel policy I have doesn't differentiate in the way you suggest. I'm not a resident of Thailand, my country of residence is NZ. Regardless, the Insurer allows for long term travelling and that's what I am technically doing - I have regular trips home to ensure I am a NZ tax resident in accordance with NZ tax laws (and therefore definition of residency) etc.

He talks and I quote when you move to live here your travel and income replacement cover will only cover you for a certain amount of time travel cover is usually up to 12 months and the income protection has a built in sabatical allowance but it will not be full covereage for you may not be working to the same earnings as b4 when in Thailand that is if you can get a job here. Your health cover will become nile and void if you live in another country but they will still take your prems off you but if you got sick here they would not pay you over here. The only way there coverage would help you as long as you kept paying the NZ one prems is if you could get back to the N.Z. and then you could use it to go to a private hospital.

How I know all this is because like you I am a from the N.Z too and had 2 covers for some time both in each country till I decided that this place Thailand was to be my home. Also you can freeze the heath cover payments depending on the amount of time you have been with them I think it is for 2 year after 10 years coverage . Also I sold this cover for 30 years with AXA HEALTH AND LIFE INSURANCE AND INCOME PROTECTION.

So NZ health cover will not cover you here if you live here, travel cover will cover you upto 12 months unless they find out you live here then they will not pay your claim. Income protection will cover you for a certain time too while over seas but not for allways even if you still pay the prems it is in there fine print. You will be like me if you live in thailand need to have a health policy I have the NZI one but it is Thailand based and as you said before life cover is world wide you can die any where they dont mind and will pay out.

Ok, didn't really want to get this detailed but I appreciate what you say and am much in agreement. Read my posts and you will see that I have taken steps to maintain validity of both health and travel insurance to ensure I have coverage. I am technically a traveller and have clarified that with my insurance company. Re the Loss of Income insurance, I'm self employed and have a nominated amount of coverage, so if I have a bike crash in Thailand and cannot work, and get repatriated to NZ by my travel insurance, the LOI insurance kicks in, as does my private health insurance. So does my ACC coverage (being a kiwi you'll understand that), as I also pay a nominated premium/coverage being self employed - ACC is the first point of coverage and what they don't cover my private cover will. I don't need the LOI if I'm am incapacitated in Thailand because my income is from dividends and director's fees from NZ companies. if I ever do make a claim on my LOI insurance it will be a bonus because 80% of my annual income will continue unabated anyway - not from ACC but from private income.

I think I'll leave this thread alone - just wanted to give some general advice but ended up defending my foresightedness - life's a bummer ain't it. Cheers

[impulse]

Quote function not working worth a flip so heres' a quote from Gsxrnz

"I think I'll leave this thread alone - just wanted to give some general advice but ended up defending my foresightedness - life's a bummer ain't it. Cheers "

Probably wouldn't have had to defend it so vigorously if your "general advice" wasn't "Make a lot of money so you can afford to be triple covered so even if the first and second layers don't come through, you're still alright (Jack)"

Or, to boil it down to a very common analogy, "Why don't them homeless people just buy homes????"

Edited April 29, 2013 by impulse

[Gsxrnz]

Quote function not working worth a flip so heres' a quote from Gsxrnz

"I think I'll leave this thread alone - just wanted to give some general advice but ended up defending my foresightedness - life's a bummer ain't it. Cheers "

Probably wouldn't have had to defend it so vigorously if your "general advice" wasn't "Make a lot of money so you can afford to be triple covered so even if the first and second layers don't come through, you're still alright (Jack)"

Or, to boil it down to a very common analogy, "Why don't them homeless people just buy homes????"

yawn.

[GuestHouse]

I find it curous that that some here advocate policies which are clearly disciminate against themselves.

TB is an example - I can almost see him frothing at the mouth as he hammers away at the keyboard, urging the exclusion of his own ethnic group from state funded healthcare in the country they have made their home.

Others eager to protect the national coffers urge no tax payer's money should be spent on 'Farangs'.

These are strange views for People who don't themselves live or work in Thailand.

I do live and work in Thailand and like nearly all the expats I know here I pay more income tax in Thaild than most folks back home earn.

Now there's the trap. It is perhaps as easy for me sitting in my office to imagine all expats are high income earners with valuable skills to offer the Thai economy and high tax contributions to offer the Thai government as it is for guy blowing a year's savings in a month's holiday at a bar stool to imagine all Farangs are lo spending, near zero contrubuters.

