1 minute ago, Bulldozer Dawn said:

Why is every one fearful of them raising the retirement extension amount up from 800K THB.  The first thing they will do is just require everyone to show that they are SPENDING 800K per year.  That will wipe out 60-70 percent of all retired expats right there.  Especially the ones scraping by in Nakon Nowhere.

 

then they will start taxing the spent 800k. that will wipe out another 80% of the remaining 30%. then beer prices will fall. 

I wonder if we will have the same commentry if/when the US Fed Reserve raises its rate. Or better still an unexpetedly close, or delayed outcome, or disputed outcome, or even decisive undesirable economically outcome, in November from the US presidential election. May even get the double whammy in same month. What was the old curse..."may you live in intetesting times".

2 hours ago, kanderson said:

 

I don't spend that much.  Sometimes I do - admitted.  I live in Issan.

 

There are people who don't feel "right" unless they are spending "up" to a level. 

 

I guess you don't have that problem. 

 

I think that's a good thing.

 

 

If you are very nervous about the Pound/Baht rate you can watch it in real time here:

 

Live Thai Baht Exchange Rates

 

1 hour ago, Bulldozer Dawn said:

Why is every one fearful of them raising the retirement extension amount up from 800K THB.  The first thing they will do is just require everyone to show that they are SPENDING 800K per year.  That will wipe out 60-70 percent of all retired expats right there.  Especially the ones scraping by in Nakon Nowhere.

 

Don't think that it won't happen, they are already getting warmed up with the minimum of 1000THB per day for Chinese tourists. 

 

But don't fret, Cambodia now offers a 3 year multiple entry visa.

Why is it people belive you have to spend x amount here and if you don't your suddenly scraping by in x place. Total rubish if people don't want to flash the cash and live quite happily in the villages what is the problem. Is it becoming a two tier expat community now the city dwellers v the village dwellers I bloody hope not. If you want to flash the cash go for it spend away your brass. But don't criticise they ones who don't want to. Retirement is just that kicking back and relaxing on the hard earned pension/s we have worked bloody hard for some have more than others but we all live within our means.

6 hours ago, Chicog said:

 

Well apparently the literacy level would drop.

Listen if they are so smart how come they do not have pot to pee in.

5 minutes ago, Deepinthailand said:

Why is it people belive you have to spend x amount here and if you don't your suddenly scraping by in x place. Total rubish if people don't want to flash the cash and live quite happily in the villages what is the problem. Is it becoming a two tier expat community now the city dwellers v the village dwellers I bloody hope not. If you want to flash the cash go for it spend away your brass. But don't criticise they ones who don't want to. Retirement is just that kicking back and relaxing on the hard earned pension/s we have worked bloody hard for some have more than others but we all live within our means.

 

For the record I now live in Nakon Nowwhere (by the sea) and could not be happier.  I think you are missing my point.  Would you still be happy here if the requirement became a minimum spend of 800K per year and not just a minimum of 800K in the bank?

8 hours ago, elgordo38 said:

Yes she is in a class all by herself.

Pantsuit Power!

 

It's all a lesson regarding the merits of internationally diversified investment trusts, or even just FTSE100 shares. The capital value is up, but the pound value of the dividends is up a lot. The companies will soon be declaring big dividend increases as all those pounds, euros, dollars, yen and yuan get turned into (many more) pounds sterling. Now admittedly if you then go sterling-baht you're no better off than you were a year ago. But then again, you're no worse off either. 

No big deal if CM looses some Brits, is it?

Brexit
What a chancer. Do you honestly believe that the pound will not bounce back? Brexit was the best thing that happened in the UK Mr Moneybags!!

People like you brag about your own country but live elsewhere !!!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

7 hours ago, Jack Mountain said:

So maybe the Thai will decide to lower the 800K barrier? Maybe not, just an idea.

