Why cant I live in Thailand?

[Paddymeboy7]

Heres the thing......I wish to live in Thailand.....I have a fixed income (retired)......State pension....small private pension.....I could easily live on them without draining the Thai public purse....I have insurance policy to cover hospital Bills if needed......I would be contributing to the Thai economy.....Just saying.

[Rookiescot]

8 minutes ago, Paddymeboy7 said:

Heres the thing......I wish to live in Thailand.....I have a fixed income (retired)......State pension....small private pension.....I could easily live on them without draining the Thai public purse....I have insurance policy to cover hospital Bills if needed......I would be contributing to the Thai economy.....Just saying.

Is it a rhetorical question?

[Faraday]

Interesting first post Paddy.

Welcome to Thaiger Talk.

Would you like to expand on your post?

Why is it that you feel you can't live here?

Look forward to reading your posts.

Have a gander at the Forum Guidelines please, & get posting!!!

 

https://thethaiger.com/forum-guidelines-and-rules

[BigHewer]

1 hour ago, Paddymeboy7 said:

Heres the thing......I wish to live in Thailand.....I have a fixed income (retired)......State pension....small private pension.....I could easily live on them without draining the Thai public purse....I have insurance policy to cover hospital Bills if needed......I would be contributing to the Thai economy.....Just saying.

Welcome to the forum

You seem to have a lot of the boxes ticked, Paddy. Why is it that you can’t live in Thailand?

[Faz]

2 hours ago, BigHewer said:

You seem to have a lot of the boxes ticked, Paddy. Why is it that you can’t live in Thailand?

I'd hazard at a guess because his combined pensions don't meet Thai Immigration financial requirements of 65,000 THB per month to retire in Thailand.

The UK (government) state pension is at best £800 every 4 weeks = £10,400 per annum.
At roughly £1 = 44 BHT that's 38,133 BHT per month.

You'd require a secondary pension of another £700 per month after tax to meet the 65,000 BHT requirement. (£1,500 per month = 66,000 BHT).

800,000 THB in a Thai bank is the other method.

[ace035]

4 hours ago, Paddymeboy7 said:

Heres the thing......I wish to live in Thailand.....I have a fixed income (retired)......State pension....small private pension.....I could easily live on them without draining the Thai public purse....I have insurance policy to cover hospital Bills if needed......I would be contributing to the Thai economy.....Just saying.

Good for you, at least you are secured for life unless you still supporting your wife, kids & grand kids. You're not going to tell that in this forum.

[Vigo]

7 hours ago, Paddymeboy7 said:

Heres the thing......I wish to live in Thailand.....I have a fixed income (retired)......State pension....small private pension.....I could easily live on them without draining the Thai public purse....I have insurance policy to cover hospital Bills if needed......I would be contributing to the Thai economy.....Just saying.

How would you be contributing to Thai economy?  Consumption of small value consumer goods and services is not a contribution. On the contrary, the lifestyle you describe is actually a financial burden to Thailand. You do not attach a cost to your presence. Wherever you live will generate a cost to society; Costs like carbon footprint, water use, sewage output, and use of public services. The lifestyle you describe does not cover these costs, and it does not create quality employment. Thailand has a shortage of low skill workers and needs to attract investors and consumers who will promote and support high skill sector. 

Subsistence demographic is not a target  population for Thailand, nor any other country for that matter.  If you are investing in a high tech company, or creating 5-10 well paying jobs or contributing to general society improvement, immigration will welcome you with open arms.

[Fanta]

lol… your argument is weak. He is a retiree not a business owner, entrepreneur or investor. His “small value consumer goods and services” generate a profit for the Thais he buys them from so he is contributing to Thailand. And the costs you describe are all paid for. He purchases the energy required to generate a carbon footprint and services are not free. He pays rent, food, services and would be spending at least double the Thai minimum wage a month while taking no money from the Thai economy. It is all out and nothing in so what more do you expect? Using your logic every retiree would need a work permit or a Thai employee. 

