The "you Couldn't Do It In The West" Argument

[crocodilexp]

Many people on this forum argue (troll?) along the lines of "Thais have the right to do this, immigration regime is lax, people couldn't stay as easily as long in your home country".

I will argue this argument doesn't hold water at all. While this is true that western nations restrict access to people from poorer countries, let's take demographics of the visitor into account. For comparison, I'll take the USA, which is world-famous for restrictive immigration policies (many western countries, starting with Canada, are much more lax).

Key assumption: comparable demographic

Assume an average farang long stayer in Thailand spends $1000/mo and invests, or is able to invest $25.000 (1m baht) into the country. Let's assume he doesn't need to work in Thailand (otherwise could get a work permit and further dicussion is a bit pointless).

Let's take a look at the American equivalent, judged average salaries.

Looking at nominal GDP per capita (per year), USA is $40k, Thailand is $2.65k. Therefore, the ratio of salaries is about 15. Let's stack the odds in favor of Thailand, and make it 10.

So, the comparable farang in the USA would spend $10,000/mo and be ready to invest $250,000.

So, we're comparing like to like, a foreigner in the USA that are as wealthy relative to an median native as an average farang in Thailand.

Permanent residence:

USA: Green Card is available through many avenues. Investment visas start from $100k, and an investment Green Card requires $1m (in a company employing 10 people, for 3 years)... There are also H1B visas for qualified workers, and salaries are competitive. If you're making $10k/mo after tax, most likely you'll qualify. The Green Card is permanent (10 years, renewable) and offers easy path to citizenship. No visa runs, all privileges except voting.

Thailand: Offers you a work permit if you employ 4 Thais (with many other nonsensical conditions) and a path to PR in 3 years (again, with more restrictive conditions to qualify). Neither work permit, or event PR compares well with a U.S. Green Card in terms of privileges and lack of restrictions.

Winner: USA (for the comparable demographic)

Long stay tourist visa:

USA: If you're making that much money, it is possible to get a 10-year tourist visa. Each entry is up to border official, but usually 6 months at a time. I think visa runs would not really work in this case, but they are not specifically prohibited.

Thailand: The best one can get is a 3-entry 6-month tourist visa. This still requires either seeing an immigration official or doing a border run every 60+30 days .

Winner: USA (if you qualify for the 10-year tourist visa, not THAT hard, I know people who are not rich by any standard and still got it)-- 20x the visa duration and 2-3x the stay duration.

Visa runs:

USA: Nationals of 27 countries (ones wealthy enough not to be likely to stay and work illegally in the USA) can get a 90-day visa-waiver at the border. There is no limit to number of entries, or required time outside of U.S. However, border agents can, and do, ask for proof of residence abroad and intent to return (I assume not difficult if you're rich).

Thailand: 30 days per entry, at most 90 days in 180 day period . On a positive side, many more countries (42!) qualify.

Winner: USA (if you're from the 27 countries). You get 3x the stay, and no official limit on runs.

---

Hope you didn't fall asleep reading this...

Of course, this whole discussion is purely academic -- factors that influence immigration policy are vastly different in Thailand vs the USA (starting with income from foreign tourism as % of the economy...)

At the end, of course

Quality of life

Winner: Thailand. I doubt anyone would disagree (I wouldn't care much for posting here otherwise).

Edited October 13, 2006 by crocodilexp

[Firefan]

You left out all the priviledges a long stay visa/PR grants you in most Western countries. Normally health care, social security, school, libriaries, emergency social help, un-employment benefits all paid by tax payers.Also generally the right to work. In addition access to other states(US) or countries (EU) without further visa hassle.

Anyway; your point is well taken - let's not compare with Western/rich countries as it makes little sense. Cheers!

[calibanjr.]

Croc, I made the same point in another post, just omitting the 10x multiplier, used a generic X, so obviously I agree.

[cclub75]

Of course, this whole discussion is purely academic -- factors that influence immigration policy are vastly different in Thailand vs the USA (starting with income from foreign tourism as % of the economy...

Well if you really want an academic discussion, let's extrapolate illegal immigration figures in USA/Europe to Thailand !

[crocodilexp]

Well if you really want an academic discussion, let's extrapolate illegal immigration figures in USA/Europe to Thailand !

To be honest, I'd have no clue where to start Thailand does get a substantial number of illegal immigrants from Myanmar/Laos/Cambodia -- not sure how it would compare to Europe or USA (on the illegal immigrants per capita basis...).

There are about 7m illegal immigrants living in the USA, which is ~2.4% of the population (295m). I would not be terribly surprised if Thailand exceeds that.

[backflip]

"I will argue this argument doesn't hold water at all. While this is true that western nations restrict access to people from poorer countries, let's take demographics of the visitor into account. For comparison, I'll take the USA, which is world-famous for restrictive immigration policies (many western countries, starting with Canada, are much more lax)."