You are a dreamer right and why should the Thais reduce there requirements to accommodate someone living on the margin. The brits I know who will be hurting are the ones applying for extension of stay on monthly income

29 minutes ago, Bulldozer Dawn said:

If you are very nervous about the Pound/Baht rate you can watch it in real time here:

 

Live Thai Baht Exchange Rates

 

This should come with a warning  ' not for those of a nervous disposition'

10 hours ago, KhonKaenKowboy said:

Things must be pretty bad over there, it looks like PM May can,t afford to go to the dentist.  

 

Yes, the £ to ฿ rate is affecting us pretty bad.  But, it could be worse.  We could be Americans.

"Are UK ex-pats worried about failing to meet the Thai government's 800,000 baht savings or income requirement because their pensions have been devalued so much?"

 

No.

 

john

7 minutes ago, jonwilly said:

"Are UK ex-pats worried about failing to meet the Thai government's 800,000 baht savings or income requirement because their pensions have been devalued so much?"

 

No.

 

john

 

Those who have 800,000+ Bht  in a Thai bank will not be affected. However those relying on income for their extension/living expenses might suffer.

9 hours ago, Baerboxer said:

Check your % Joe. That's a 17% fall. 

 

Most pundits were suggesting the pound was too high even before Brexit and forecasting a much lower rate by the end of the year against the USD. Anticipating a FED interest rate increase.

 

Many were predicting a GBP dollar rate of 1.20 by year end. It was trading at 1.45 to 1.49 range before Bexit and had strengthened a little. 

 

The rate against the ThB is down by a similar %. 

 

Very hard to predict FX with all the nuances and surprises including trader thinking. But budgeting at 1.20 to 1.25 at the moment seems reasonable. 

 

It was not so long ago that some were predicting the USD was down the pan, going to collapse and take the world down with it. 

I predict it will go up again LOL. There's just as much chance it will as go down IMO.

 

You think you guys have it tough. The AUD dropped 37% against the USD from early 2012 to early 2016.  From 2014 - 2016 it dropped 27%.

 

You will survive. Eventually you get used to the new rate.

 

A lot of guys can make up the loss by not being quite so generous...e.g. like not buying so many houses and/or cars for their Thai partners.

 

All I know is this. Being a Brit and a having my pension income from England, my bank savings interest has been dropping steadily over the years and toppled by the crap bank £ exchange rates, my income has been falling month by month.

 

We can managed but now have to count those pennies and watch what we spend.

13 hours ago, CNXBKKMAN said:

For somebody only just making the 800k with a 50 baht exchange rate then then they will have a problem at 43 or lower. I am sure there will be people in this situation. 

      I don't think anybody will be shocked if it goes lower but it when it all doom and gloom things get oversold and it could be a great time to be buying pounds if you have a lot of THB. 

     I do remember a similar exchange rate in 93/94 but everything cost so much less. Restaurants, beer , food was easily half the price of now .

You have my sympathies.

When we returned to Thailand to retire five years ago, the Aussie Dollar was getting almost 33 Baht, it is now, and has been for some time, hanging around 25-26 Baht. As my wife is Thai, I only have to have 400K Baht in the Bank, which I leave there year after year but now the Oz Aged Pension doesn't buy anything like it used to in Thailand.

3 hours ago, mamborobert said:

I wonder if we will have the same commentry if/when the US Fed Reserve raises its rate. Or better still an unexpetedly close, or delayed outcome, or disputed outcome, or even decisive undesirable economically outcome, in November from the US presidential election. May even get the double whammy in same month. What was the old curse..."may you live in intetesting times".

When the Fed raises rates the dollar will strengthen especially against  the Bt. and other Developing countries.

" Close, delayed, disputed, decisive?" Deep breaths.

what is the whammy?

 

6 hours ago, hmficc said:

I think we will see many Brits moving to Cambodia or the poorer countries in Africa.

