Only 2 Visa Exempt Entries At Border Crossings Per Calendar Year Effective Dec 31st

[jpinx]

4 minutes ago, darrendsd said:

 

You don't need to ask for proof, a simple search will confirm

Small change compared to their booze, fags and girls bills

[overherebc]

And it's good night from me.

[abcc9]

Does this include exiting by bus but entering by plane? I'll be in Thailand in Christmas and will be staying there until the 1 month exemption expires. Then I want to go to Cambodia by bus and stay there for a week and then return by plane to start another 1 month visa exemption for Thailand. Can this doable or do I have to exit by plane as well? 

Edited December 19, 2016 by abcc9

[JackThompson]

2 hours ago, abcc9 said:

Does this include exiting by bus but entering by plane? I'll be in Thailand in Christmas and will be staying there until the 1 month exemption expires. Then I want to go to Cambodia by bus and stay there for a week and then return by plane to start another 1 month visa exemption for Thailand. Can this doable or do I have to exit by plane as well? 

 

As long as you avoid Poipet, I assume the "2 entry" limit regards the Visa Exempt entry.  The only place other than Poipet preventing folks from leaving are most Myanmar crossings, unless you have a Myanmar Visa or ME Thai Visa.  You cannot get a VOA to Myanmar so would have no choice but to do an in/out.

[Maestro]

Does this include exiting by bus but entering by plane? ... 

No. It means visa-exempt entry at a land border regardless of where and how you last exited the country.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Thaivisa Connect mobile app

[notmyself]

On ‎17‎/‎12‎/‎2016 at 6:45 PM, Captain_Bob said:

Also it will adversely affect legit tourists who visit neighbouring countries and then wish to re-enter Thailand 2-3 times during their travels. 

 

Such as many backpackers who use Thailand as their'hub'

[LivinLOS]

15 hours ago, JackThompson said:

 

"High net worth" by a Thai or Swiss standard?  Thailand is attractive because it has good value for the money, compared to our home-countries.  Anyone who is not very wealthy would be foolish to squander 500K Baht on a visa - a full year of living expenses in Thailand (at 6x a minimum Thai full-time salary) - which could instead be invested or saved. 

 

They dont want people here on 40k a month.. That much is clear.. If 500k THB isnt 3 or 4 months spending, your not meeting thier desired 'quality' of tourist / long stayer.. Sorry of thats news to you, but best take that on board and adapt to it, because thats how they see it. 

 

Secondly.. Having gone back to the west this year, set up a second home, bought everything to put inside it, bought a car, done all thats needing in making a modern new place to live (electronics, utilities, kitchenware, etc etc) that like for like, with nice quality items.. The UK is cheaper than Thailand. My shopping is cheaper than Thailand. My car, my net, my phones, my TVs, my stereo, my coffee maker, my clothes, my shoes, my hobbies, my interests... Almost everything !! Eating out is less varied and more expensive, having someone cut my garden or do my laundry is more expensive, but the days of Thailand being half price the west are over. My summers back there are no more costly than my time here, I spend money a bit differently, but its not cheap v expensive its one set of interests v a different set. 

 

 

[LivinLOS]

15 hours ago, JackThompson said:

 

The fantasy about a handful of rich people and floods of Chinese solving everything is over.  Time to come back to reality, and recognize what other countries in the region have already figured out - the more people like I described who come in, the better it is for their own people, and the future of their country.

 

 

Have you looked at tourist arrival numbers for the last decade ?? Have you seen the farang ghettos that exist on Phuket, Patts, Hua hin, etc.. Seen the english teachers and nomads shopping for those sub 10k apartments ?? 

 

Thailand it seems is making a real choice.. It wants more people who can lodge 3 mil or prove an after tax >100k a month income.. Or people who will actually drop 500k.. Than people who are comparison shopping between here and cambodia, or here and PI, based on the cost of a visa, or if they have to take a 50 buck plane trip over a 30 buck bus ride. 

 

You may not agree thats best for Thailand, hell I am not saying I agree its best for Thailand.. I am saying is this is what they are very clearly doing. Good (rich) guys in Bad (poor) guys out.. This will cause some discomfort for the guys they push out, that much in inevitable. It will make Thailand less popular for budget single long stayers, normal holiday makers probably wont feel much of a difference, and there will continue to be ways, but with ever increasing problems, hassles, stresses... 

