Prev Page 3 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 Next » Please log in to reply 150 replies to this topic

[cloudhopper]

gregb, on 2010-07-04 18:10:52, said:

Hedge your pension and buy gold futures.

Good advice IMO but buying physical (Thai 965) gold may prove to be more useful here in the event (of capital controls, currency crisis, windfall taxation etc.) than futures.

[el jefe]

craigt3365, on 2010-07-04 11:32:32, said:

Not sure about that home state thing....I am back in the States fairly often visiting family and friends...about 3 months out of the year.  So, I don't really qualify as being "out" full time.  That may be what is getting me?

trogers is right on...property is a great protection against inflation.  I know many folks in California who could not afford to live there if they hadn't bought 20 years ago or so.  But since they did, they are living very comfortably with housing being taken care of...and paid off...

You can be an expat with no state of residence (back in the US) and completely avoid state taxes. State laws vary from state to state but what most of them have in common is that in order to terminate your former state residency you must establish residency someplace else, whether that be another state, or another country. There are more obstacles if you continue to own or rent property in your former state of residence.

[trogers]

gregb, on 2010-07-04 18:10:52, said:

Average price of gold in 2005, about $445/oz. (8400 Baht/baht weight). Average price of gold this year, about $1200 USD (18,400 Baht/baht weight).

I remember gold prices were once in the 800s and then fell below the 400 point. What hedging will you make that prices are 1200 today and will not fall below 800 by year end?

[Naam]

Pacificperson, on 2010-07-04 05:39:23, said:

Naam, on 2010-07-04 04:32:33, said:

Thailand - No Longer A Cheap Retirement Destination

i fully agree and claim that Thailand is not only extremely cheap for those who would pay 45% (or more) of their income to the taxman in their home countries but live a very comfortable life in Thailand without spending a single penny as all expenses (and much more) are covered by their savings on income tax.

I am not yet retired, but soon I hope to be on a US public sector pension. My expectation is that I will have to pay US income taxes wherever I live. I don't know of anyway to avoid this.

Also, since my pension will always be in US dollars, I will always face the exchange rate risk. Over 20 years the downside could have a really significant impact.  The solution here seems to be to invest early as much as possible in Thailand. Buy a condo or long term lease.

unfortunately you are a U.S. citizen and therefore taxed no matter where you live on this planet. a number of other nationalities [still] enjoy being tax free when not resident in their home country.

[Naam]

geriatrickid, on 2010-07-04 23:45:14, said:

Naam, on 2010-07-04 04:32:33, said:

Thailand - No Longer A Cheap Retirement Destination

i fully agree and claim that Thailand is not only extremely cheap for those who would pay 45% (or more) of their income to the taxman in their home countries but live a very comfortable life in Thailand without spending a single penny as all expenses (and much more) are covered by their savings on income tax.

Provided that the foreign resident assumes the status of a non-resident of his/her homeland. Considering the political climate around the world and the problems of accessing affordable health care, a prudent person would do the cost -benefit analysis first. Today,many financially successful people are not prepared to sever all ties back to their homelands.

what is there to analyse? anybody who is financially successful does not rely on some shitty public/government health care system but has taken things into his/her own hands and maintains private insurance. and if the situation in the host country changes he/she moves to another country. the worst case scenario is returning back to ones home country and pay through the nose for each and everything on top of paying taxes. there is no such thing like "severing all ties" when moving abroad as one always has the right to return any time.

no doubt dozens of reasons exist why people who could afford to live abroad prefer not to move such as old parents to take care of, family, friends, etc., etc., etc.

by the way, what you call a "prudent person" would be considered by most others as a "person without significant financial means" who has no other choice than relying on public health care, unemployment insurance, welfare, dole or you name it. for those who have the means it is just a matter of comparing advantages / disadvantages and then make a decision. that individual results will differ considerably goes of course without saying.

[MrE]

This is the normal trend for all developing nations. As more currency flows in, the local population becomes more aware of what they are worth, demand better, although still abominable wages, the cost of living for everyone goes up and so forth. I remember staying for months in Spain and Greece for almost nothing decades ago. The faster the speed of international communications and accompanying education, the quicker the days of Empire, exploitation and substandard pay scales will disappear.

I have had so many consultations with farang business owners, for instance, who come to me to ask how they can get more productivity out of their employees, whom they portray as ignorant, lazy and irresponsible. In nine out of ten cases, they are paying below the minimum daily wage and requiring that the employees spend twelve hours a day on their premises. Both of these practices are not only illegal but counterproductive as has been proven by almost every major conglomerate around the world. Over time, the local population learns what they should be earning and will eventually want it, or will accept the lower wages and not perform efficiently or loyally.