[BigHewer]

6 hours ago, Faz said:

The UK (government) state pension is at best £800 every 4 weeks = £10,400 per annum.
At roughly £1 = 44 BHT that's 38,133 BHT per month.

My Japanese state pension will be even lower, adjusted only marginally for career earnings. 

Definitely a good idea to plan ahead with supplementary pensions if wishing to retire in Thailand, unless of course one is from one of those lucky countries like Denmark or the Netherlands, where the state pension alone is often enough.

[Faz]

52 minutes ago, BigHewer said:

Definitely a good idea to plan ahead with supplementary pensions if wishing to retire in Thailand, unless of course one is from one of those lucky countries like Denmark or the Netherlands, where the state pension alone is often enough.

The fluctuating exchange rates have made a big difference to calculations in meeting Thailand's financial requirements. Prior to the UK Brexit referendum the £ stood at 52 BHT. It's went as low as 38 BHT at one point.

It's difficult to plan when exchange rates fluctuate over 20%.
Those who deposited the 800,000 THB when rates were at their premium are the fortunate one's.
 

[Marc26]

1 hour ago, BigHewer said:

My Japanese state pension will be even lower, adjusted only marginally for career earnings. 

Definitely a good idea to plan ahead with supplementary pensions if wishing to retire in Thailand, unless of course one is from one of those lucky countries like Denmark or the Netherlands, where the state pension alone is often enough.

Looks like Denman isn't that much

Max/yr looks like $11,500usd

Netherlands doesn't seem that much either 

 

A lot of people in the US will get more in social security 

The average in US is $1650/mo, around $20k/yr

[LoongFred]

1 hour ago, BigHewer said:

My Japanese state pension will be even lower, adjusted only marginally for career earnings. 

Definitely a good idea to plan ahead with supplementary pensions if wishing to retire in Thailand, unless of course one is from one of those lucky countries like Denmark or the Netherlands, where the state pension alone is often enough.

My US social security is most $3000 / month. But its money I put in. I also have pension income. Retirees from UK need additional money than only their UK pension. 

[TiT]

Is it accurate that the UK state pension is around $1k USD/mo?  I would think they got more than that?

[Marc26]

7 minutes ago, LoongFred said:

My US social security is most $3000 / month. But its money I put in. I also have pension income. Retirees from UK need additional money than only their UK pension. 

I would have gotten max SS if I stayed in the US but I will end up working more years in Canada

 

US you may at around 9k contribution for 2022

Canada is only 3500

 

So in the end, my combined will end up being around 2500

 

But I look at that as "free money" basically 

Edited March 26, 2022 by Marc26

[Faz]

25 minutes ago, Marc26 said:

The average in US is $1650/mo, around $20k/yr

That still wouldn't meet the 65,000 BHT requirement without a secondary top up pension.

[Faz]

14 minutes ago, TiT said:

Is it accurate that the UK state pension is around $1k USD/mo?  I would think they got more than that?

Yes it is, at best. Many receive less than that.

[Marc26]

22 minutes ago, Faz said:

That still wouldn't meet the 65,000 BHT requirement without a secondary top up pension.

Yeah it seems like most countries pensions won't 

 

I would have a marriage visa when the time comes so I don't think need the monthly income?

 

But who knows by the time that comes

[Faz]

37 minutes ago, LoongFred said:

My US social security is most $3000 / month. But its money I put in. I also have pension income. Retirees from UK need additional money than only their UK pension. 

Hooray for you Fred and you never waste an opportunity to let other members know of your income.
The average US citizen though also requires an additional pension to SS to meet the requirements.

I've seen pensions from one or two Nordic Countries that put your pension to shame Fred, they just don't gloat about it.

You don't have to rely on any Pension income if you have the necessary funds at hand.