 

This is the writing thats on the wall.. Tilting at windmills will get no where.. 

[LivinLOS]

14 hours ago, overherebc said:

If someone has an income from their own country that allows them to live the life they are comfortable with what's the problem.

Talking here about the over 50's who have 65,000 a month or over and can stay on extensions happily for however long. 

 

15 hours ago, JackThompson said:

 

There is profit for Thais, and sales-taxes paid, in every baht I spend here.  No "free services" that I am aware of.  High-rollers rent limos and larger condos.  I rent taxis and a smaller condo.  There are many more like me than "high rollers."  Both are a net-gain in foreign-sourced capital.  There is no need to pick one instead of the other. 

 

Your putting it purely financial.. 

 

Your missing perhaps the social.. The BBC showing images and posting information thats to be hushed up.. The vocal complaints and exposure that farangs expect and insist on.. The upsetting of the social apple cart.. 

 

They dont want us here.. The tolerate a few of us as long as we remain cash cows.. Well the prices are going up for them to continue to tolerate that.. 

[LivinLOS]

12 hours ago, JackThompson said:

 

In a nutshell, there are many examples on this forum of what I describe.  If you can provide a precise definition of what Thai immigration will classify as a "reasonable tourist," that would be the first I've heard of such a definition.

 

Reasonable tourists dont have a home here.. A wife here.. Etc.. Those are clearly long stayers.

 

If you have a wife.. get a visa.. 

If your over 50 get a visa..

If your wealthy get a visa..

 

If your a tourist visiting briefly.. From a G7 country.. You can occasionally get a visa exempt entry. These are not a way to base a lifestyle 'living here'. 

If your a tourist visiting extensively, from your home country, get a ME tourist visa.. You can 'winter' here all you like, providing you go 'home' afterwards. 

 

If your under 50, dont have a wife or child, dont have enough to budget for 100k per annum but wish to simply live here ongoing ?? Well thats a problem, perhaps look at one of the alternative countries in the region. 

 

Really is that simple. 

[LivinLOS]

12 hours ago, thetruth revealer said:

but why wasting money `? do you really think that 500k is equivalent what you can get from this country at this point ?????????

 

Yes if I wasnt married I would just buy a damn visa.. Sure its an annoyance, but so is constantly worrying about the next visa rule. Its 100k a year to make it go away. 

 

The point is not if I think its worth it, or you think its worth it.. Thats the price.. Your free to use it, and have an easy life or not use it, and go to a different country for an easy life. 

 

Thats the price.. Its not a T shirt to haggle over in the night market.. Its a take it or leave ot deal. 

[JackThompson]

5 hours ago, LivinLOS said:

Have you looked at tourist arrival numbers for the last decade ?? Have you seen the farang ghettos that exist on Phuket, Patts, Hua hin, etc.. Seen the english teachers and nomads shopping for those sub 10k apartments ?? 

 

Thailand it seems is making a real choice.. It wants more people who can lodge 3 mil or prove an after tax >100k a month income.. Or people who will actually drop 500k.. Than people who are comparison shopping between here and cambodia, or here and PI, based on the cost of a visa, or if they have to take a 50 buck plane trip over a 30 buck bus ride. 

 

You may not agree thats best for Thailand, hell I am not saying I agree its best for Thailand.. I am saying is this is what they are very clearly doing. Good (rich) guys in Bad (poor) guys out.. This will cause some discomfort for the guys they push out, that much in inevitable. It will make Thailand less popular for budget single long stayers, normal holiday makers probably wont feel much of a difference, and there will continue to be ways, but with ever increasing problems, hassles, stresses... 

 

This is the writing thats on the wall.. Tilting at windmills will get no where.. 

 

The big-lie being spread about, is that "40K-ers" not willing to blow 500K on a temporary visa are ghetto-dwellers.  This is propaganda often used to push the Elite-Visa scheme, then echoed by those who seem to be unaware of the actual cost of living in most of Thailand.  

