Govt approves 10 year visas for foreigners over 50

[bokningar]

58 minutes ago, rabas said:

Eldery people with good insurance can speed a lot on medical.

5555 most people can do that if they want and can find a  amphetamine  dealer   

[digibum]

14 hours ago, Peterw42 said:

No mater what the financial requirement are for a visa/extension, the actual monthly spend will remain the same.

Just because the requirements go up, it doesn't mean retirees start eating lobster for breakfast.

Like tourists, there are a few that do it on the cheap, but they are still spending. A Thai person is getting the money.

Most retiree's are already well off. They already spend lots.They eat out 7 days a week, they cant eat out 8 days a week.

I know some rich retirees that spend nothing, I also know some poor retirees that are spending a bomb.

 

 

 

 

 

Very true.  There is no requirement to spend this money.  But having it means that it's either being spent or saved for a rainy day which might be medical expenses.  If one is making just enough to survive and their monthly nut is equal to their monthly income there is nothing to cover life's unexpected emergencies which means that the Thai government might get stuck with the bill. 

 

[digibum]

14 hours ago, i claudius said:

So does that mean that the thousands of old married guys who cannot meet the requirements have to leave their family's and go home. Leaving them destitute?

Sent from my ASUS_T00J using Tapatalk
 

 

No.  And that's why so much of the groaning by the old guys is falling on deaf ears.  

 

First, you can obtain a different type of visa, a marriage visa for instance.  Heck, take some Thai language classes and actually learn the language of the country you've decided to live in.  Lots of other options.  

 

Second, you could decide to go back home where there are normally social programs in place to help close any earnings gaps.  I mean, chances are that you're not the only guy in the whole country who is in a similar situation so how are all the old guys back home making do?  

 

 

[newnative]

11 minutes ago, digibum said:

 

No.  And that's why so much of the groaning by the old guys is falling on deaf ears.  

 

First, you can obtain a different type of visa, a marriage visa for instance.  Heck, take some Thai language classes and actually learn the language of the country you've decided to live in.  Lots of other options.  

 

Second, you could decide to go back home where there are normally social programs in place to help close any earnings gaps.  I mean, chances are that you're not the only guy in the whole country who is in a similar situation so how are all the old guys back home making do?  

 

 

Or, you can just keep doing the current 1 year extension, which isn't going away.

[digibum]

14 hours ago, Peterw42 said:

I think this "rich guys in, poor guys out" mantra is rubbish. Most truly wealthy people are rich and stay rich because they dont spend money. People with close to no money usually blow the lot, people who think they are rich usually blow the lot showing off.

Its possible a lot of people will qualify and take up the new visa, and still live on mama noodles.

 

Actually, most wealthy people control their spending and put what they save in income producing assets like real estate, bonds, etc.  

 

People who aren't wealthy do things like consider their car or motorcycle as an asset (it's a depreciating asset that will eventually have a value of $0) or plunk down 100% cash to purchase a home which is generating no revenue and while it can appreciate the appreciation can only be realized when you sell it (and if you were to sell it you would have no place to live).  

 

So many people would be so much better off buying a piece of real estate back in their home country and renting it out than using all of their savings to purchase a plot of land in Thailand that generates zero income.  

 

I mean, take someone who has purchased a home in Issan for $50K USD cash.  They could have used that as a down payment on a $250,000 home back in their own country and when all is said and done, after paying for property management, capex, maintenance, mortgage, etc, they should be able to realize at least $250 a month in profit.  And because they have a property manager, all they have to do is sit back and collect the checks.  

 

Over time, rent increases kick in and that $250 becomes $275 and then $300 and so on because most of your big costs like the mortgage are fixed costs so most of the rental increase falls right through to the bottom line.  

 

I know $250 doesn't seem like a lot but, unfortunately, wealth is accumulated over time and retirees don't have that luxury.  But $250 a month is better than $0 a month plowing that money into a piece of land that generates nothing.  

 

I know, but I own my own home and can just live out my days . . . blah, blah, blah. . . well, the truth is you can't afford even that lifestyle.  Yes, you can plow the cash into buying a house because you've probably already made a lifetime of other bad financial decisions if you're at the retirement finish line and relying 100% on government checks the truth of the matter is you need income more than you need the ideal lifestyle.  