[Pinetree]

13 hours ago, Paddymeboy7 said:

Heres the thing......I wish to live in Thailand.....I have a fixed income (retired)......State pension....small private pension.....I could easily live on them without draining the Thai public purse....I have insurance policy to cover hospital Bills if needed......I would be contributing to the Thai economy.....Just saying.

why can't you then? 

[Marc26]

2 minutes ago, Faz said:

Hooray for you Fred and you never waste an opportunity to let other members know of your income.
The average US citizen though also requires an additional pension to SS to meet the requirements.

I've seen pensions from one or two Nordic Countries that put your pension to shame Fred, they just don't gloat about it.

You don't have to rely on any Pension income if you have the necessary funds at hand.

 Nothing to really brag about

If you are getting more than the average you sort of got screwed, IMO

 

If you were able to invest that money yourself over 40 years

You'd get a lot more than 3k/mo, or the 2500 or so I will end up with 

[Faz]

4 minutes ago, Marc26 said:

I would have a marriage visa when the time comes so I don't think need the monthly income?

You'd extend your stay (a permit, not a Visa) based on Thai spouse.
Yeah, that's either 400K in a Thai bank, or 40K per month income.

[Vigo]

6 hours ago, Fanta said:

lol… your argument is weak. He is a retiree not a business owner, entrepreneur or investor. His “small value consumer goods and services” generate a profit for the Thais he buys them from so he is contributing to Thailand. And the costs you describe are all paid for. He purchases the energy required to generate a carbon footprint and services are not free. He pays rent, food, services and would be spending at least double the Thai minimum wage a month while taking no money from the Thai economy. It is all out and nothing in so what more do you expect? Using your logic every retiree would need a work permit or a Thai employee. 

No the  position is not weak.  Quite the contrary, it is validated and the basis for immigration policy around the developed world. There isn't a country in the world that targets low income foreigners. The economic basis just does not support their presence. You disagree, which is fine. Please feel free to make your case the immigration departments  around the world because the experts of  varying political sentiment all disagree with you.

You refer to the profit generated for Thais from low cost purchases as a "contribution" to Thailand. A subsistence foreign retiree will be purchasing basic products. These products have low profit margins.  What exactly are the  profit margins such that they will generate the profits you refer to?  Have you costed out the profit contribution  from the financially marginal foreigner?  Cost out the food purchases and "services" . You make the  assumption that spending  at least twice the Thai minimum wage a month is financially important. You are deluded if you  believe that 800, or even 2000 baht a month in spending is beneficial.   Are you aware of the agricultural product subsidy programs in Thailand? The emphasis is on  providing affordable basic foods to the low income/low wealth population of Thailand. This is why there are are rice, palm oil pork, chicken and common vegetable/fruit subsidies. It also why there are so many funding projects for local  aquaculture.  The subsidies and financial support  are not offset by the product "profit margins". Most foreigners are unaware of the extent of government funding of basic foodstuffs in Thailand.  As bad as Thai government can be, the bureaucrats have ensured that there isn't widescale starvation as is seen in other countries. Energy supply and distribution and domestic water is also heavily subsidized. The low income foreigner benefits from that social policy.

Have you considered what targeted foreigners  invest in a month? Try hundreds of thousands of baht. The Thai government is looking for foreign retirees who will spend big money.  A few bottles of Leo beer and Mama noodles don't cut it.  My recent neighbor has 2 kids and works at one of the international firms with employees in thailand. He is a short term foreign transfer and is paid German salary and benefits. Once his wife arrived, he went to the company subsidized house with driver/handyman and maid. He had no problems or issues with Thai immigration and he described everyone as being "helpful" and considerate. That's quite the contrast to what some people encounter.  His was the profile that every country chases. 

Your position does not understand the difference between of contribution margin and net profit. Nor does it show that you understand the costs that attach to the delivery of general services. Energy is also subsidized in Thailand. The people who are  paying  closer to the real cost of energy consumption will be homeowners, and business operators. Who do you think pays for the upkeep and infrastructure of energy  distribution in Thailand. It is not low income people,whether they are Thai or  foreign.

