News Forum - Killing off retirement opportunities in Thailand – OPINION

[Soidog]

12 minutes ago, gummy said:

Frankly speaking if you always think of the negatives you could end up being quite miserable irrespective of where you are

Agreed @gummy. I just feel sorry for people who are on the rough end of decisions that are applied retrospectively. Imagine if the U.K. government suddenly raised the retirement age to 70 and anyone 65-69 had to start to look for work again. 

[King Cotton]

6 minutes ago, LoongFred said:

Thailand is no longer classified as a poor country

Just how wrong can you be without being accused of misinformation?

'Currently, 10.5 percent of Thailand’s population is living below the poverty line . . . '

https://borgenproject.org/why-is-thailand-poor/

 

[Bob20]

Fully appreciate the tone of the opinion piece and it's a repeat of a few weeks ago.

But to some extent it's happening in other countries as well. Specifically the UK and W.Europe have skyrocketing energy bills that leave lots of people below the breadline with too little compensation. It may even be too expensive in your own country in certain circumstances...

I'm in the A-O group and have a habit of comparing things with "back home" to assess reasonableness. We don't know yet whether the new requirements that are to be introduced in September 2022 are only for new applications or for everyone (according to info on this forum). But if they apply to me as well, it's still -a lot- cheaper than the compulsory premium I'd pay back home.

When we talk about age limits for insurance or unreasonable premiums, I read complaints from people abroad not wanting to settle here anymore, but don't see many here saying "I'm packing my bags next month and am definitely leaving my family behind". 

I would be genuinely interested why they left their home country to come to Thailand in the first place, as nearly all claim to be a financial asset to Thailand. Then this surely isn't an obstacle that can't be overcome for most and at home they will find similar actions that push them down the ladder with generally much higher costs of living on top as well.

Could it be that Covid and other circumstances have put us all in too much of a general pessimistic mood where we agitate to any change that influences us? But changes that have a negative influence don't just happen in Thailand...

[Soidog]

1 minute ago, Poolie said:

I think you all over-estimate the gross/nett contribution to the Thai economy that ex pats bring. They wouldn't miss it, even in these more austere times. At it's height, it was estimated to be part of 1%. Hardly ground shaking. The close families no doubt will mourn it but not the economists. 

I think that is spot on @Poolie.  It’s why I’m often disappointed that more Thai families who are likely affected by these changes don’t protest more about it. The foreigners cant and there’s no real financial pressure as you say on the Thai economy. 

[Soidog]

2 minutes ago, Bob20 said:

Fully appreciate the tone of the opinion piece and it's a repeat of a few weeks ago.

But to some extent it's happening in other countries as well. Specifically the UK and W.Europe have skyrocketing energy bills that leave lots of people below the breadline with too little compensation. It may even be too expensive in your own country in certain circumstances...

I'm in the A-O group and have a habit of comparing things with "back home" to assess reasonableness. We don't know yet whether the new requirements that are to be introduced in September 2022 are only for new applications or for everyone (according to info on this forum). But if they apply to me as well, it's still -a lot- cheaper than the compulsory premium I'd pay back home.

When we talk about age limits for insurance or unreasonable premiums, I read complaints from people abroad not wanting to settle here anymore, but don't see many here saying "I'm packing my bags next month and am definitely leaving my family behind". 

I would be genuinely interested why they left their home country to come to Thailand in the first place, as nearly all claim to be a financial asset to Thailand. Then this surely isn't an obstacle that can't be overcome for most and at home they will find similar actions that push them down the ladder with generally much higher costs of living on top as well.

Could it be that Covid and other circumstances have put us all in too much of a general pessimistic mood where we agitate to any change that influences us? But changes that have a negative influence don't just happen in Thailand...

I agree with much of what you have said there @Bob20.  However, for me, it’s the retrospective nature of the changes that is so damaging. As you will know, in the U.K. when energy prices go up it affects the CPI and with the pensions “triple lock” most pensioners are given a soft landing. Add to that the myriad of additional benefits many pensioners receive, and the impact is certainly softened. To be aged 75 and having spent most of your savings and supplies of money having sold up at home and then possibly told you have to find £50,000- 100,000 to hold in a Thai bank or you need $50,000 of medical insurance costing £2,000 a year could be severe for many.
 