<deleted>......!!!!! Get a grip most of us are here because we have planned for our futures and live as normal as we can regardless of nationality, the only nation I saw invading " the poorer countries of Africa" was the U.S. In Somalia in 93 and look how that turned out! Not's let forget Iraq, Afghanistan....sorry got carried away there! But hey so did the U.S.!!!!

10 hours ago, sanemax said:

I have lost 20 % of my income recently .

I completely gave up drinking .

I used to spend 40 % of my income on alcohol .

I m 20 % better off and 6 kilos lighter .

And healthier and happier

You could have been 40% better off !

11 hours ago, chiang mai said:

 

He does have a point, as indelicate as it may seem.

Im not sure he does have much of a point . Even if the annual requirement was say only 500,000 I would guess that would be comfortably above the median wage for a Thai family. If one is not a burden on the state , what is the problem ?

6 minutes ago, joecoolfrog said:

Im not sure he does have much of a point . Even if the annual requirement was say only 500,000 I would guess that would be comfortably above the median wage for a Thai family. If one is not a burden on the state , what is the problem ?

I don't think they are interested in guests "who are not a burden to the state". That's a very low bar - they want "quality" big spenders that are easy to fleece.

3 minutes ago, tropo said:

I don't think they are interested in guests "who are not a burden to the state". That's a very low bar - they want "quality" big spenders that are easy to fleece.

 

A nasty "Thai bashing" comment which has no basis in fact.

 

 When where you last "fleeced" ?

59 minutes ago, tropo said:

I don't think they are interested in guests "who are not a burden to the state". That's a very low bar - they want "quality" big spenders that are easy to fleece.

 

Of course, that depends on in what sense you use the term "fleece:" do you mean the shearing of the outer coat of money that leaves the tourist perhaps more exposed to sunburn, but, still alive; or, do you mean the sense of "fleece" as in swindle, con, bilko, pantsoff, etc., that could result in more ominous outcomes such as balcony-jumping.

 

If you mean fleece in the first sense, then "easy to fleece" could imply a certain malleability of the tourist, a diminution of the perhaps normal instinctive struggle against being hog-tied (or whatever sheep-shearing restraint technique is called). But, it's easy to imagine this could also refer to the well-known seductive power of the Land of Smiles which, for example, so quickly can opoidize the archetypal single male traveler coming here haunted by the ghosts of testosterone past into a river of cash in spate.

 

If you mean fleece in the second sense, then your mention of "are not a burden to the state" is a bit enigmatic: do you mean to imply that the state (the nation) is complicit in either fleecing, or enabling fleecing ? Should we add "benignly indifferent," or, "doesn't give a rats ass unless/until it affects the 'bottom line'," to that rather binary hypothesis ? One can well imagine, since it is the business of states to tax, that a state could enable fleecing in order to tax it, while not, officially, endorsing fleecing ... after all, total contradiction between explicit values and actual behavior is in the very nature of states, as well as the fervent denial of that fact, and the inversion of the denial into the enactment of patriotism, and the blaming of victims

 

But, before we cast LOS into Circe's Island (but, with wandering heroes turned to sheep, not pigs), shouldn't we ask if there aren't many of the recipients of the second kind of fleecing (that goes more than wool-deep) who actually come here ready, and willing, to be fleeced ?

 

Of course, this poor lame soi-dog of a synthesis of Orang and Human souls and consciousness who dares to trample your blades of grass now acknowledges there are untold depths to this topic which we have only scratched the fleas on the surface of, and admits that both our natures (particularly the human) have a lot more wool-gathering to do before the ultimate self-fleecing renders us able to see our truly pathetic nakedness.

 

from both of us, ~o:37;

 

p.s. if you are blissfully unaware of  our dual nature: you can upgrade your bliss without uninstalling your unawareness by viewing our previous descriptions of the singularity that united us in odd-fellow co-habitation in an aging (human form ... unfortunately the Orang form had to drop the body) meat-package:

 

the way we were, the way we are

 

 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, joecoolfrog said:

Im not sure he does have much of a point . Even if the annual requirement was say only 500,000 I would guess that would be comfortably above the median wage for a Thai family. If one is not a burden on the state , what is the problem ?