I suggest an alternative aproach from blanket denial of services based on ethnicity.

Start by examing who contributes what and determine entitlement upon on the basis of contribution - No need to rush to entitlement to healthcare, start with entitlement to more than a single visitor visa in any one given period.

Thailand might then have a chance of avoiding the welfare and healthcare disaster it is blindly importing.

[StreetCowboy]

I find it curous that that some here advocate policies which are clearly disciminate against themselves.

TB is an example - I can almost see him frothing at the mouth as he hammers away at the keyboard, urging the exclusion of his own ethnic group from state funded healthcare in the country they have made their home.

Others eager to protect the national coffers urge no tax payer's money should be spent on 'Farangs'.

These are strange views for People who don't themselves live or work in Thailand.

I do live and work in Thailand and like nearly all the expats I know here I pay more income tax in Thaild than most folks back home earn.

Now there's the trap. It is perhaps as easy for me sitting in my office to imagine all expats are high income earners with valuable skills to offer the Thai economy and high tax contributions to offer the Thai government as it is for guy blowing a year's savings in a month's holiday at a bar stool to imagine all Farangs are lo spending, near zero contrubuters.

I suggest an alternative aproach from blanket denial of services based on ethnicity.

Start by examing who contributes what and determine entitlement upon on the basis of contribution - No need to rush to entitlement to healthcare, start with entitlement to more than a single visitor visa in any one given period.

Thailand might then have a chance of avoiding the welfare and healthcare disaster it is blindly importing.

Spoken like a true forester. Clear away the deadwood before harvesting the healthy

[fletchsmile]

@Blether

Having read some of your more revealing posts. I doubt very much if you would ever be able to buy the kind of insurance you are suggesting everyone should have.

You prior health record wouldn't allow you anything beyond tourist short term repatriation insurance.

What are you going to do?

Straight answer to a straight question?

I'm a sterling asset millionaire. I also earn serious money over and above my assets. How else would I be able to swan around the world for 6 months of the year?

Now I can assure you I'm going to get flamed the life out of for telling you that.

I find that people who have to specify which currency they're a millionaire in aren't as wealthy as they think they are or would like to be

As for the topic. Seems obvious to me:

1) Mandatory insurance isn't really feasible, and too complex to monitor, unless they insist everyone buys a Thai insurance policy - not exactly going to go down well in the real world.

2) Letting foreigners join the 30 baht health scheme "en masse" just makes the country poorer - so not going to happen.

Fletch

Edited April 29, 2013 by fletchsmile

[Maestro]

...This thread is about people moving to Thailand, you haven't, so you don't have their problems.

Worldwide health Insurance for tourists is a doddle.

This thread is about "long-term Farang-residents as well as Farang-tourists"

Source: http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/636054-mandatory-health-ins-the-latest/#entry6350002

[BB1955]

1. It should be mandatory.

2. Under no circumstances should they extend the 30 baht scheme to farangs.

It's a scheme for the Thai working class and poor, not a scheme to assist farangs in lifestyle decisions.

I think it's ridiculous.......RIDICULOUS!......that anyone in all conscience would try to use up the few precious resources available to the Thai poor.

Just in case your confused, I think it's ridiculous.

Just so you know.

So what do you think foreigners with Thai wife and children should do?

Those who are too old to get any insurance?

Those who are too poor to afford insurance?

Are you suggesting they should desert their wife and family and move back to their home country?

What would you suggest they do?

In most civilised countries married foreigners already living in that country are allowed citizenship.

A foreigner who is married to a Thai spouse and is in the country on a marrage visa and listed in the yellow book can get on the 30 baht plan . I have talked to several foreigners whos wifes got them on it . This is not by any employment it is the normal 30 baht plan that thai people use ...

[marstons]

1. It should be mandatory.

2. Under no circumstances should they extend the 30 baht scheme to farangs.

It's a scheme for the Thai working class and poor, not a scheme to assist farangs in lifestyle decisions.

I think it's ridiculous.......RIDICULOUS!......that anyone in all conscience would try to use up the few precious resources available to the Thai poor.

Just in case your confused, I think it's ridiculous.

Just so you know.

I suppose I better go put my flame proof suit on now. Oh well.

but it is widely used by the not so poor also, hence its become a problem because people who used to put money into the pot do not any more except for the 30 baht.