As I said previously. No problem with changes. A country could ask whatever they want for new entrants to a system. It’s the retrospective application that’s so potentially damaging for many. The last change wasn’t so bad. Neither is this one, or the next, or the next. But with each other hurts more and more.       

[King Cotton]

15 minutes ago, Naresh said:

Very valid issue, well highlighted.

Can there be a way to take it to the authorities who matter? 

It is in mutual interest of Thailand and the visitors. Complicated and expensive requirements would dampen the spirit and discourage many. 

Fair comment, @Naresh, in this your debut post. Welcome to the forum, where I'm sure you'll find much to engage with.

[ThailandBob]

18 minutes ago, Soidog said:

 

Currently, even if you are married and perhaps started a family, you still need to place 400,000 baht (£9,000, €10,000, $US 12,000) in a Thai bank. I think many people who say “why should the Thai government support a load of penniless pensioners are viewing it from how things are in their own countries. In Thailand you don’t get free social care. You don’t get “meals on wheels” or Summer air conditioning allowance. You don’t get a state pension as such. The worse case scenario for Thailand is that the foreigner becomes sick and they can’t pay for their treatment. In most cases when that happens, they stick them in a government hospital, pump them full of morphine to stop any pain and let them die. Hardly a massive cost for someone who has maintained a Thai family for years. Paid VAT on everything they buy. Purchased cars, houses and put kids through school and university. Not to mention paying for monthly mobile phone bills, internet and satellite tv. Anyone who has spent more than 5 years retired in Thailand has already contributed enough to pay for some morphine and a few litres of unleaded petrol to burn them when they die !!

Bam! Soidog pretty much sums it up.

[King Cotton]

19 minutes ago, Lewis said:

This opinion is one sided.  Thailand will never develop in right direction if it keep attracting only backpackers, cheap Charlie’s and modest retirees having nostalgia of the good old times.. Let’s face it: to avoid the inevitable nature destruction by mass and cheap tourism, to afford a modern and sustainable infrastructure including hospitals c/w state of the art medical equipment they need to raise the bar. It has to cost more. Thailand is reaching a point where they will have to rebuild an education system to produce more skilled workers, technicians, health care workers and engineers. Stop looking at this country like a heaven for retirees or backpackers. 

Welcome to the forum,@Lewis!     Strong comment, too, highlighting that there are two sides to every debate or issue.

[Bob20]

10 minutes ago, Soidog said:

I agree with much of what you have said there @Bob20.  However, for me, it’s the retrospective nature of the changes that is so damaging. As you will know, in the U.K. when energy prices go up it affects the CPI and with the pensions “triple lock” most pensioners are given a soft landing. Add to that the myriad of additional benefits many pensioners receive, and the impact is certainly softened. To be aged 75 and having spent most of your savings and supplies of money having sold up at home and then possibly told you have to find £50,000- 100,000 to hold in a Thai bank or you need $50,000 of medical insurance costing £2,000 a year could be severe for many.
 

As I said previously. No problem with changes. A country could ask whatever they want for new entrants to a system. It’s the retrospective application that’s so potentially damaging for many. The last change wasn’t so bad. Neither is this one, or the next, or the next. But with each other hurts more and more.       

I agree with you on the principle too, but in the UK the soft landing on energy prices covers only half the increase. And at home I used to pay €6000 a year compulsory healthcare premium while I'm fully healthy.

And when you buy an electric car as it's great for the environment, and they promise zero % road tax, two years later they withdraw charging points as they can't keep up with energy demand and start charging road tax after all, despite their promises, which you partially based your purchase on. Or capital gains tax on your savings that you paid tax over already. Or negative interest in the bank...

So yes, agreed on the principle, but these things don't just happen here in Thailand.

[Stevejm]

While I understand the concerns raised it is difficult for me to formulate a clear opinion on the matter because the annual cost of the new $50k coverage requirement isn’t clear to me. I can’t find coverage at this level quoted anywhere. Perhaps the insurance companies haven’t caught up with the new rules yet.

[Soidog]

27 minutes ago, Shade_Wilder said:

Afternoon Mr @Soidog

No, I don't believe that it is too optimistic; it is a matter of politics and economics.

