News Forum - Killing off retirement opportunities in Thailand – OPINION

[Sandbar]

Unfortunately I find the Thai intellect and foresight fairly shallow. Their thought and decision making is very reactionary. Thier disrespect (government officials) towards foreigners is well documented and unwarranted. They have an inferiority complex against western society and it's spoils. This all due to a country that has been in conflict and turmoil with its self for years, and run by egotistical corrupt politicians. 

[gummy]

3 hours ago, Sandbar said:

and run by egotistical corrupt politicians.

If only it was that simple !

[Stevejm]

11 minutes ago, gummy said:

If only it was that simple !

Is it not that simple? What is your experience? 

[NidNoi]

14 hours 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...  

The problem is: If you don’t get sick, no Thai company would be able to get your money (unless it’s seized), and if you get sick Thai hospitals would have to spend some money to give healthcare and other services to get your money. With the insurance scheme they get your money without any obligation in return (except for a very small chance to have to disburse some of it as it is mentioned in the fine lines).

[NidNoi]

14 hours ago, King Cotton said:

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/

Almost same as Canada (10.1%) based on 2019 census:  It used to be 14.5% in 2015. Of course the line is not at the same level as in Thailand but the results on people are the same. Poverty hits mainly natives, new immigrants and people living in remotely located towns and settlements.

[Jojo]

I have visited Thailand on several occasions and I have seen how tourists and retirees help the poorer people of Thailand by spending money on street food and have a drink in the bars and on the beaches. By buying the locally made souvenirs and using local transport. A lot also use hotels and apartments and use all the services that the locals provide. I made several friends and acquaintances in Thailand. When Covid came and most had their livelihoods vanished  I was asked to help. I sent money to some for food and for rent. 
I can not think why the Thai government wants to make it harder to visit Thailand or to retire in Thailand. A small levy on tourists could easily replace the huge cost to the health insurance that a retire has to pay. In the end when the retire passes on his or her money can be made to remain in Thailand. 
it is not to much to ask. A 100 bath levy on tourists is not going to make much difference but it will help the retirees spend their money in the local economy instead to insurance companies where it makes only the companies richer. Maybe the government itself should insure retirees at a reasonable rate and use the money for its public hospitals instead. 
Joseph

[King Cotton]

18 minutes ago, Jojo said:

I have visited Thailand on several occasions and I have seen how tourists and retirees help the poorer people of Thailand by spending money on street food and have a drink in the bars and on the beaches. By buying the locally made souvenirs and using local transport. A lot also use hotels and apartments and use all the services that the locals provide. I made several friends and acquaintances in Thailand. When Covid came and most had their livelihoods vanished  I was asked to help. I sent money to some for food and for rent. 
I can not think why the Thai government wants to make it harder to visit Thailand or to retire in Thailand. A small levy on tourists could easily replace the huge cost to the health insurance that a retire has to pay. In the end when the retire passes on his or her money can be made to remain in Thailand. 
it is not to much to ask. A 100 bath levy on tourists is not going to make much difference but it will help the retirees spend their money in the local economy instead to insurance companies where it makes only the companies richer. Maybe the government itself should insure retirees at a reasonable rate and use the money for its public hospitals instead. 
Joseph

Welcome to TT forum, @Jojo!  Several valid comments there too, in this your debut post.

[Alex]

It's not just Thailand who have their priorities and methodology skewed. Many countries, including Thailand, have set retirement "visa" requirements by using what seems to be a random system or throwing a dart at a spinning board. They pick a number out of the air for monthly income, for the ridiculous deposit minimums and they allow the private insurance industry to dictate terms and costs for health insurance. There are other ways of doing all of this. For instance; Colombia ties the required retirement income to their minimum wage. You need to prove you have 3X the income of the lowest paid worker there. They assume you can get by on that (*Note: I can live quite comfortably on 3X minimum wage in Thailand.) They require everyone to have health insurance (details may have changed since COVID) and that, for retirees paying into the public healthcare system is "The monthly premium is calculated as 12.5 percent of the 40 percent of monthly gross income that you declared..." There are no 'pre-existing' conditions and no one is turned down regardless of age. I've been in Thailand for over 10 years and would prefer to spend the rest of my time here, I like it here. But I'm in my mid 70s and as such will soon become uninsurable. BTW - the health insurance program in Colombia is administered by private health insurance providers who sill offer all the usual private policies with all the bells and whistles you can afford at high-end private hospitals.

