Jump to content
BANGKOK 24 July 2019 01:20
webfact

Tourism yes, work NO!: Big Oud turns back Chinese man at airport!

Recommended Posts

Chinese bloke round the corner from us, same visa as me has work prohibited stamped on it, goes to work everyday. His Mrs gets an extension by claiming her daughter born here has a Thai father, but that is not true. Not daft the Chinese.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LongTang said:

 

Ill intent or not, In the end of the day these polices will and already are hurting tourism.

People do not like the stress involved with the unknown reactions of the IO when arriving here multiple times for holiday purposes, and taking the risk of being rejected like some dirty criminals.

 

So even if some people who were working illegally here will be forced to leave, In the big picture the country will lose much more then it will gain.

 

 

The true tourist wont know the difference. They come for a month or two and go home. They might return in a couple of years. Long stay visitors on tourist visas are not real tourists so to speak. They want to live here and don't want to pay for the appropriate visa.  Many fell because they could do this in the past they are entitled to continue.  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 hours ago, lamyai3 said:

They've said they haven't bothered in the past as it's been too difficult to catch them. However the government pushed new cybersecurity laws this February prior to the elections, allowing them the right to snoop and seize computers and devices without a warrant. There's also been the push for a single internet gateway in recent years, so it's certainly possible the country could become hostile to digital nomads and businesses if they keep going in the current direction. 

I would just love them to try that one, I'll surely make the news when my violent side comes out....LOL

Edited by metisdead
Please do not modify someone else's post in your quoted reply, either with font or color changes or wording.
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, FredGallaher said:

The true tourist wont know the difference. They come for a month or two and go home. They might return in a couple of years. Long stay visitors on tourist visas are not real tourists so to speak. They want to live here and don't want to pay for the appropriate visa.  Many fell because they could do this in the past they are entitled to continue.  

I beg to disagree, If the issue here is an economical one, Then the definition of what constitute a 'tourist' should not depend on the length of stay or the number of visits as long as one does not deprive work from the locals.

 

Moreover, tourists that come here for a month or two are the ones that are most likely to come back much more often as they usually develop deeper emotional ties to this place.

Those are the tourist that will be hurt the most, and the ones that will spread the bad word about this place, A word that till now brought here millions.

 

If on the other hand the issue is Not Economical one But Nationalistic one, then i rest my case..

 

Edited by LongTang
  • Thanks 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, lamyai3 said:

Not sure, I guess those options are available to them. But I can't see half a million baht for a five year visa appealing, unless they've got money to launder - there are plenty of cheaper and more welcoming destinations on offer. Let's not forget also that the yuan is another currency that's plummeted against the baht in the past year or two. 

Chinese have way more money than you think. They just don't flaunt their wealth. Majority wouldn't whinge about 800.000 Bht for retirement ext.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Letseng said:

Chinese have way more money than you think. They just don't flaunt their wealth. Majority wouldn't whinge about 800.000 Bht for retirement ext.

Flaunt no. Hoard yes. Come in like gangbusters, yes. Too many of the billions who are buying up the world. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, SteveK said:

the anti-foreigner sentiment with painful visa hoops

What has changed for a (western) tourist?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, LongTang said:

I beg to disagree, If the issue here is an economical one, Then the definition of what constitute a 'tourist' should not depend on the length of stay or the number of visits as long as one does not deprive work from the locals.

 

Moreover, tourists that come here for a month or two are the ones that are most likely to come back much more often as they usually develop deeper emotional ties to this place.

Those are the tourist that will be hurt the most, and the ones that will spread the bad word about this place, A word that till now brought here millions.

 

If on the other hand the issue is Not Economical one But Nationalistic one, then i rest my case..

 

I don't see these tourist visa /long termers contributing much. Mostly rent a cheap room and eat street food. The want to stay cheap and take advantage of Thai facilities. Thailand seem to realize that there contribution is minimal.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, jackdd said:

 

 

The translation from Thaivisa is wrong. I always wonder if Thaivisa just uses Google translate instead of employing somebody who could deliver a proper translation.

This sentence is made up from Thaivisa:

 

 

 

The Thai article just says that the Chinese man stayed a long time in Thailand before and did not meet the criteria to be allowed entry into Thailand. They suspect that he is working because he spent more time in Thailand than what would be reasonable for a tourist.

Then below this they mention which laws cover this, and also which law / rules cover the visa on arrival which he used, and here they basically say that a visa on arrival allows a stay of 15 days.

 

The problem is the statement "he spent more time in Thailand than what would be reasonable for a tourist." what's reasonable time for tourist" 2 weeks? a month? 2 weeks 4---5 times a yeaar? There is no rule so IO just make up one  depending on their mood not any particular criteria.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...