The current government has limited legitimacy in other areas, so it needs economic good times and growth to be the reason for it to be re-elected, or to be able to get away with cheating to another term.

Thais like money. Thais like economic growth. The Bangkok Elite like growth and money. Thai women like money. All those university students who have been cooped up for 2 years want a job and money. The farmers want money. The bar girls want money.

Thai people want money and economic good times.

The Thai government decided to re-open tourism in order to generate economic good times ahead of a likely election next year, and if they don't get good economic growth and cash coming in, they will get tossed out.

And, they know it.

Remember the Arab Spring started with a Tunisian fruit seller who wasn't getting a good income. I know it, and you can bet your ass the Government/Junta people know it too.

@Shade_Wilder good evening. 
 

That’s twice now you have not liked me agreeing with you . I never said it was “too” optimistic. I said it was optimistic.  At the risk of being ticked off again, I agree with all you have said above

[ThailandBob]

I keep reading that those who object to mandatory health insurance are somehow profiteering or gaming the system. The type of health insurance offered here PALES in comparison to REAL health insurance or even Medicare. My objection is, I can afford to pay for whatever comes down the pike, and I'm willing to put 3M baht in escrow rather than hand it over to a greedy gaggle of actuarial wonks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 1, 2021 by ThailandBob

[Stevejm]

1 hour ago, Johno said:

Agree with every thing said here and the fact of the 2 tiered medical Bill's which charge the westerner outrageous prices compared to locals and a thai medical insurance policy that does not like to pay out are just a bad joke..

Why would the 800000bht propping up the thai banks and cannot be used for medical emergencys 

And of course immigration bureaucracy infuriating...  

UK charges foreign visitors 150% of normal cost of hospital treatment and visitors staying longer than 6 months pay £600+ per year mandatory health care cover. We can choose where to live 

Edited November 1, 2021 by Stevejm
Update

[Pius]

1 hour ago, Thaiger said:

OPINION Quite clearly the Government has simply not thought through the impact of the insurance provisions imposed by the Thailand Pass on “budget tourists” and likewise on current and prospective retirees in Thailand. The sobering reality is that it is well nigh impossible for individuals, 70 years and above, to obtain health insurance other than at exorbitant rates. The insurance requirements, USD 50k (1.6m THB), while rational on the surface, will undoubtedly block the backpacker/budget tourist cohort and simultaneously devastate those long-term elderly Non-Resident Visa holding retirees, many of whom live on fixed pensions and have been attracted to remain […]

The story Killing off retirement opportunities in Thailand – OPINION as seen on Thaiger News.

Read the full story

Thinking of the consequences of new rules has never been the extra special strength of this government.

[Craig]

Nice piece but your “would of, could of, should of’s” don’t work with the way the government here sees things.  I’m retired at 50 and wouldn’t dare buy property or a wife here.  Yes, I said “buy” because you’re right- farangs are ATM’s here.  I think a soi dog has more value than farangs and even though I have the money and health insurance, I will gladly leave eventually.  Good luck to those who stay or can’t leave.  

[LoongFred]

1 hour ago, Shade_Wilder said:

"Quite clearly the Government has simply not thought through the impact of the insurance provisions imposed by the Thailand Pass on “budget tourists” and likewise on current and prospective retirees in Thailand."

The author has hit the proverbial nail on the head with his first paragraph. However, he seems to be assuming that nothing will change.

Correct, both backpackers and seniors won't come, Thai tourism numbers won't increase, then someone will tell the people in charge that their wonderful idea isn't working and things will change. Remember; the idea behind re-opening is to stimulate a failing economy, and if the economy continues to be sluggish, things will change.

What we are seeing is decision-making by Bureaucrat with no 'skin in the game'. As soon as actual business men tell the government that the reason tourists aren't coming is it is too expensive, things will change.

The people making decisions know don't know what they are doing. When they fail, other, better qualified people in the field of tourism will be listened to.

Or, the economy will not pick up and the current government will be removed from office.

Be patient, the laws of Economics and Politics work.

Your analysis is flawed.  Backpackers want to spend as little as possible so they can extend their travels. They're no economic gain. Seniors with adequate resources will be welcomed as they can add move economically than they take. 

Other groups either short term or longer would receive a welcome if they have adequate resources and contribute positively to the economy.