 

There is no good reason why Thailand should offer long term visa's to low spenders, at some point they become a liability which defeats the purpose of allowing them to stay here. Even 800k a year is very low internationally and one that hasn't changed for a long time, increasing the figure to say 1.5 million baht would reduce losses caused by non-payment of medical fees for example and reduce government risk.

I think they will require foreigners to prove they have medical insurance, before they raise the savings amount.  The EU has been doing it for years, and the policy costs are reasonable.  Also, consider that raising the savings requirement wouldn't prevent any losses from those under 50, and/or those on tourist/ed visas.  Most of the motorcycle suicide pilots are under 50....and most of those types don't even live to be 50.

1 minute ago, KhonKaenKowboy said:

I think they will require foreigners to prove they have medical insurance, before they raise the savings amount.  The EU has been doing it for years, and the policy costs are reasonable.

 

Policy costs are reasonable for whom, at what age? Thai insurance companies will not insure health past age 65.

42 minutes ago, orang37 said:

 

Of course, that depends on in what sense you use the term "fleece:" do you mean the shearing of the outer coat of money that leaves the tourist perhaps more exposed to sunburn, but, still alive; or, do you mean the sense of "fleece" as in swindle, con, bilko, pantsoff, etc., that could result in more ominous outcomes such as balcony-jumping.

 

If you mean fleece in the first sense, then "easy to fleece" could imply a certain malleability of the tourist, a diminution of the perhaps normal instinctive struggle against being hog-tied (or whatever sheep-shearing restraint technique is called). But, it's easy to imagine this could also refer to the well-known seductive power of the Land of Smiles which, for example, so quickly can opoidize the archetypal single male traveler coming here haunted by the ghosts of testosterone past into a river of cash in spate.

 

If you mean fleece in the second sense, then your mention of "are not a burden to the state" is a bit enigmatic: do you mean to imply that the state (the nation) is complicit in either fleecing, or enabling fleecing ? Should we add "benignly indifferent," or, "doesn't give a rats ass unless/until it affects the 'bottom line'," to that rather binary hypothesis ? One can well imagine, since it is the business of states to tax, that a state could enable fleecing in order to tax it, while not, officially, endorsing fleecing ... after all, total contradiction between explicit values and actual behavior is in the very nature of states, as well as the fervent denial of that fact, and the inversion of the denial into the enactment of patriotism, and the blaming of victims

 

But, before we cast LOS into Circe's Island (but, with wandering heroes turned to sheep, not pigs), shouldn't we ask if there aren't many of the recipients of the second kind of fleecing (that goes more than wool-deep) who actually come here ready, and willing, to be fleeced ?

 

Of course, this poor lame soi-dog of a synthesis of Orang and Human souls and consciousness who dares to trample your blades of grass now acknowledges there are untold depths to this topic which we have only scratched the fleas on the surface of, and admits that both our natures (particularly the human) have a lot more wool-gathering to do before the ultimate self-fleecing renders us able to see our truly pathetic nakedness.

 

from both of us, ~o:37;

 

p.s. if you are blissfully unaware of  our dual nature: you can upgrade your bliss without uninstalling your unawareness by viewing our previous descriptions of the singularity that united us in odd-fellow co-habitation in an aging (human form ... unfortunately the Orang form had to drop the body) meat-package:

 

the way we were, the way we are

 

LOL. You have too much time on your hands. I don't take posting here nearly as seriously as you obviously do... and I didn't make the "burden to the country" comment. I was quoting another poster.

 

However the meaning is very simple: The person brings in enough money to cover their costs while living in Thailand, with little to spare.

 

I won't expand on what I mean by "fleecing". Most will understand what I'm talking about.

 

 

http://www.insubuy.com/schengen-insurance/

seems to work well for these 26 countries....why would you have to buy it from a Thai company?