 

People who aren't wealthy also do things like ignore the fact that they are receiving retirement benefits in a mature economy with a low growth rate and trying to live in a country with a high growth rate (though Thailand has shot themselves in the foot as of late which has put a damper on their GDP growth).  The rate of inflation in the high growth economy will surely outpace the cost of living increases that they receive in a low growth rate economy thus eventually the gap will increase to a point where they can no longer afford to live in the high growth rate economy.  

 

Wealthy people plan for the future.  People who don't become wealthy prefer to be victims.  

 

[digibum]

10 hours ago, mcfish said:

LISTEN UP everybody

 

I just did a 90 day report at Jomtien and when that was done I asked the lovely lady immigration officer about the 10 year visa

 

The ANSWER?

 

Yes its currently being processed so sounds like it will happen

 

I then asked will it replace my retirement extension?

 

the ANSWER?

NO 

 

her exact words..up to you ,can stay on retirement extension or go 10 year(5x5).up to you!

 

 

Bro, come on.  We all know that in Thailand the answer you get from anybody can change from day to day from person to person.  Don't go and post this as definitive proof.  It's a single data point.  That's it.  

 

You spoke to an immigration officer about a regulation that hasn't been published yet and you think that the answer they gave you is, what, legally binding?  Are you going to go in there and demand to be exempt because this immigration officer told you something different?  

 

The regs will be what they are when they are published.  Until then, speculation here, or even by immigration officers, is valued at less than zero.  

[Jingthing]

16 minutes ago, digibum said:

 

...

 

Wealthy people plan for the future.  People who don't become wealthy prefer to be victims.  

 

This is a thread about visa changes.

If there is no choice, many of us won't be able to meet the 100K income requirement, or be able or willing to deposit 3 million baht. 

Then there is the health insurance thing ... can of worms and structured in a strange way too (what's up with that OUTPATIENT part of it ...).

For those preaching right wing pop psychology about the moral superiority of wealthy people and how pathetic less wealthy people are ("victims"), please give us a break, and go to an Ayn Rand forum or something. 

I'm sure there's a financial requirement level almost everyone here couldn't meet either.

Feeling smug and gloating that you can make this new level is rather crass. So you might have mo' money, but whether you have CLASS is another matter.

Edited November 25, 2016 by Jingthing

[roamer]

3 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

This is a thread about visa changes.

If there is no choice, many of us won't be able to meet the 100K income requirement, or be able or willing to deposit 3 million baht. 

Then there is the health insurance thing ... can of words.

For those preaching right wing pop psychology about the moral superiority of wealthy people, please don't bother. 

I'm sure there's a financial requirement level almost everyone here couldn't meet either.

Feeling smug and gloating that you can make this new level is rather crass. So you might have money, but whether you have CLASS is another matter.

Sounding more like Oscar Wilde every day Jingthing .

[digibum]

57 minutes ago, newnative said:

Or, you can just keep doing the current 1 year extension, which isn't going away.

 

Another yahoo claiming to know something definitively when that is nothing is definitive at this point.  

 

[roamer]

2 hours ago, i claudius said:

Years ago I used to get cover for a preixisting condition when I came here ,it was very expensive and lasted only 2 weeks, no way will you get 6 months

Sent from my ASUS_T00J using Tapatalk
 

 

Doesn't have to be the case. Asthma is one example where you can still get cover for extended periods and there are many others. Depends on the ailment, history of hospitalisation etc. The advent of very sophisticated algorithms has made this a much more competitive business than it used to be with some good specialist underwriters.  

[whitemouse]

4 minutes ago, digibum said:

 

Another yahoo claiming to know something definitively when that is nothing is definitive at this point.  

 

 

 

Now you are calling a poster here a yahoo? What's wrong with you, guy? 

[elviajero]

6 minutes ago, digibum said:

Another yahoo claiming to know something definitively when that is nothing is definitive at this point. 

It is definitive that no proposal or announcement has been made regarding 1 year extensions of stay based on retirement, therefore, anyone can definitively state that the current 1 year extension based on retirement is not going away based on this proposal for a new visa.

[tropo]

2 minutes ago, digibum said:

 

Another yahoo claiming to know something definitively when that is nothing is definitive at this point.  

 

 

The clues all point toward the current system remaining unchanged.

 

I'm 100% certain myself, after considering all the info we've been given. You choose whatever level of certainly you want - up to you. There's no need to call the more confident among us "Yahoos".

 

One thing is 100% certain. If this new visa replaces the old system for 14 target nationalities - those nationalities will become hard to find in Thailand. Any still here will be quite lonely. The ones still left will soon head out as the other nationalities still left will stink them out. All facilities built to make their stay comfortable (imported food, restaurants) will dry up.