 

When I first began looking for longer-term accommodations, I did look at apartments in all sorts of places.  Some of those would be the "farang ghettos" you describe.  Those people are definitely not spending 40K Baht/mo in Thailand - maybe 1/2 that.  Enforcing the 800K / 65K/mo rule - by excluding the "agent" workarounds - would take care of this problem.

 

For 40K Baht/mo, you can live in a nice condo on a high floor overlooking the ocean, buy quality food, eat-out a few times/wk, and do some traveling.   I.E. - live far better than you would on the same foreign-sourced income in the West - which is the point of not living "back home."

 

This does not mean a person only earns 40K /mo - only that this is their budgeted-spend, allowing for savings.  The bottom line for everyone is: no money = no freedom; no savings = no future.  Excluding the "40K-ers" means eliminating  the vast majority of Thailand's long-stayer foreign-capital income.

 

The policies of our home countries on many fronts is not helpful.  Our national immigration policies have turned our passport-holders from known-good-commodities into possible threats.  Diplomat-statements criticizing the current govt foolishly alienate our long-time SE Asian ally against the communists.  The policy-permitted sellout to China (communists) by our nation's corporations undermines Thailand's national-security and export potential (requiring they let in low-wage laborers to produce goods for export).  The use of NGOs and "press freedom" orgs to push an "anti-Thai-sovereignty" (globalist) propaganda-agenda threatens the very existence of Thailand as a country for Thais (as they no doubt witness this fate happening in our own home-nations).

 

But it is not the 40K-crowd which is involved in the anti-Thai activities of these Western-funded orgs and agendas - it is elites.  Elites are precisely the ones who fund the propaganda and policies in question - not "middle-class Westerners."  Why boot out the wrong segment of the Western population by targeting us?  What is the real reason for these policies?  Are we just "collateral damage" in a larger battle?  The "globalist" enemies of Thai sovereignty do not even socialize with us.

 

Ocams razor says to look for the simplest explanation.  Money / corruption is usually at the root of policies that harm a people.  The "Anti-40K-ers" certainly don't seem to care what happens to ordinary Thais as a result of their efforts to prevent "non-elites" from spending foreign-sourced capital in the country, to spite that income being multiple-times more income than a small group of elites could ever spend.  Are some "on the take" from Elite-Visa profits?

 

The big-lie that "40K-ers" without 500K to spend on visas are somehow ghetto-dwellers - whether borne of intent (cut of the elite-visa-loot) or ignorance - is a windmill we can eliminate, by not tolerating its propagation.

Edited December 20, 2016 by JackThompson

[jpinx]

2 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

 

The big-lie being spread about, is that "40K-ers" not willing to blow 500K on a temporary visa are ghetto-dwellers.  This is propaganda often used to push the Elite-Visa scheme, then echoed by those who seem to be unaware of the actual cost of living in most of Thailand.  

 

When I first began looking for longer-term accommodations, I did look at apartments in all sorts of places.  Some of those would be the "farang ghettos" you describe.  Those people are definitely not spending 40K Baht/mo in Thailand - maybe 1/2 that.  Enforcing the 800K / 65K/mo rule - by excluding the "agent" workarounds - would take care of this problem.

 

For 40K Baht/mo, you can live in a nice condo on a high floor overlooking the ocean, buy quality food, eat-out a few times/wk, and do some traveling.   I.E. - live far better than you would on the same foreign-sourced income in the West - which is the point of being not living "back home."

 

This does not mean a person only earns 40K /mo - only that this is their budgeted-spend, allowing for savings.  The bottom line for everyone is: no money = no freedom; no savings = no future.  Excluding the "40K-ers" means eliminating  the vast majority of Thailand's long-stayer foreign-capital income.

 

The policies of our home countries on many fronts is not helpful.  Our national immigration policies have turned our passport-holders from known-good-commodities into possible threats.  Diplomat-statements criticizing the current govt foolishly alienate our long-time SE Asian ally against the communists.  The policy-permitted sellout to China (communists) by our nation's corporations undermines Thailand's national-security and export potential (requiring they let in low-wage laborers to produce goods for export).  The use of NGOs and "press freedom" orgs to push an "anti-Thai-sovereignty" (globalist) propaganda-agenda threatens the very existence of Thailand as a country for Thais (as they no doubt witness this fate happening in our own home-nations).