Your baiting to get flamed does not seem to have caught on, maybe try and wind things up a bit more.

Edited April 29, 2013 by marstons

[Beetlejuice]

1. It should be mandatory.

2. Under no circumstances should they extend the 30 baht scheme to farangs.

It's a scheme for the Thai working class and poor, not a scheme to assist farangs in lifestyle decisions.

I think it's ridiculous.......RIDICULOUS!......that anyone in all conscience would try to use up the few precious resources available to the Thai poor.

Just in case your confused, I think it's ridiculous.

Just so you know.

I suppose I better go put my flame proof suit on now. Oh well.

Easy talk, but you don`t even live here.

[mickjn]

@Blether

Having read some of your more revealing posts. I doubt very much if you would ever be able to buy the kind of insurance you are suggesting everyone should have.

You prior health record wouldn't allow you anything beyond tourist short term repatriation insurance.

What are you going to do?

You can buy as much as you like and stay as long as you like,provided you pay the extra premium

[kannot]

1. It should be mandatory.

2. Under no circumstances should they extend the 30 baht scheme to farangs.

It's a scheme for the Thai working class and poor, not a scheme to assist farangs in lifestyle decisions.

I think it's ridiculous.......RIDICULOUS!......that anyone in all conscience would try to use up the few precious resources available to the Thai poor.

Just in case your confused, I think it's ridiculous.

Just so you know.

So what do you think foreigners with Thai wife and children should do?

Those who are too old to get any insurance?

Those who are too poor to afford insurance?

Are you suggesting they should desert their wife and family and move back to their home country?

What would you suggest they do?

In most civilised countries married foreigners already living in that country are allowed citizenship.

I can empathize with people in this position. However everybody has points in their life when they should have or could have considered the ramifications of this sort of issue and taken steps to protect themselves (to the best of their ability and affordability) from any form of future disaster, be it health, accident, or not being able to provide for their health care in their old age.

This probably sounds pompous (Blether, can I borrow your flameproof suit?), but I made serious sacrifices when I was younger to make sure I am well protected with life insurances, health insurances, travel insurances etc. I commenced policies at a young age when it was obvious there were no pre-existing conditions etc. I'm still making sacrifices today to ensure that I am as well protected as I can - and believe me the premiums get more the older you get.

Some policies expire at 70, some at 78, so when I get there in 20 odd years I'm striving to ensure I have enough savings to live comfortably and the ability to pay for health care.

Flamers: make sure you have the gas tanks fully charged!

OK you took out all the insurances and then the health co. goes bump? just like the pension companies did in the UK,

ROVER CARS is one example I can think of where a friend of mine lost all his pension.

[kannot]

Don't rely upon getting smart with your insurance companies, Uberimes Fides comes in to play which means that you are obliged to declare all material of interest to your coverage.

We all know stories of people who were unjustly denied coverage because of some minor infraction, it's a poor plan.

Good advice. I have an annual review with my broker and go out of my way to inform him of all relevant facts. I hate the annual medical checkup though, particularly the manual check for prostate cancer.

Ask for the Womanual???

[NeverSure]

The topic - OP - is about mandatory health insurance for farangs who are residents OR tourists.

The answer, I guess, is that all Farangs who are 70 or older go back to their home countries, and anyone who doesn't have health insurance which covers him while a tourist in Thailand won't be admitted.

I can't see Thailand doing that to its tourist industry. Can't say about retirement visas.

There are so, so, so many reasons to not tie up all of one's assets in a corrupt place where at best he is tolerated as a guest. I will never fail to maintain residency in my home country, and be prepared to land there at any time.

[Suradit69]

1. It should be mandatory.

2. Under no circumstances should they extend the 30 baht scheme to farangs.

It's a scheme for the Thai working class and poor, not a scheme to assist farangs in lifestyle decisions.

I think it's ridiculous.......RIDICULOUS!......that anyone in all conscience would try to use up the few precious resources available to the Thai poor.

Just in case your confused, I think it's ridiculous.

Just so you know.

So what do you think foreigners with Thai wife and children should do?

Those who are too old to get any insurance?

Those who are too poor to afford insurance?

Are you suggesting they should desert their wife and family and move back to their home country?

What would you suggest they do?

In most civilised countries married foreigners already living in that country are allowed citizenship.

............please don't be overly offended when I point out that you should have thought of that before you committed all your assets to the country.

A country that has a track record of making it clear that you are tolerated but not welcome.