 

The way I see it, Thailand has never been of much interest to affluent people. It's a low-budget retirement destination for people who want to get more bang for their retirement buck. If I became affluent tomorrow, I'd be on the next plane out.

 

 

[mcfish]

 
Bro, come on.  We all know that in Thailand the answer you get from anybody can change from day to day from person to person.  Don't go and post this as definitive proof.  It's a single data point.  That's it.  
 
You spoke to an immigration officer about a regulation that hasn't been published yet and you think that the answer they gave you is, what, legally binding?  Are you going to go in there and demand to be exempt because this immigration officer told you something different?  
 
The regs will be what they are when they are published.  Until then, speculation here, or even by immigration officers, is valued at less than zero.  

Get some rest bro

Sent from my SC-01D using Tapatalk

[digibum]

14 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

This is a thread about visa changes.

If there is no choice, many of us won't be able to meet the 100K income requirement, or be able or willing to deposit 3 million baht. 

Then there is the health insurance thing ... can of worms and structured in a strange way too (what's up with that OUTPATIENT part of it ...).

For those preaching right wing pop psychology about the moral superiority of wealthy people and how pathetic less wealthy people are ("victims"), please give us a break, and go to an Ayn Rand forum or something. 

I'm sure there's a financial requirement level almost everyone here couldn't meet either.

Feeling smug and gloating that you can make this new level is rather crass. So you might have mo' money, but whether you have CLASS is another matter.

 

Thank you for illustrating what victim behavior looks like.  

 

I'm not gloating at all.  But people with a victim mentality often mistake facts for gloating.  Facts are like kryptonite for poor people because they don't want to hear them.  

 

I have said over and over and over again that I can sympathize with people who are between a rock and a hard place and that I begrudge no one for their where they are financially.  

I was responding to someone that said rich people don't spend money.  Wealthy people do spend money but they tend to spend money differently and I was trying to illustrate how and why they spend money differently.  

 

But let me put this more succinctly, if I were in the shoes of someone who didn't have enough income to make the 100,000 baht requirement, instead of thinking about leaving my wife destitute or running off to another country (only delaying the inevitable since inflation and exchange rates catch up to you eventually unless you die before they do), I would be thinking, "How can I get more money?"  

 

The difference between 67,000 baht and 100,000 baht is 33,000 baht.  How can you make 33,000 baht a month?  That's just shy of $1,000 USD.  

 

Can you sell your house and buy something smaller and invest the difference and get $1,000 a month?  Maybe you can sell your property outright and rent since the requirement isn't how much is left over at the end of the month but how much is coming in?  You could invest the proceeds from the sale of the property and have additional income.  

 

Can you work online?  Can you start an online business?  Granted, there's some debate about whether or not working online violates any laws in Thailand but so far most of the lawyers I have read say that it does not so if this is standing between you and and being able to stay with your family, personally I would do anything it took.  

 

But that's the difference between me and a lot of people here.  I think "How" and they think about fleeing while blaming everyone else for their financial woes.  

 

So yes, the fact of the matter is that there are those who look at retirement and say, "How much does it cost to live the lifestyle I want in retirement and how do I get there?" and there are those who say, "This is how much the government is going to give me, where can I live?"  

 

Of course those that opt for the later choice are going to have a victim mentality because for them everything is controlled by external factors.  How much the government gives them.  How much it costs to live in Thailand.  Everything is external.  

 

Those that choose the former, tend to think of the world in terms of what they can control.  Maybe if I don't have this Starbucks every morning for the next 5 years until I retire I can sack away a little additional cash.  How can I create passive streams of income that will help take care of me in retirement?  

 

This isn't about elitist views, this is just fact.  It's math.  Save more, spend less, compound the savings over time and you create wealth.  

 

 

[digibum]

44 minutes ago, elviajero said:

It is definitive that no proposal or announcement has been made regarding 1 year extensions of stay based on retirement, therefore, anyone can definitively state that the current 1 year extension based on retirement is not going away based on this proposal for a new visa.

 

No they can't.  All they can say is that no announcement regarding the 1 year visa extension of stay based on retirement has been made.  We can therefore assume that at this point it's unlikely there will be any changes.  

 

Words like "assume" and "unlikely" massively change the context of those statements.  Until you see the new regs in writing nothing is definitive.  