 

But it is not the 40K-crowd which is involved in the anti-Thai activities of these Western-funded orgs and agendas - it is elites.  Elites are precisely the ones who fund the propaganda and policies in question - not "middle-class Westerners."  Why boot out the wrong segment of the Western population by targeting us?  What is the real reason for these policies?  Are we just "collateral damage" in a larger battle?  The "globalist" enemies of Thai sovereignty do not even socialize with us.

 

Ocams razor says to look for the simplest explanation.  Money / corruption is usually at the root of policies that harm a people.  The "Anti-40K-ers" certainly don't seem to care what happens to ordinary Thais as a result of their efforts to prevent "non-elites" from spending foreign-sourced capital in the country, to spite that income being multiple-times more income than a small group of elites could ever spend.  Are some "on the take" from Elite-Visa profits?

 

The big-lie that "40K-ers" without 500K to spend on visas are somehow ghetto-dwellers - whether borne of intent (cut of the elite-visa-loot) or ignorance - is a windmill we can eliminate, by not tolerating its propagation.

The myth continues.  This new restriction is for land-crossings only.  Considering that the comparative cost of flying or land-travel plus hotels is not so different, where is the problem?

 

 

[JackThompson]

6 minutes ago, jpinx said:

The myth continues.  This new restriction is for land-crossings only.  Considering that the comparative cost of flying or land-travel plus hotels is not so different, where is the problem?

 

Read what LivinInLos wrote, and you will see what I was responding to.

[jpinx]

15 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

 

Read what LivinInLos wrote, and you will see what I was responding to.

Fair enough - but you are obviously taking this very personally.....

"..... Why boot out the wrong segment of the Western population by targeting us? ......"

...and I can certainly sympathise and agree with some of what you say, but the reality is that we are guests in Thailand and if they don't want a certain sector of the guests that arrive, it is up to us to accept the rules or move on.   We have no "say" in what Thailand will or will not come up with next.  Our choice is to read the rules, and make the best of them, or move on.  The old adage of "Don't take anything to Thailand that you can't afford to lose." starts to bite home when the rules look like changing, and people, possibly including yourself, feel aggrieved by the insecurity of it all, but that's the reality.  Your not in Kansas/Hampshire anymore and the pre-conceptions of right and wrong are not applicable.

[JayBird]

It seems they really are moving towards their goal of the right visit for each individual.  As stated a year+ ago, they don't have a problem with people visiting, they just want them on the right visa.

 

Combined with the Embassy web sites advertising Thailand Elite, it seems there is more of a shift towards this.  And it can easily be broken down to:

 

1) Real casual visitors (30 days a year) -- Visa Exempt / On Arrival @ Airport

2) Real casual visitors (60 days a year) -- SETV from home country

3) Visitors who are visiting all of Asia - METV from home country (note: METV is not meant to say you can stay for 6/9 months, its mean to say you can hop in/out easily without applying for a visa each time.  It just happens to have a long expiration date -- would not be surprised if this changed to 60 days in the future or had a cumulative day cap of 60 days per METV)

 

And for those who, for whatever reason, what to stay here longer than 60/90 days on a regular basis the 'correct' visa would be the PE visa (via Thailand Elite) or Retirement Visa (if of age).

 

Therefore, the people who would be affected the most by these policies are:

-- Those who wish to stay here longer than 60/90 days a year AND do not wish to get a PE or Retirement Visa.

 

Or in other words: Young non-touristy tourists without a lot of money.

 

Right or wrong, at a glance, if you are young, not a real touristy tourist, and don't have a lot of money, Thai thinking will kick in and figure you to be 'undesirable' (right or wrong as that may be).

 

 

Sadly this will also sweep in the good guys, but they probably make a small enough % of the visitors that Thailand does not care

 

So what to do moving forward?

1) Respect that Thailand does not really want you to stay here for a long period of time

2) Convince them you are 'cool' by paying for the Thailand Elite visa (or be old and have money in the bank).

 

Fair or not, doesn't matter -- this is how it is.

 

The only thing holding me back right now from getting a PE Visa is this nagging thought at the back of my head that the day after I pay for it an agreement is made between G7 countries for 90 day visa on arrivals

 

 

[JackThompson]

1 hour ago, jpinx said:

Fair enough - but you are obviously taking this very personally.....