[NidNoi]

14 hours ago, LoongFred said:

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. 

Thailand is not the only country in this world trying to grab a share of the tourists’ dollars. Nowadays you can’t be too picky about the “quality” of your clients. The backpackers of today may be the 5 star hotel guests of tomorrow.

I just logged off the Philippines Visa website. For a visa free 30 day entry no health or Covid insurance required, jus a declaration of health stipulating that you don’t have any symptoms, a proof that you have the financial means for the length of your stay (a credit card is valid), a round-trip ticket and an hotel booking. No PCR test required as they know airlines will required one.

[Jason]

It would appear that the good times are coming to an end....unless you're a millionaire.

[LoongFred]

6 hours ago, Sandbar said:

16 hours 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

Expand  

Thailand simply want to better itself by promoting tourists or retirees who benefit the country, not those who feel entitled to extras because that's what they got in their nanny state. The Thai people and government are very tolerant, but visitor here bare personal responsibility to take care of themselves. If you have to pay more or do more, you have a choice to stay or not. 

About 90% of discussions are simply complaint, which is very sad. Of course complaining does nothing to improve things and is the lazy persons out. Look around and be happy you're here or you should move on to your place of happiness. 

[LoongFred]

19 minutes ago, NidNoi said:

Thailand is not the only country in this world trying to grab a share of the tourists’ dollars. Nowadays you can’t be too picky about the “quality” of your clients. The backpackers of today may be the 5 star hotel guests of tomorrow.

I just logged off the Philippines Visa website. For a visa free 30 day entry no health or Covid insurance required, jus a declaration of health stipulating that you don’t have any symptoms, a proof that you have the financial means for the length of your stay (a credit card is valid), a round-trip ticket and an hotel booking. No PCR test required as they know airlines will required one.

Good pack your rucksack and be off to where you are wanted. 

I doubt that many cheap Charlie's will change to 5 star hotels ever. Being cheap is in their make-up. 

[Smithydog]

The challenge I have with all this is simply the business risk associated with narrowing options. If the intention, as seems often stated, is to attract the higher end of the market, is now the right time to do it?

Stifling a portion of your market when you are in a recovery stage, doesn't make sound business sense. Most change, adapt or improve their business when things are going good and not bad. Doing it in the not so good times is often a decision made in desperation and doomed for failure.

Covid-19 has put back the plans of many and restricted their options. If the country has made the decision to open up, then perhaps a return to a welcome policy for all will help stimulate the economy more than trying to make changes now designed to potentially attract a more restricted group.

After all, there are a lot of extremely well established areas in the world where the richest choose to go already and would have a distinct and historical advantage over a newcomer to a congested market.

 

[Alex]

23 minutes ago, LoongFred said:

Good pack your rucksack and be off to where you are wanted. 

I doubt that many cheap Charlie's will change to 5 star hotels ever. Being cheap is in their make-up. 

Awesome comment. You work for the private health insurance business and need to protect you cash flow? Instead of making a cheap and useless comment why don't you offer up an alternative way of doing things? Maybe offer a solution instead of a slur. There are other ways to do business here, there and everywhere. Give it a shot. I know you won't, you'll just pound on you keyboard and let everyone know how 'alpha' you are while adding nothing to the conversation. I there a block button I can use here?

[LoongFred]

40 minutes ago, Smithydog said:

The challenge I have with all this is simply the business risk associated with narrowing options. If the intention, as seems often stated, is to attract the higher end of the market, is now the right time to do it?

Stifling a portion of your market when you are in a recovery stage, doesn't make sound business sense. Most change, adapt or improve their business when things are going good and not bad. Doing it in the not so good times is often a decision made in desperation and doomed for failure.

Covid-19 has put back the plans of many and restricted their options. If the country has made the decision to open up, then perhaps a return to a welcome policy for all will help stimulate the economy more than trying to make changes now designed to potentially attract a more restricted group.