Your misinformation about the US immigration policy is extraordinary. You should post in the "joke" section.

[ovenman]

Your misinformation about the US immigration policy is extraordinary. You should post in the "joke" section.

Some specific examples of where crocodilexp is misinformed?

[PeaceBlondie]

You can't compare the two countries numerically. For one thing, GDP per capita in Thailand is more like $7,700, not $2,650, so I stopped reading after that. Oh, the estimated illegal alien total in the USA is often quoted at 11 million, including thousands of overstaying Thais. The official population exceeds 300 million this week.

You can't compare wages in baht to wages in dollars; there are no reliable statistics anyway.

Quality of life? This dial-up transmits at 23 kps download, 96 kps upload, in Thailand's second biggest city. Or fourth biggest city; nobody knows. Quality of life, when my CBR150 is considered a big bike, and the standard full time employed worker rides a 110cc or a 125, and eats somtam? Incomparable.

But I'm staying in Thailand.

[samran]

Want a workpermit in the EU? Then prove that no other EU citizen can do that job. It ain't easy.

Visa running in the west? Forget about it. That goes for you being a westerner from the so-called 27 rich countries. The UK would have no compunction booting out an overstaying Aussie, or one, who is eternally on holiday, and vice versa.

The US allows 90-days flat in North America for their visa waivers, so even if you cross into canada, mexico or the carribean, if you come back, you only get the time remaining. Then it is outta there fella. My wife, a citizen of a western nation, had to write of for special dispensation to re-enter the US, after she had failed to return her immigration departure card to the airline, essentially making her appear as she was overstaying.

As for the goal posts moving, I agree, that is unfair. I also think that the bar has been lowered so married couples can now use their family income for immigration extensions.

But for the run-of the mill visa runners, they unfairly expect the world.

[britmaveric]

Unfortunately yankland isnt thailand, so like comparing apples/oranges. I know where I'd rather be - thailand without a doubt.

[calibanjr.]

Demographic Issue

You CAN use numbers to roughly correlate a demographic for certain purposes. Croc used $2650 which is roughly the annual avg. salary instead of GDP, which is a relevant number (I got $2540 Thailand vs. $41400 US, 2004) from:

FROM WORLD BANK DEVELOPMENT INDICATORS 2005

http://www.finfacts.com/biz10/globalworldincomepercapita.ht

The point is that many people say, "well you couldn't just hang out in the West and live off your 1-2k a month etc.", without looking at proportionality.

As to the US immigration policy and income/investment numbers, I don't know how that works, but if someone would like to educate me and the others in a less asinine manner than backflip, I'd appreciate it.

I think it is a reasonable argument so far, without people getting defensive about it. Looks like whatever the numbers, etc. we've all chosen Tland seemingly, regardless

Edited October 13, 2006 by calibanjr.

[ovenman]

The point is that many people say, "well you couldn't just hang out in the West and live off your 1-2k a month etc.", without looking at proportionality.

Indeed. While I realize that he qualifies as super-rich so we're still not comparing apples with apples, what exactly do folks think that Mr. Big is doing in his self-imposed exile in London?

[calibanjr.]

Wonder if he's still looking for a Premiership side to buy? Did he stuff enough suitcases for that? I think that would be a semi-self-imposed exile, no?

Edited October 13, 2006 by calibanjr.

[Firefan]

I think the OP point was NOT to compare. And here we are comparing... Cheers!

[crocodilexp]

You can't compare the two countries numerically. For one thing, GDP per capita in Thailand is more like $7,700, not $2,650, so I stopped reading after that.

You are right to some extent, but just a bit hasty.

What you are referring to is GDP per capita at PPP (Purchasing Power Parity). In simplified terms, it means that an average Thai, with their $2,700 could afford as many things as someone earning $7,700 in the USA.

However, only *nominal* GDP is relevant to my argument -- a farang with their $1000/mo in Thailand can still buy as many things as a Thai for the same amount (well, almost, if it wasn't for the double pricing... )

[suiging]

For as much as it's worth, these arguments have merit from either perspective, however the one fact that is indisputable is ......TIT

They will do what they like as they are a sovereign country who do not give a rat's ass for the USA or the EU. One of the last bastions of national pride left in the world, and i kinda respect that.

[johnnyk]

A story from the aftermath of the Viet Nam war...

Pete Peterson, Wall St. honcho, VN POW, Clinton's Ambassador to VN visited VN after the war and met with a high-ranking VN official.

Petersonmentioned to the VN official that the VC/NVA had not won a single battle against the US throughout the entire war.

The VN official pointed out the window to the VN flag saying, "That may be true, it is also irrelevant."

Thailand?

Their country, their rules.

All the rest is whining and bleating. Get over it.

Edited October 14, 2006 by johnnyk