"..... Why boot out the wrong segment of the Western population by targeting us? ......"

...and I can certainly sympathise and agree with some of what you say, but the reality is that we are guests in Thailand and if they don't want a certain sector of the guests that arrive, it is up to us to accept the rules or move on.   We have no "say" in what Thailand will or will not come up with next.  Our choice is to read the rules, and make the best of them, or move on.  The old adage of "Don't take anything to Thailand that you can't afford to lose." starts to bite home when the rules look like changing, and people, possibly including yourself, feel aggrieved by the insecurity of it all, but that's the reality.  Your not in Kansas/Hampshire anymore and the pre-conceptions of right and wrong are not applicable.

 

I agree with not investing in Thailand during this period, though I hope the future provides a better environment.  I admit to being personally affected; I am almost of retirement age, and it does create great consternation that my planned retirement could be defunct just before I reach the magic-age.

 

Also agree we don't have much power to affect the situation - certainly not the right to overrule the local people.   But if foreigners can quit stabbing each other in the back, and speak in a unified voice to promote policies that are "win-win" for both foreign and the Thai people, that voice would have a much greater chance of being heard.  That voice could promote sane policies that actually address the real problems related to non-Thais in Thailand, while not harming those clearly not part of those problems (both foreign and Thai).  Though no guarantee it would make a difference, it might help to prevent harm to foreign-residents and Thai people alike.

[Evilbaz]

The choice of moving to a neighbouring country is not an option if you have a Thai partner or family.

All you do then it seems is shift the Visa problems to them, which is pretty selfish.

[jpinx]

23 minutes ago, JackThompson said:

 

I agree with not investing in Thailand during this period, though I hope the future provides a better environment.  I admit to being personally affected; I am almost of retirement age, and it does create great consternation that my planned retirement could be defunct just before I reach the magic-age.

 

Also agree we don't have much power to affect the situation - certainly not the right to overrule the local people.   But if foreigners can quit stabbing each other in the back, and speak in a unified voice to promote policies that are "win-win" for both foreign and the Thai people, that voice would have a much greater chance of being heard.  That voice could promote sane policies that actually address the real problems related to non-Thais in Thailand, while not harming those clearly not part of those problems (both foreign and Thai).  Though no guarantee it would make a difference, it might help to prevent harm to foreign-residents and Thai people alike.

Not only in "this period", but never.  I am very well aware of the fact that guys have married and live here in houses they have sunk money into, but they are still on year-by-year visas and the rules can and do change.  There is *no* security in this environment and never has been.  Some guys are prepared to take it on, and others baulk at it and stay at home or in some other country, and others just do it but moan and winge a lot

Foreigners have zero influence on government policy.  How would you like it if all the non-permanent residents of your own country were given a voice? 

ThaiVisa is well-known for it's collection of robust and off-the-wall posters.  Backstabbing would be putting it politely sometimes.  There is zero chance of getting all the long-term under-50's to agree to anything other than free beer  

Your idea of a "sane policy" is vastly different to the locals

 

[JackThompson]

3 minutes ago, JayBird said:

It seems they really are moving towards their goal of the right visit for each individual.  As stated a year+ ago, they don't have a problem with people visiting, they just want them on the right visa.

 

Combined with the Embassy web sites advertising Thailand Elite, it seems there is more of a shift towards this.  And it can easily be broken down to:

 

1) Real casual visitors (30 days a year) -- Visa Exempt / On Arrival @ Airport

2) Real casual visitors (60 days a year) -- SETV from home country

3) Visitors who are visiting all of Asia - METV from home country (note: METV is not meant to say you can stay for 6/9 months, its mean to say you can hop in/out easily without applying for a visa each time.  It just happens to have a long expiration date -- would not be surprised if this changed to 60 days in the future or had a cumulative day cap of 60 days per METV)

 

And for those who, for whatever reason, what to stay here longer than 60/90 days on a regular basis the 'correct' visa would be the PE visa (via Thailand Elite) or Retirement Visa (if of age).

 

Therefore, the people who would be affected the most by these policies are:

-- Those who wish to stay here longer than 60/90 days a year AND do not wish to get a PE or Retirement Visa.

