ex pats

[Guest aot87]

With the $

[Gaybutton]

With the $

[Guest Astrrro]

I live within my means so I'm always looking for ways to trim some fat. Recently, I've been socializing less at bars suggesting to friends that we go to the 10 baht Thai whiskey stand.

 

Finding a cheaper hotel is one way to save money. I think you'll get the biggest bang for the buck by working the frequent flyer programs. Sometimes signing up for a new credit card can get you gobs of miles, in one instance 30K miles.

[Guest aot87]

I'm not sure I understand the intent of your question.

What i ment was, i was wondering how guys like your self were coping with the bad exchange rate and remember, some guys are on a fixed income

[Gaybutton]

What i ment was, i was wondering how guys like your self were coping with the bad exchange rate

Most who live here and are having troubles because of the exchange rate manage to find ways to cut back. It means some can't go out to the bars as often, or drink as much, or take boys off as often. It is easy to cut back on food prices by eating at less expensive restaurants or cooking at home. People find ways to cope. Walking more often instead of taxis. Using a fan more than air conditioning. Moving to a less expensive place. Taking in a roommate.

 

Some people started out with a rock bottom income in the first place. Now, if they've used up all the ways they can cut back and have no other alternatives left, then I suppose they can take lessons from the boys who manage to live on incomes of 3000 or 4000 baht a month.

 

However, if someone really is trying to live here on that kind of a budget, then they're living here illegally if they're lying about their income when they get their visa. Even if they're living here at the minimum legal income, that still enough to live decently. They may not be able to lead a life of wealth and splendor, but they can live an acceptable lifestyle. I know farang who are living here on incomes less than 35,000 baht per month and yet they manage to survive. I wouldn't want to have to live here on an income that low, but people do what they have to do.

 

Of course, obviously they're lying about their monthly income. If the embassies and/or Immigration ever starts requiring more proof, that's when they can really start laughing . . .

[Guest fountainhall]

With the $ £ and euro still falling against the thai bht, how is it affecting the long stay expats

From what I read, the € has been tanking because of problems over the Greek economy where the previous government seems to have falsified data to such a huge extent that the deficit is actually double what had been reported. The country needs some sort of bailout or loan guarantees. It seems some sort of deal is being reached and this issue may soon be on the back burner. Will that lead to a rise in the €? I haven't the faintest idea!

 

The £ is falling for 2 reasons. Firstly, fear is growing that the country's deficit is becoming unmanageable and another bailout may be needed. Secondly, pundits are now suggesting there could be a hung parliament after the next general election which has to come sometime soon. This goes against all the polls in recent years which have predicted a landslide win by the opposition Conservative party. The markets don't like indecisive elections.

 

To get to your question, I live in Bangkok. Up till now - and for the next few years - my income is mostly in US$ and this has remained reasonably stable recently. However, in the longer term, that income will switch to sterling and I have been assuming an exchange rate around 55. If the rate goes well under 50, I will take some of the measures which GB outlined to cut costs. If things get really bad, I'll consider moving from Bangkok up to Chiang Mai where most living costs are considerably cheaper.

 

But I recall not so long ago (within the last 18 months), sterling dropped to almost 40, then swung back up to 60. And the € was as low as 1.25 before rising to about 1.60. All the financial commentators suggest that the US$ has to decline over the next few years because of the huge amounts of money the Bush and Obama governments have been printing. So my fingers are crossed that the other currency declines are short-term.

[gumbleby]

Of course, obviously they're lying about their monthly income. If the embassies and/or Immigration ever starts requiring more proof, that's when they can really start laughing . . .

 

If they have sufficient money in the bank, a lower income should not be a problem. In that case it's a very good idea to live within your means. With that sort of budget, most can live much better in Thailand than they would be able to at home. Only problem I see might be medical expenses.

[Gaybutton]

If they have sufficient money in the bank, a lower income should not be a problem.

I don't know how many people would have sufficient money in the bank, yet have an income of only 30,000 baht or so. Probably not very many. In any case, to legally obtain their visa, they have to prove it. The USA embassy takes your word for it and issues the proof-of-income statement based solely on your word, with no kind of proof or documentation of any kind to back up what you say. I have no idea what other embassies require. But what happens to these people if real proof is ever required and they don't have 800,000 baht in the bank? If that ever happens, now they have a slight problem.

[Guest Astrrro]

I don't know how many people would have sufficient money in the bank, yet have an income of only 30,000 baht or so. Probably not very many.

 

Plenty of folks are in that boat. Guys who retired/quit early in life and aren't collecting a pension or social security. I have zero income.

[Gaybutton]

Guys who retired/quit early in life and aren't collecting a pension or social security. I have zero income.

Yes, but obviously you've accumulated enough to live on for the rest of your life. I'm talking about people who retired, didn't have much of anything accumulated, and also have very small incomes. These are the people who are living month to month and are almost always broke by the end of the month or even before. I'm sure they can survive, but beyond sheer survival, I don't think I would want to trade for their lifestyle.

[Guest Astrrro]

Yes, but obviously you've accumulated enough to live on for the rest of your life.

 

I wish I was as sure of that as you are!

[Gaybutton]

I wish I was as sure of that as you are!

"If not, yer in the terlet . . ." - Jimmy Durante

[Guest]

1 Just over 2 years ago it was possible to get well over 60 baht to the pound if I am not mistaken?

 

2 Anyone retiring abroad with an income purely in Sterling has to recognise the risk of substantial falls in their income when measured in local currency.

 

3 Anyone still investing for future retirement in Asia should consider investing a proportion of their funds in Asia Pacific Investment Trusts to reduce currency risk.

 

4 I think the markets are worried about a hung parliament AND a re-elected Labour government. After all, Labour have not shown the slightest clue about how to reduce the deficits. They may have to be bailed out by the IMF, just like 1976.

[Guest fountainhall]

2 Anyone retiring abroad with an income purely in Sterling has to recognise the risk of substantial falls in their income when measured in local currency.

 

3 Anyone still investing for future retirement in Asia should consider investing a proportion of their funds in Asia Pacific Investment Trusts to reduce currency risk.

 

4 I think the markets are worried about a hung parliament AND a re-elected Labour government. After all, Labour have not shown the slightest clue about how to reduce the deficits. They may have to be bailed out by the IMF, just like 1976.

Re 2 and 3, I totally agree that diversifying one's savings is always a good idea. But it's not so easy to do that when the bulk of your retirement income is going to be paid in one currency.

 

Re 4, the UK's deficit ballooned for the same reason that the US deficit ballooned - fighting expensive wars overseas (the more expensive of which should never have been started), bailing out irresponsible banks and pumping stimulus money into the economy to avoid an even worse recession. From all the partisan political in-fighting going on, I can't see that any party in either country has much of a prescription to make meaningful reductions in the respective deficits in the short-term. At least in the UK, there is only one 'bad guy' to blame - the government in power. In the US, every Republican I see on TV always fails to recognise that his party actually caused the whole bloody mess in the first place!