People looking to use their hard earned cash to live "cheaply" (at four or five times the earnings of what a Thai lives on) while the locals live worse, will find such locations harder and harder to find. I believe it's still possible to live like royalty in Sudan, Colombia and Burma. And I remember Afghanistan being warm this time of year.

[PattayaParent]

Jingthing, on 2010-07-04 13:15:18, said:

Not all retirees own their homes. Usually, it is desirable, but everyone's goals in life, yes later life also, are different. For example, some retired people like to be more mobile and owning an illiquid property would restrict that freedom. Also, in places like Thailand, it is still rather cheap to rent and retirees are only promised permission to stay one year at a time, with no longer term promises.

Very true, most of the people I know back home don't own a home, in fact there are entire streets and blocks that are owned and rented out by Housing Associations, the residents of which don't own property, and I suspect every city in UK has the same.

[badge]

Thailand - No Longer A Cheap Retirement Destination


Agreed.

[gregb]

trogers, on 2010-07-05 01:21:53, said:

gregb, on 2010-07-04 18:10:52, said:

Average price of gold in 2005, about $445/oz. (8400 Baht/baht weight). Average price of gold this year, about $1200 USD (18,400 Baht/baht weight).

I remember gold prices were once in the 800s and then fell below the 400 point. What hedging will you make that prices are 1200 today and will not fall below 800 by year end?

You don't, because that won't happen. This isn't the 80's. If you think it is, then do nothing, keep holding your fiat and you can join the chorus with everyone else about how expensive Thailand is becoming.

For people who think in terms of gold, the cost of living in Thailand (and indeed every other country in the world) has gone down for 5 years and will continue to go down. Gold is the strongest currency in the world today and it will continue strengthening for the forseeable future. A smart person would use whatever financial derivatives are available to them to try and hedge their weakening pensions against gold. It is really the only move left.

For people like myself, who have no money anyway and are still decades from retirement, it doesn't really matter one way or the other. I know what is coming, and I am just screwed no matter what I do. Those of us in our 30's and 40's who aren't already wealthy never will be...at least not without serious risk. The days when you could make a sound, safe investment and count on retirement are long since passed. But *IF* I had something to protect, I would be doing so aggressively, and you'll find that protection in a shiny yellow rock.

Again, the cost of living in Thailand is entirely dependent on the currency you view it in. If you insist on using dollars or euros, yes, it is getting expensive. If you use a more modern currency like gold, it is actually getting cheaper. I suggest to everyone it is time to change your perspective rather than complaining about rising costs.

[badge]

When another country that Im interested in starts pricing real estate, utilities, goods and services in Gold, perhaps it would be worth considering. Until then, I will continue to compare THB to currencies used in the real world, such as the much maligned USD, EUR, GBP etc.

Incidentally advocating buying derivatives in Gold instead of bullion is a rather poor idea to me; long dated contracts are extremely illiquid, short dated contracts require constant roll and therefore costs(spread, comm.).

[trogers]

gregb, on 2010-07-05 18:57:02, said:

trogers, on 2010-07-05 01:21:53, said:

gregb, on 2010-07-04 18:10:52, said:

Average price of gold in 2005, about $445/oz. (8400 Baht/baht weight). Average price of gold this year, about $1200 USD (18,400 Baht/baht weight).

I remember gold prices were once in the 800s and then fell below the 400 point. What hedging will you make that prices are 1200 today and will not fall below 800 by year end?

You don't, because that won't happen. This isn't the 80's. If you think it is, then do nothing, keep holding your fiat and you can join the chorus with everyone else about how expensive Thailand is becoming.

This line of thinking seems very familiar. I think it was deeply expressed a decade ago, and a sizable herd of investors followed. I recall it was then about The New Economy and the Nasdaq...

[CaptHaddock]

Buckeye911, on 2010-07-04 18:56:25, said:

Good point, Pib.  We need to maintain a residence in the states so my wife does not lose her permanent resident status.  If I should die before her, she would not be able to collect my social security benefits if she is no longer a permanent resident.  I will obviously research further but I am also assuming that I will have to pay Virginia state tax because I will be receiving a state government pension from Virginia.