 

Or in other words: Young non-touristy tourists without a lot of money.

 

Right or wrong, at a glance, if you are young, not a real touristy tourist, and don't have a lot of money, Thai thinking will kick in and figure you to be 'undesirable' (right or wrong as that may be).

 

Sadly this will also sweep in the good guys, but they probably make a small enough % of the visitors that Thailand does not care

 

That is one reading of the tea-leaves, and I could very well become reality.  If limits on Tourist Visa time-in-country are added, then it is a proven case.  For now, we only know that using Visa Exempts for long-term stay is being discouraged - especially for land-crossings.

 

However, describing these folks' spending  as "not a lot of money" is unknown, given no info on which to base the statistics.  It would also need to be considered in the context of "how much is enough to matter" / "how many Thai incomes do they support"? 

 

Consider how much money governments in the west hand out to "create jobs" - often millions of dollars each.  And much of that new job-income is money recycled within the country.  Thais, by contrast, can create Thai-jobs merely by allowing people to obtain "work prohibited" visas to spend foreign-capital into their economy.   A large proportion of each visitor's spend goes directly into the employment of Thais, who themselves spend that income back into the economy.

 

We do know, beyond any doubt, that millions of people around the world now make their incomes from jobs not tied to "showing up at a physical-location" for work.  That number is growing fast, and will continue to grow due to technology.   Add them to those who have saved money, but cannot spend their capital on an overpriced visa.  If we take "40K-ers" as the spend, and multiply by 50,000 people, that is 24 Billion Baht / year.   Not an insignificant sum. 

 

How many of those have been lost already due to increasing visa-restrictions (doubles/triples and exempts)?  How many more could be brought here with a welcoming visa-policy like the Philippines, which merely asks one deposit a reasonable sum (relative to the cost of living here) in the bank, to weed out the destitute?

[farangx]

10 hours ago, LivinLOS said:

If your under 50, dont have a wife or child, dont have enough to budget for 100k per annum but wish to simply live here ongoing ?? Well thats a problem, perhaps look at one of the alternative countries in the region. 

 

Really is that simple. 

 

It is really that simple ....

[buick]

4 hours ago, JayBird said:

3) Visitors who are visiting all of Asia - METV from home country (note: METV is not meant to say you can stay for 6/9 months, its mean to say you can hop in/out easily without applying for a visa each time.  It just happens to have a long expiration date -- would not be surprised if this changed to 60 days in the future or had a cumulative day cap of 60 days per METV)

 

And for those who, for whatever reason, what to stay here longer than 60/90 days on a regular basis the 'correct' visa would be the PE visa (via Thailand Elite) or Retirement Visa (if of age).

 

the requirements for an METV from the los angeles consulate in USA include the following (not all are listed).

 

• Bank statement showing a minimum of US$7,000
• Letter from employer verifying employment
• Copy of airline tickets (e-tickets or itinerary showing confirmed flights) - tickets should show multiple entries
• Copy of hotel reservation

 

what if you are between jobs (maybe laid off with a nice severance package) and can't get a letter from your employer.  there are people who use this 'downtime' (no job) to travel.  and some people prefer to set up their vacation along the way, they know what countries they plan to visit but don't make the reservations until they've arrived in thailand.  so that makes it tough to show hotel reservations and airline tickets with multiple entries.  one would think the $7,000 (or a higher number if need be) would be enough and scrap the idea of the letter, airline tickets, and hotel res.

 

and the elite visa only makes sense when immigration won't allow you to enter the country for long stays using a combo of tourist visas and visa exempt entries.  i've been doing this for many years, when immigration stopped me for a talk (too many visa exempt entries), they told me the proper visa was a tourist visa.  no mention of the elite visa.  to me, the elite visa is for someone who wants to stay in thailand - not leaving at all.  i like thailand but i also enjoy leaving and seeing other places.  i can make two trips to nearby countries using the 100,000/yr that the elite visa would cost me.  so it is a complete waste of money for someone in my shoes (under 50, not married, etc... - although i did turn 50 this year so i may change to retirement soon).  it doesn't mean i'm financially challenged, i just manage my money to avoid wasting it (i do fail a few times a year though and hit the 'waste' button !!!!).