After all, there are a lot of extremely well established areas in the world where the richest choose to go already and would have a distinct and historical advantage over a newcomer to a congested market.

They are looking at the covid crisis as and opportunity to change or right some wrongs. I think it's very smart and forward thinking. Sure it upsets a few sexpats and/bar flies but benefits the country as a whole. 

[LoongFred]

2 hours ago, Jojo said:

I have visited Thailand on several occasions and I have seen how tourists and retirees help the poorer people of Thailand by spending money on street food and have a drink in the bars and on the beaches. By buying the locally made souvenirs and using local transport. A lot also use hotels and apartments and use all the services that the locals provide. I made several friends and acquaintances in Thailand. When Covid came and most had their livelihoods vanished  I was asked to help. I sent money to some for food and for rent. 
I can not think why the Thai government wants to make it harder to visit Thailand or to retire in Thailand. A small levy on tourists could easily replace the huge cost to the health insurance that a retire has to pay. In the end when the retire passes on his or her money can be made to remain in Thailand. 
it is not to much to ask. A 100 bath levy on tourists is not going to make much difference but it will help the retirees spend their money in the local economy instead to insurance companies where it makes only the companies richer. Maybe the government itself should insure retirees at a reasonable rate and use the money for its public hospitals instead. 
Joseph

The choice to visit is yours. Being responsible for yourself and paying your bills is required. This may include health insurance and adequate funds in the Thai bank account. No one is forcing anyone to visit, but if you do bring your money.

[LoongFred]

50 minutes ago, Alex said:

Awesome comment. You work for the private health insurance business and need to protect you cash flow? Instead of making a cheap and useless comment why don't you offer up an alternative way of doing things? Maybe offer a solution instead of a slur. There are other ways to do business here, there and everywhere. Give it a shot. I know you won't, you'll just pound on you keyboard and let everyone know how 'alpha' you are while adding nothing to the conversation. I there a block button I can use here?

Thanks for your comment. BTW I'm retired, but know a lot about healthcare. My take is that it all comes down to personal responsibility and to leave more than you take. 

[KaptainRob]

52 minutes ago, Smithydog said:

The challenge I have with all this is simply the business risk associated with narrowing options. If the intention, as seems often stated, is to attract the higher end of the market, is now the right time to do it?

Stifling a portion of your market when you are in a recovery stage, doesn't make sound business sense. Most change, adapt or improve their business when things are going good and not bad. Doing it in the not so good times is often a decision made in desperation and doomed for failure.

Covid-19 has put back the plans of many and restricted their options. If the country has made the decision to open up, then perhaps a return to a welcome policy for all will help stimulate the economy more than trying to make changes now designed to potentially attract a more restricted group.

After all, there are a lot of extremely well established areas in the world where the richest choose to go already and would have a distinct and historical advantage over a newcomer to a congested market.

Spot on Smithy.  The backpacker market is actually a huge money spinner for many countries as it's no longer a cheap-charlie means of travel.  Most come from well heeled families and whilst they'll stay in budget accommodation it's only to conserve funds for extreme sports, major excursions and dining on local foods.  Israeli's form a large part of that market and probably spend more than an Aussie or Yank on a 2 week beach and bar holiday.

[LoongFred]

3 minutes ago, KaptainRob said:

Spot on Smithy.  The backpacker market is actually a huge money spinner for many countries as it's no longer a cheap-charlie means of travel.  Most come from well heeled families and whilst they'll stay in budget accommodation it's only to conserve funds for extreme sports, major excursions and dining on local foods.  Israeli's form a large part of that market and probably spend more than an Aussie or Yank on a 2 week beach and bar holiday.

What's this based on or is it your person take? Backpackers are not generally though of as people who part with there money when they have to.

This contrast with average Thais who are obsessed with looking neat and clean. 

[Smithydog]

1 minute ago, LoongFred said:

They are looking at the covid crisis as and opportunity to change or right some wrongs. I think it's very smart and forward thinking. Sure it upsets a few sexpats and/bar flies but benefits the country as a whole. 