I don't believe that receiving a state pension from VA establishes residence for tax purposes in VA.  There was Supreme Court case a few years ago where CA had tried that and they lost.  However, VA is probably the most aggressive state on collecting income tax from expats.  They take the view that you remain a VA resident until such time as you establish legal residence in another STATE, not country.  That said, you should get a lawyer and find a solution.  It would be tragic to pay income tax to VA for decades after you have left.


Your strategy for your wife is not a good one, although your motivation is.  She should get her US citizenship.  Then she can inherit your SS benefits and any IRAs you have without a problem.  She is not entitled to keep her green card after living abroad after a year.  Since BCIS and the VA state govt have different standards for different purposes it seems to be possible to run afoul of both govt levels.  BCIS may decide she is committing fraud, for example.  

We are moving from NY to Thailand next year and will not be paying state and city income tax, which totals at a rate > 10%.  My Thai wife is a US citizen.  NY state is not a problem like VA.

   

[Buckeye911]

CaptHaddock, on 2010-07-05 23:16:15, said:

Buckeye911, on 2010-07-04 18:56:25, said:

Good point, Pib.  We need to maintain a residence in the states so my wife does not lose her permanent resident status.  If I should die before her, she would not be able to collect my social security benefits if she is no longer a permanent resident.  I will obviously research further but I am also assuming that I will have to pay Virginia state tax because I will be receiving a state government pension from Virginia.

I don't believe that receiving a state pension from VA establishes residence for tax purposes in VA.  There was Supreme Court case a few years ago where CA had tried that and they lost.  However, VA is probably the most aggressive state on collecting income tax from expats.  They take the view that you remain a VA resident until such time as you establish legal residence in another STATE, not country.  That said, you should get a lawyer and find a solution.  It would be tragic to pay income tax to VA for decades after you have left.


Your strategy for your wife is not a good one, although your motivation is.  She should get her US citizenship.  Then she can inherit your SS benefits and any IRAs you have without a problem.  She is not entitled to keep her green card after living abroad after a year.  Since BCIS and the VA state govt have different standards for different purposes it seems to be possible to run afoul of both govt levels.  BCIS may decide she is committing fraud, for example.  

We are moving from NY to Thailand next year and will not be paying state and city income tax, which totals at a rate > 10%.  My Thai wife is a US citizen.  NY state is not a problem like VA.

  

Thanks for your comments, CaptHaddock.  I would hope that we can return to the states often enough to maintain her green card status but I realize at some point that would become quite a burden.  My fear is that if she becomes a US citizen she will no longer be able to own real property in Thailand.  Currently she owns a house and another parcel of land, we own another parcel of land jointly.  I have attempted to research this a little but have not been able to find anything definitive as to whether Thailand permits dual citizenship. Some say yes and some say no,  I guess I should consult an attorney the next time we are in Thailand.

[nakachalet]

buckeye911.... are you a true blood buckeye graduate?

there have been abundant postings in reference to thai citizen and dual citizenship ....

relax buckeye, your spouse will have no problem whatever at all in thailand to own thai real properties and otherwise.... and whatever else you wish to purchase for her and own....

there are many returning affluent thais who both own land and properties in other more liberated countries and also in thailand....

in general these folks are rather quiet.... like < มีดคมในฝัก > sword hiding its sharp edge,  not bragging about it.... and there are many many of such individuals in our circle of friends....

when your wife does hold an u.s. passport, she would be joining this less than <1% of affluent thai population.... having the privilege of owning real properties in more than one country....

i am certain by then she would also become even smarter pertaining to thai and farang stuff ....  

just ascertain that her permanent residency does not expire.... and apply for her naturalization status just as soon as the laws permit.... alright?

but how does your post--I would hope that we can return to the states often enough to maintain  her green card status but I realize at some point that would become  quite a burden.

just why would returning to the states occasionally to satisfy the immigration requirements becomes quite a burden....?  don't quite understand that part though....  

Buckeye911, on 2010-07-06 01:57:08, said:

CaptHaddock, on 2010-07-05 23:16:15, said:

Buckeye911, on 2010-07-04 18:56:25, said:

Good point, Pib.  We need to maintain a residence in the states so my wife does not lose her permanent resident status.  If I should die before her, she would not be able to collect my social security benefits if she is no longer a permanent resident.  I will obviously research further but I am also assuming that I will have to pay Virginia state tax because I will be receiving a state government pension from Virginia.

I don't believe that receiving a state pension from VA establishes residence for tax purposes in VA.  There was Supreme Court case a few years ago where CA had tried that and they lost.  However, VA is probably the most aggressive state on collecting income tax from expats.  They take the view that you remain a VA resident until such time as you establish legal residence in another STATE, not country.  That said, you should get a lawyer and find a solution.  It would be tragic to pay income tax to VA for decades after you have left.