 

i think the limit on 2 border crossings per year seems fair.  i'm sure some people will have reasons to not like it (as i have my reasons for not liking the elite visa and METV).  but i've only made two land border crossing in 10 yrs so the limit will not cause me any issues.

Edited December 20, 2016 by buick

[darrendsd]

12 hours ago, LivinLOS said:

 

They dont want people here on 40k a month.. That much is clear.. If 500k THB isnt 3 or 4 months spending, your not meeting thier desired 'quality' of tourist / long stayer.. Sorry of thats news to you, but best take that on board and adapt to it, because thats how they see it. 

 

Secondly.. Having gone back to the west this year, set up a second home, bought everything to put inside it, bought a car, done all thats needing in making a modern new place to live (electronics, utilities, kitchenware, etc etc) that like for like, with nice quality items.. The UK is cheaper than Thailand. My shopping is cheaper than Thailand. My car, my net, my phones, my TVs, my stereo, my coffee maker, my clothes, my shoes, my hobbies, my interests... Almost everything !! Eating out is less varied and more expensive, having someone cut my garden or do my laundry is more expensive, but the days of Thailand being half price the west are over. My summers back there are no more costly than my time here, I spend money a bit differently, but its not cheap v expensive its one set of interests v a different set. 

 

 

 

"They don't want people here on 40k a month"

 

Plenty of married or retired people are here on that so your argument is destroyed straight away

[William Osborne]

2 hours ago, darrendsd said:

 

"They don't want people here on 40k a month"

 

Plenty of married or retired people are here on that so your argument is destroyed straight away

 

40K /months seems pretty tight to me !!.... wonder what the their options are if they get any medical issues (which most retired people do ?)

[darrendsd]

3 hours ago, William Osborne said:

 

40K /months seems pretty tight to me !!.... wonder what the their options are if they get any medical issues (which most retired people do ?)

 

It might be tight but people do it, as for medical options many simply go without insurance and hope for the best,

[roobaa01]

gdaya folks,

 

here is my answer to the 40k monthly question :

 

im 61 like my thai wife. my pension 39 k monthly , house is paid off in banglamung, car also 2 yrs old paid off, medical insurance 80 k annually paid out of my pension, 450 k fixed deposit in the bank for marriage extension. i can say we live comfortibly of my pension 39 k monthly.

 

wbr

roobaa01

[Thaidream]

It is the same argument over and over again. It is all manageable to a degree. The stale argument of who can live on what amount is invalid because all of us have different lifestyles. I can eat Thai food 3 times every day and never crave Western food- others do the opposite. obviously, our food budgets are different. Thee are many other examples.  In my opinion, the Thai policy seems targeted at  individuals staying in Thailand working illegally - no proper Visa and no Work Permit.  The theory appears to be to make it as difficult as possible for these people to enter the country and remain.

However, there are enough options available to stay long term in Thailand but some cost more than people can afford or want to pay. If I was single and in that category- I would move to another country that is more hospitable. There is nothing in Thailand that cannot be found elsewhere.

[breaky9973]

I am an expat in Laos and frequently pass the border in Chong Mek. Often I just need a break from Laos and go to get that big city vibe from Bangkok. But since the only flight out of Pakse airport to Bangkok is expensive and always makes a stop in Savannakhet, I prefer to do a border crossing. Most of Thai immigration staff know me at the border and they know I do have a work permit and business visa for working in Laos. I wonder how this rule is going to affect my travels though.

[William Osborne]

You will still be flagged up in the computer so they will have to go by the rules.... thats what happened me earlier this year in Poipet..... complete pain for me as i have to drive down there for other business ever couple months anyway :-/

 

Edited December 21, 2016 by William Osborne

[overherebc]

8 minutes ago, William Osborne said:

You will still be flagged up in the computer so they will have to go by the rules.... thats what happened me earlier this year in Poipet..... complete pain for me as i have to drive down there for other business ever couple months anyway :-/

 

 

Unfortunately you are one of the people this wasn't aimed at but are being caught in a trap set for others.

Probably means doing it by air or going through the hassle of getting a visa everytime which will probably be a pain in the a--.for you.

Words of comfort not a lot of use though.