Don't disagree that they are looking to take opportunities to make changes and I have no problem with them choosing to make a change or to even to forward think if they choose. The country can do what they feel is best for them. It will hopefully grow, be successful and continue long after any of us has passed on.

Perhaps it was a plan on the back burner for some time. I don't know and nor should I. However, in recent times the Government has copped a lot about their planning and execution abilities and such an important change needs excellence in both for any country, not just Thailand.

So, I simply suggest that a bit of patience is often a good thing, especially in a recovery mood and with the distinct and obvious challenges they will face in doing the change they desire. It might be as little as one year! After all, with a country with such a long history, one year should not be too much of a hindrance to achieve the right and desired results, especially when other countries need to recover the same as Thailand does.

[farang]

i agree that the insurance is killing a lot of tourtist from coming.a better and more easy way would be for everyone coming into thailand would be for the govt to collect on arriving a fee from each person,paid on the spot.maybe 1,000 baht.drop the pass and the insurance required.that 1,000 baht fee should more than take care of any covid that might pop up with tourtist as they have to have been given their vaccines to enter.so no hugh threat there.this insurance/pass has had me stuck so far.i was wanting to return in oct but too many hoops.and i for one stay about 5 or 6 months each year spending  close to one million baht there.as im sure most guys my age retired do also.and yes those insurance rates for guys over 70 are very steep.

,in my case i have to buy one year of it for only staying about 5 months.ive been staying about five months each year for the last 18 years until now.chock dee to all.

[HolyCowCm]

11 hours ago, Stonker said:

What's hard to get about it if you've been here for three years and are either working and paying tax or married to a Thai?

The criteria are simple, and if you meet them the process can take time but while I don't have PR as I'm not eligible I've never met anyone who met them who applied for PR and didn't get it - I've met plenty who complained about it but never applied though!

Heard you say this many times before. Easier said than done for their criteria they set, and as for other countries a piece of cake compared to here. That is what I am getting at. The odds are against you even if you are married.. And whom and how many do you know applied and won? It is not just that simple and easy to do for most.

[farang]

one other thing about the insurance.most all of the 70 plus age retired guys already have insurance in their home country that pays as well in thailand,some cases you pay the bill in thai and get it  paid back to you in your own country.but most thai embassies wont accept it.so that puts most older tourtist haveing to pay  two  insurances.and thats quite a chunck of cash.so yes i think a 1,000 baht fee paid on arrival would be a great way to cover it and drop the insurance required to buy in thai.ive used my usa at least 3 times over the years and paid there got my stamped paid bill and turned it in when back in usa.and as far as any skiping out on a hospital bill,just turn it in to immigration with a flag on it and the guy has to pay it to leave on his flight.easy fix. chock dee to all.

[gummy]

1 hour ago, Smithydog said:

The challenge I have with all this is simply the business risk associated with narrowing options. If the intention, as seems often stated, is to attract the higher end of the market, is now the right time to do it?

Stifling a portion of your market when you are in a recovery stage, doesn't make sound business sense. Most change, adapt or improve their business when things are going good and not bad. Doing it in the not so good times is often a decision made in desperation and doomed for failure.

Covid-19 has put back the plans of many and restricted their options. If the country has made the decision to open up, then perhaps a return to a welcome policy for all will help stimulate the economy more than trying to make changes now designed to potentially attract a more restricted group.

After all, there are a lot of extremely well established areas in the world where the richest choose to go already and would have a distinct and historical advantage over a newcomer to a congested market.

Some excellent points you made.  However the "welcome policy" you mention appeared to me to become an "unwelcome policy" from around 2010 onwards, that is both from  business and personal  perspectives ad most certainly more acute since 2016/17.  Not of course from the normal Thai people as nothing has changed, their always welcoming, but the Thai government has certainly introduced some measures, official and unofficial that gives one the opinion that the trend to deter foreigners was and still is unspoken policy irrespective of the fact that many of us have been here years with Thai families.

[Stardust]

18 hours 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.

Everybody who loves Thailand hopes that to end all the mess they created in that beautifull country. Thailand deserve better and competent people come in charge again to manage the country. They came into power by a couo not by a election and stayed by changing laws, constitution to their favour and to maintain their status quo. It is a sad how deep down they brought Thailand