 

People who make definitive statements when things are less than definitive don't do so for the benefit of the reader.  They do so to make themselves look like experts.  As such, yahoo is an appropriate term as the statements are reckless.  

 

[JetsetBkk]

3 minutes ago, digibum said:

 

 

Is that you in your avatar? Just curious.

[digibum]

38 minutes ago, mcfish said:

 

Get some rest bro

Sent from my SC-01D using Tapatalk
 

 

 

Excellent retort.  It just demonstrates that despite your desire to believe otherwise, you actually can't argue with the premise that the statements of a single immigration officer commenting on a yet unpublished new regulation have no value.  

 

If you had simply shared your experience and said that it was an additional data point, that's one thing but you put it out there as proof that the immigration office believe this to be the case.  No.  One immigration officer *thinks* this.  He won't know until the new regs are published just as none of us will.  

[mcfish]

 

Excellent retort.  It just demonstrates that despite your desire to believe otherwise, you actually can't argue with the premise that the statements of a single immigration officer commenting on a yet unpublished new regulation have no value.  

 

If you had simply shared your experience and said that it was an additional data point, that's one thing but you put it out there as proof that the immigration office believe this to be the case.  No.  One immigration officer *thinks* this.  He won't know until the new regs are published just as none of us will.  

Let's see now, a definitive answer from immigration versus a thousand chaotic responses on TV

I was there, she was definitive.

You really think immigration will only learn the details about the visa the same time we do? When it's published? How nieve are you, of course they have been fully briefed, it's their job!

Sent from my SC-01D using Tapatalk

[digibum]

1 minute ago, JetsetBkk said:

 

Is that you in your avatar? Just curious.

 

It's Randy from Trailer Park Boys.  Hilarious comedy out of Canada.  

 

 

[digibum]

6 minutes ago, mcfish said:

Let's see now, a definitive answer from immigration versus a thousand chaotic responses on TV
I was there, she was definitive.

Sent from my SC-01D using Tapatalk
 

 

Perhaps we speak two different forms of English.  Definitive means conclusive, final, ultimate.  The view of a single immigration officer commenting on a regulation which has not even been fully vetted is anything but conclusive, final, or ultimate.  

 

Let's put it another way, if you had asked that same immigration officer if it was legal for retirees to smoke weed for medicinal purposes, how conclusive, final, and ultimate do you think that would be if the police arrested you for possession of marijuana?  Or what if they stamped 80 days on your extension and that immigration officer told you that it was okay and you came back in 90 days, how conclusive, final, and ultimate do you think that immigration officer's word would be in keeping you from paying a fine? 

 

 

[JetsetBkk]

5 minutes ago, digibum said:

 

It's Randy from Trailer Park Boys.  Hilarious comedy out of Canada.  

 

 

Thanks! 10 seasons already! I'll download S01 and see how it goes.  

 

Meanwhile, back on the 10 year visa topic...

[digibum]

1 minute ago, JetsetBkk said:

 

Thanks! 10 seasons already! I'll download S01 and see how it goes.  

 

Meanwhile, back on the 10 year visa topic...

 

One season for every year on the visa.  

[mcfish]

 
Perhaps we speak two different forms of English.  Definitive means conclusive, final, ultimate.  The view of a single immigration officer commenting on a regulation which has not even been fully vetted is anything but conclusive, final, or ultimate.  
 
Let's put it another way, if you had asked that same immigration officer if it was legal for retirees to smoke weed for medicinal purposes, how conclusive, final, and ultimate do you think that would be if the police arrested you for possession of marijuana?  Or what if they stamped 80 days on your extension and that immigration officer told you that it was okay and you came back in 90 days, how conclusive, final, and ultimate do you think that immigration officer's word would be in keeping you from paying a fine? 
 
 

I edited the same time you replied

Sent from my SC-01D using Tapatalk

[elviajero]

5 minutes ago, digibum said:

No they can't.  All they can say is that no announcement regarding the 1 year visa extension of stay based on retirement has been made.  We can therefore assume that at this point it's unlikely there will be any changes.  

 

Words like "assume" and "unlikely" massively change the context of those statements.  Until you see the new regs in writing nothing is definitive.  

 

People who make definitive statements when things are less than definitive don't do so for the benefit of the reader.  They do so to make themselves look like experts.  As such, yahoo is an appropriate term as the statements are reckless.  

You're a pedant arguing over semantics.