What of the man who didn't plan to stay here, but his Thai partner deliberately became pregnant, and he chose to honour his parental obligations?

"What of the man who didn't plan to stay here, but his Thai partner deliberately became pregnant ..."

Somehow I think he may have had a "hand" in the process. You do understand how pregnancies get started. No?

" ...and he chose to honour his parental obligations?"

... and expects the government to give him free stuff so his parental obligations get shifted onto them. Someone didn't leave his nanny-state mentality behind.

[Morakot]

A while ago, some members of parliament were pushing the idea, that

long-term Farang-residents as well as Farang-tourists must have

mandatory health-insurance to cover their stay in Thailand.

Hard to believe that this notion would only apply to Westerners.

[Suradit69]

The topic - OP - is about mandatory health insurance for farangs who are residents OR tourists.

The answer, I guess, is that all Farangs who are 70 or older go back to their home countries, and anyone who doesn't have health insurance which covers him while a tourist in Thailand won't be admitted.

I can't see Thailand doing that to its tourist industry. Can't say about retirement visas.

There are so, so, so many reasons to not tie up all of one's assets in a corrupt place where at best he is tolerated as a guest. I will never fail to maintain residency in my home country, and be prepared to land there at any time.

"...and be prepared to land there at any time."

Paying for insurance is normally considered a way to preserve one's assets, not tie them up, certainly not all of them.

Hopefully if you become suddenly ill or have an accident and are hospitalized in this "corrupt place" that you or your home country will pick up the tab for medical care and/or pay to have you evacuated by air, back home to the place that is corruption-free and where you'll be received like a long lost brother rather than tolerated as a drain on the stretched medical facilities.

[Keith67]

1. It should be mandatory.

2. Under no circumstances should they extend the 30 baht scheme to farangs.

It's a scheme for the Thai working class and poor, not a scheme to assist farangs in lifestyle decisions.

I think it's ridiculous.......RIDICULOUS!......that anyone in all conscience would try to use up the few precious resources available to the Thai poor.

Just in case your confused, I think it's ridiculous.

Just so you know.

I suppose I better go put my flame proof suit on now. Oh well.

Mr Blether

You and i had a recent disscussion with regards to the healthcare situation in Thailand and the eventual outcome was basically some Thai hospitals for local Thais were good some were not due to under funding and other issues, so how could the not so good hospitals be improved?, in my opinion quite easily, here's how.

As you stated in our disscussion Thai hospitals are underfunded and understaffed for reasons i find include;

• The average Thai pays no healthcare costs apart from the option of the B30 card, this works well as i stated in some cases.
• The average village located Thai works for B2-300 per day, this money is paid as a cash in hand payment with no Tax or national contribution to healthcare.
• The Thai health syatem will rely on payouts from the government to subsidise these local hospitals but without the goverment obtaining payment for earnings from the vast majority of the population.

So based on these points if a system were to be put in place where Expats could if so desired apply for a similar system to the B30 Thai system with a monthly premium of maybe B100 it should generate a substantial amout of funding toward the streched Thai system, the system would cover sickness but as with Thais accidents would incur costs.

A system of this nature would in effect need a large number of expats to join to make it work, this would only happen if the hospitals in their area were to a standard where cleanliness and care were an acceptable level. My opinion being a system of this nature would mean the hospitals that fall way below the cleanliness and care that should be reasonably expected would have work to do the ones that do not then their previous efforts would pay off.

A system of this nature would also benefit the Thais as their hospitals should theoreticaly improve, also remembering the expat element in Thailand are not usually the type that run off to the hospital because they sneeze 2 times in a day.

[ericthai]

1. It should be mandatory.

2. Under no circumstances should they extend the 30 baht scheme to farangs.

It's a scheme for the Thai working class and poor, not a scheme to assist farangs in lifestyle decisions.

I think it's ridiculous.......RIDICULOUS!......that anyone in all conscience would try to use up the few precious resources available to the Thai poor.

Just in case your confused, I think it's ridiculous.

Just so you know.

So what do you think foreigners with Thai wife and children should do?

Those who are too old to get any insurance?

Those who are too poor to afford insurance?

Are you suggesting they should desert their wife and family and move back to their home country?

What would you suggest they do?

In most civilised countries married foreigners already living in that country are allowed citizenship.

Who's saying you cant get citizenship in Thailand? You can if you meet the requirements as in any other country!