KhunHeineken

That will work fine, if behind that bag of sand that earth cable goes through the wall and onto a stake into the ground.

No good to you unless you have purposely built your own house and had 3 core wiring installed, with a circuit going to an earth. Surge protectors divert the surge to earth. With 2 pin plugs, there's no third cable going to earth. If you are in a condo, nothing you can do about it. If you are in a house, you might be able to rig something up on the power point where your sensitive electronics are, and where this power board will be. You could remove the power point, drill a small hole through the wall, and run a cable to a ground outside. Hammer a copper rod into the ground and attached the third cable to it. Back inside, either try to source an international plug power point or, strip some of the insulation back on the power board lead, cut into the earth cable and join it to your new earth cable, and then insulate the joint and the lead again. You would have to drill a small hole through the power point to poke the new earth cable through. . The above effectively means you have made a ground for the surge to be diverted to only for that one power point, but since you are using a power board, all the devices attached to the one power point will be surge protected.

Perhaps because some people only look for the absolute cheapest possible option, and then wonder why they don't get what they pay for.

Well, you know what they say about "death and taxes?" Errrr, it's draft government policy, which appears to have bipartisan, as shown in a link I have posted previously. We are talking about governments and taxes, not the weather. The thread title asks why posted reject living in the west. One reason is high taxes, well, the day was always going to come when they closed loopholes, particularly as the current laws are 90 years old and no longer fit for purpose. That said, here's a glass half full article for you. https://www.accountantsdaily.com.au/tax-compliance/20961-political-interest-in-reviewing-tax-residency-laws-has-disappeared-says-specialist

As we all will. Once again, paying tax in Thailand is the least of of most people's concern, and that amount can be minimized anyway. Paying 30% tax on your income in Australia, because you have been outside of Australia for 183 days, ouch, and yes, the pension is deemed an income.

It's my understanding that most people with a similar situation don't care even if they qualify only for $1 a fortnight of pension money, reason is, it unlocks a lot of other benefits.

It's funny because you have the kids of the boomers helping their kids to buy a house, known as "the bank of mum and dad" because the housing market is so messed up, yet, when these people are given a chance to vote for change, they don't take it, ensuring the next generation will be even worse off when it comes to housing.

New video, only 3 weeks old. They say it's coming in 2026. No idea where they get that information from. Remember, it's the opposite for Aussie expat pensioners, who want to remain a resident of Australia for tax purposes, in order to avail themselves of the tax free threshold.

Interesting that Centerlink knows one's date of return to Australia, thus, date of departure as well, which means they know how many days spent inside and outside of Australia in a financial year. Does 183 days sound familiar?

Does it matter which TV channel interviews the people? You are getting their account of the situation. Does their footage lie? There's a shop in this clip openly advertising a packet of cigarettes for $12 with a big sign on the shop.

You've added your own criteria in there. It's criteria that Centerlink does not require. Eg. has paid tax. Say he's never worked a day in his life, and never paid any tax. He qualifies, but does he deserve it? Should he get it? Should the taxpayer fund is retirement in Thailand? This guy openly admits it. CH9 or no CH9, hear the story from his own mouth. People work hard to give this deadsh*t money every fortnight, and YOU defend the system that allows it, simply because he "qualifies." How many of these are able bodied and can work????

I thought you meant a rejected application for a new passport. The re-establishing residency rule has been around for years, and well discussed on this forum. Apart from being outside of Australia, do you even qualify for the pension? Would you pass the asset test? If you qualify, will you return to Australia to do your 2 years?

Yes, few people smoke, but no where near the numbers the government claims. Do you think the people who have been pushed onto the black market cigarettes show up in official data? https://www.abc.net.au/news/2025-03-03/black-market-tobacco-manchester-cigarettes-four-corners/104978592 "According to Victoria Police, there are 1,300 standalone tobacco stores in Victoria, and of those, 1,000 sell some kind of illicit tobacco." Still $15AUD a packet for grey / black market cigarettes. Once again, these stats do not address the boom in grey / black market cigarettes. The government has spun it that their huge tobacco tax is stopping people from smoking, and you fell for their BS. Meanwhile, record amounts of grey / black market cigarettes are being imported and sold to smokers. These sales do not appear in any official stats.

Why?

You are simply deflecting. An older report, but still relevant. https://www.9news.com.au/national/dole-bludgers-worst-in-australia-revealed/cf24a1bc-b329-4982-a9ce-5c04ce23acf8 "According to the report nearly 50,000 people in Australia that are capable of working did not attend job interviews in the past year, but are still not being penalised." The reports says 50,000, but according to you, very little fraud. As said, the reason little fraud is found is because the recipient "qualified" but that doesn't mean they can not work. This woman got away with it for 21 years. Had over $240,000AUD in cash in her home. She even instructed others how to defraud the system. Where's the checks and balances to be able to get away with it for so long, and for so much? You don't comprehend the difference between "fraudsters" and to use your word, "qualified" recipients. You still don't see it's the ease of obtaining a welfare payment that is the issue. Here's an example that's closer to home. Say an Aussie expat has been living in Thailand for many years. He now reaches retirement age. He goes back to Australia to stay for 2 years to re-establish residency. He tells Centerlink what they want to hear, that is, his intention is to live in Australia. After 2 years he achieves portability, and flies back to Thailand a day later. He had no intention of remaining in Australia at all. Now, he "qualified" for the welfare, but has he committed "fraud?"