[digibum]

36 minutes ago, elviajero said:

You're a pedant arguing over semantics.

 

Semantics is very important in regards to laws.  A single word or comma can change the entire meaning of the law.  

 

 

[digibum]

42 minutes ago, mcfish said:

I edited the same time you replied

Sent from my SC-01D using Tapatalk
 

 

Let's see, based on the numerous instances that can be cited just here on ThaiVisa of immigration officers not being aware of recent immigration law changes and general mistakes make by immigration, I'm wondering how naive you are in believing that one single interaction with a random immigration officers proves beyond any possible doubt that the law is how you think it is.  

 

Mind you, I'm not arguing that I think the law is different but I also don't believe anything said by an rank and file immigration official is authoritative anymore than I believe that someone working at the Genius Bar in an Apple Store speaks on behalf of Apple.  

[Jingthing]

I'm with the we don't know yet definitely what this is going to be brigade. It seems most logical. It's not about promoting panic or certainly that it's all gonna be alright for current level retired expats either. Why rush conclusions when there isn't enough to back them up?

[mcfish]

 
Let's see, based on the numerous instances that can be cited just here on ThaiVisa of immigration officers not being aware of recent immigration law changes and general mistakes make by immigration, I'm wondering how naive you are in believing that one single interaction with a random immigration officers proves beyond any possible doubt that the law is how you think it is.  
 
Mind you, I'm not arguing that I think the law is different but I also don't believe anything said by an rank and file immigration official is authoritative anymore than I believe that someone working at the Genius Bar in an Apple Store speaks on behalf of Apple.  

She was straight to the point and definitive. You want visa advice then go to immigration, you want an apple product go to Apple, you want legal advice go to a lawyer, you want medicine, go to a doctor. That's how the world turns... You want silly bickering over nothing come to TV LOL

Sent from my SC-01D using Tapatalk

[Jingthing]

 

Thank you for illustrating what victim behavior looks like.  

 

I'm not gloating at all.  But people with a victim mentality often mistake facts for gloating.  Facts are like kryptonite for poor people because they don't want to hear them.  

 

I have said over and over and over again that I can sympathize with people who are between a rock and a hard place and that I begrudge no one for their where they are financially.  

I was responding to someone that said rich people don't spend money.  Wealthy people do spend money but they tend to spend money differently and I was trying to illustrate how and why they spend money differently.  

 

But let me put this more succinctly, if I were in the shoes of someone who didn't have enough income to make the 100,000 baht requirement, instead of thinking about leaving my wife destitute or running off to another country (only delaying the inevitable since inflation and exchange rates catch up to you eventually unless you die before they do), I would be thinking, "How can I get more money?"  

 

The difference between 67,000 baht and 100,000 baht is 33,000 baht.  How can you make 33,000 baht a month?  That's just shy of $1,000 USD.  

 

Can you sell your house and buy something smaller and invest the difference and get $1,000 a month?  Maybe you can sell your property outright and rent since the requirement isn't how much is left over at the end of the month but how much is coming in?  You could invest the proceeds from the sale of the property and have additional income.  

 

Can you work online?  Can you start an online business?  Granted, there's some debate about whether or not working online violates any laws in Thailand but so far most of the lawyers I have read say that it does not so if this is standing between you and and being able to stay with your family, personally I would do anything it took.  

 

But that's the difference between me and a lot of people here.  I think "How" and they think about fleeing while blaming everyone else for their financial woes.  

 

So yes, the fact of the matter is that there are those who look at retirement and say, "How much does it cost to live the lifestyle I want in retirement and how do I get there?" and there are those who say, "This is how much the government is going to give me, where can I live?"  

 

Of course those that opt for the later choice are going to have a victim mentality because for them everything is controlled by external factors.  How much the government gives them.  How much it costs to live in Thailand.  Everything is external.  

 

Those that choose the former, tend to think of the world in terms of what they can control.  Maybe if I don't have this Starbucks every morning for the next 5 years until I retire I can sack away a little additional cash.  How can I create passive streams of income that will help take care of me in retirement?  

 

This isn't about elitist views, this is just fact.  It's math.  Save more, spend less, compound the savings over time and you create wealth.  

 

 

Reading that post was like smoking a Horatio Alger book in a crack pipe. You're hilarious.

Hint dude -- you can currently legally retire in Thailand with an income of 0.00 baht.

Oh wait. Also for the new 5/10 visa you can also get that with an income of ... wait for it ... 0.00 baht.