Subsistence retirees may be wonderful people, loved by their families and friends alike. That's not the point. It's all about the value added that their presence brings. The low income retiree is welcome as a short term visitor, or even as a 2-3 month stay visitor, which is a reasonable and generous policy.

[Wanderer]

2 hours ago, Pinetree said:

why can't you then? 

Because either he can't meet the requirements or doesn't understand them. 

[Pinetree]

23 minutes ago, Vigo said:

No the  position is not weak.  Quite the contrary, it is validated and the basis for immigration policy around the developed world. There isn't a country in the world that targets low income foreigners. The economic basis just does not support their presence. You disagree, which is fine. Please feel free to make your case the immigration departments  around the world because the experts of  varying political sentiment all disagree with you.

You refer to the profit generated for Thais from low cost purchases as a "contribution" to Thailand. A subsistence foreign retiree will be purchasing basic products. These products have low profit margins.  What exactly are the  profit margins such that they will generate the profits you refer to?  Have you costed out the profit contribution  from the financially marginal foreigner?  Cost out the food purchases and "services" . You make the  assumption that spending  at least twice the Thai minimum wage a month is financially important. You are deluded if you  believe that 800, or even 2000 baht a month in spending is beneficial.   Are you aware of the agricultural product subsidy programs in Thailand? The emphasis is on  providing affordable basic foods to the low income/low wealth population of Thailand. This is why there are are rice, palm oil pork, chicken and common vegetable/fruit subsidies. It also why there are so many funding projects for local  aquaculture.  The subsidies and financial support  are not offset by the product "profit margins". Most foreigners are unaware of the extent of government funding of basic foodstuffs in Thailand.  As bad as Thai government can be, the bureaucrats have ensured that there isn't widescale starvation as is seen in other countries. Energy supply and distribution and domestic water is also heavily subsidized. The low income foreigner benefits from that social policy.

Have you considered what targeted foreigners  invest in a month? Try hundreds of thousands of baht. The Thai government is looking for foreign retirees who will spend big money.  A few bottles of Leo beer and Mama noodles don't cut it.  My recent neighbor has 2 kids and works at one of the international firms with employees in thailand. He is a short term foreign transfer and is paid German salary and benefits. Once his wife arrived, he went to the company subsidized house with driver/handyman and maid. He had no problems or issues with Thai immigration and he described everyone as being "helpful" and considerate. That's quite the contrast to what some people encounter.  His was the profile that every country chases. 

Your position does not understand the difference between of contribution margin and net profit. Nor does it show that you understand the costs that attach to the delivery of general services. Energy is also subsidized in Thailand. The people who are  paying  closer to the real cost of energy consumption will be homeowners, and business operators. Who do you think pays for the upkeep and infrastructure of energy  distribution in Thailand. It is not low income people,whether they are Thai or  foreign.

Subsistence retirees may be wonderful people, loved by their families and friends alike. That's not the point. It's all about the value added that their presence brings. The low income retiree is welcome as a short term visitor, or even as a 2-3 month stay visitor, which is a reasonable and generous policy.

You are quite right, but the perhaps larger issue is the inbred arrogance and entitlement of very many westerners, who believe that they have a God given right to move where they like and almost do what they like, regardless. They do not seem to see that it is a privilege to be allowed to enter and live in a place like Thailand, not a right.  We see this arrogance and entitlement  displayed frequently on this and other forums as people whine and moan about the Thai immigration requirement, or cultural issues that they don't agree with,  or the fact that they can't buy alcohol between 2pm and 5 pm.  Its pathetic and they should pack up and go home, or better still, not come here in the beginning . 

To the OP, if you can't afford to come here and live, then you can't, that's what it is.  

[Pinetree]

10 minutes ago, Wanderer said:

Because either he can't meet the requirements or doesn't understand them. 

Then he can't come to live here;  end of post