Thailand used to be a place to visit or live very inexpensively, but not anymore. 

 

[LoongFred]

7 minutes ago, Craig said:

Nice piece but your “would of, could of, should of’s” don’t work with the way the government here sees things.  I’m retired at 50 and wouldn’t dare buy property or a wife here.  Yes, I said “buy” because you’re right- farangs are ATM’s here.  I think a soi dog has more value than farangs and even though I have the money and health insurance, I will gladly leave this $hithole eventually.  Good luck to those who stay or can’t leave.  

Sounds like you've already booked a flight. So good luck!

[LoongFred]

13 minutes ago, Stevejm said:

UK charges foreign visitors 150% of normal cost of hospital treatment and visitors staying longer than 6 months pay £600+ per year mandatory health care cover. We can choose where to live 

Wow, they're the two tier champs.  

[Bob20]

6 minutes ago, Craig said:

Nice piece but your “would of, could of, should of’s” don’t work with the way the government here sees things.  I’m retired at 50 and wouldn’t dare buy property or a wife here.  Yes, I said “buy” because you’re right- farangs are ATM’s here.  I think a soi dog has more value than farangs and even though I have the money and health insurance, I will gladly leave this $hithole eventually.  Good luck to those who stay or can’t leave.  

I retired at 55 and in day-to-day life I don't experience what you describe at all.

If I did, I wouldn't leave eventually, but would be gone already.

[Griff1315]

51 minutes ago, Soidog said:

Agreed @gummy. I just feel sorry for people who are on the rough end of decisions that are applied retrospectively. Imagine if the U.K. government suddenly raised the retirement age to 70 and anyone 65-69 had to start to look for work again. 

Don't you be giving them any ideas it's bad enough now....

[Toby]

Stayed here for 4 years now each month contributing with 60 K+ baht and each year the visa will be more and more difficult to obtain….

[Sgtsabai]

This "government" could care less about their own people much less us. Face it, we are not wanted by dear leader nor does he want western ways, thinking etc. He does not like Issan and farangs help people in Issan. Retiring here will never get easier and more than likely will get more difficult. When I first came back to SE Asia in 2002 this was a good place to retire. Oh and for the poster that was curious as to why expats came here, I'm a sexpat and proud of it. Although age and health has put pretty much a stop to the "one month millionaire" days down in Pattaya years back. 

The hoops we have to jump through vary and one never knows from one year to the next what little dirty trick immigration may play upon one. All it takes is one new person that doesn't like farangs. The insurance scam and that is surely what it is, is flat out to make money for friends of the government and to force expats out. I choose to buy as I have OA and feared that O etc. would be included. Lucky that I did as covid shut down the border to Lao and I would have been stuck with bad options. Stateside I am 100% covered by the VA, here only for specific disabilities and of course Medicare won't pay, why that would cut big medicine and big pharma out of some cash and neither will my free work insurance that covers whatever Medicare doesn't because I don't have Medicare Part B. 

I've been here too long to just pack up and leave. I retired long ago. I Have family across the Mekong also. Philippines is out with a mad man in charge, I'm frankly scared to go back to Vietnam, and Lao has terrible medical care. So I'll stick it out as long as I can. Besides I have no desire to go back to the states, didn't before the trump and certainly am too old to take up arms against the fascists traitors, but I would. 

Make the best of what we have. Remember, smile the man said, things could be worse, I smiled and sure enough things got worse. 

[King Cotton]

32 minutes ago, Stevejm said:

UK charges foreign visitors 150% of normal cost of hospital treatment and visitors staying longer than 6 months pay £600+ per year mandatory health care cover. We can choose where to live 

Hi, @Stevejm!  Whilst the above info may be accurate, a source link would have been more than welcome.

[LoongFred]

16 minutes ago, Toby said:

Stayed here for 4 years now each month contributing with 60 K+ baht and each year the visa will be more and more difficult to obtain….

Could you retire at home on 60k baht/ month? 

[gummy]

1 hour ago, Soidog said:

Agreed @gummy. I just feel sorry for people who are on the rough end of decisions that are applied retrospectively. Imagine if the U.K. government suddenly raised the retirement age to 70 and anyone 65-69 had to start to look for work again. 

It would just mean scousers would spend even more time collecting dole money