Your strategy for your wife is not a good one, although your motivation is.  She should get her US citizenship.  Then she can inherit your SS benefits and any IRAs you have without a problem.  She is not entitled to keep her green card after living abroad after a year.  Since BCIS and the VA state govt have different standards for different purposes it seems to be possible to run afoul of both govt levels.  BCIS may decide she is committing fraud, for example.  

We are moving from NY to Thailand next year and will not be paying state and city income tax, which totals at a rate > 10%.  My Thai wife is a US citizen.  NY state is not a problem like VA.

Thanks for your comments, CaptHaddock.  I would hope that we can return to the states often enough to maintain her green card status but I realize at some point that would become quite a burden.  My fear is that if she becomes a US citizen she will no longer be able to own real property in Thailand.  Currently she owns a house and another parcel of land, we own another parcel of land jointly.  I have attempted to research this a little but have not been able to find anything definitive as to whether Thailand permits dual citizenship. Some say yes and some say no,  I guess I should consult an attorney the next time we are in Thailand.

[CaptHaddock]

Buckeye911, on 2010-07-06 01:57:08, said:

Thanks for your comments, CaptHaddock.  I would hope that we can return to the states often enough to maintain her green card status but I realize at some point that would become quite a burden.  My fear is that if she becomes a US citizen she will no longer be able to own real property in Thailand.  Currently she owns a house and another parcel of land, we own another parcel of land jointly.  I have attempted to research this a little but have not been able to find anything definitive as to whether Thailand permits dual citizenship. Some say yes and some say no,  I guess I should consult an attorney the next time we are in Thailand.

Although I am not in Thailand, I have read repeated assurances that Thais with dual citizenship have no difficulties with owning property.  Prior to the 1997 Constitution she would not have had property rights, but not since.

On the other hand, simply returning to the states to maintain a residence is not cheap and is probably violating the law since your actual residence is Thailand.  If your wife has had the green card for 3 years she can apply for citizenship, which is relatively fast these days and actually easier to get than the green card.  The Thais are lucky in being able to hold dual citizenship unlke the Chinese or Koreans who lose their native citizenship when they obtain US citizenship.  If your wife is living abroad and loses her green card (which what BCIS intends) she will have a very hard time getting a second shot at citizenship.  Especially, if she is younger than you, her lifetime benefit from SS could be very large.  When she reaches Full Retirement Age (depends on her birth year, but probably 66 or 67) she qualifies for half of your SS benefit which she receives for her life unless you die before she does, in which case she inherits your full SS benefit.  For that reason if you can afford to wait until age 70 to collect then you receive about 132% of your FRA benefit and her spousal and widow's benefits go up accordingly.   All plus SS's inflation adjustment.  I think your plan of trying to maintain her green card status when the BCIS does not want her to have it jeopardizes her lifetime SS benefits.  Very risky in my opinion and not worth it.


Also, I think having dual citizenship is a good hedge for the future.  You never know what might happen.




In any case, good luck with your plans.

[craigt3365]

Buckeye911, on 2010-07-06 01:57:08, said:

CaptHaddock, on 2010-07-05 23:16:15, said:

Buckeye911, on 2010-07-04 18:56:25, said:

Good point, Pib.  We need to maintain a residence in the states so my wife does not lose her permanent resident status.  If I should die before her, she would not be able to collect my social security benefits if she is no longer a permanent resident.  I will obviously research further but I am also assuming that I will have to pay Virginia state tax because I will be receiving a state government pension from Virginia.

I don't believe that receiving a state pension from VA establishes residence for tax purposes in VA.  There was Supreme Court case a few years ago where CA had tried that and they lost.  However, VA is probably the most aggressive state on collecting income tax from expats.  They take the view that you remain a VA resident until such time as you establish legal residence in another STATE, not country.  That said, you should get a lawyer and find a solution.  It would be tragic to pay income tax to VA for decades after you have left.


Your strategy for your wife is not a good one, although your motivation is.  She should get her US citizenship.  Then she can inherit your SS benefits and any IRAs you have without a problem.  She is not entitled to keep her green card after living abroad after a year.  Since BCIS and the VA state govt have different standards for different purposes it seems to be possible to run afoul of both govt levels.  BCIS may decide she is committing fraud, for example.  

We are moving from NY to Thailand next year and will not be paying state and city income tax, which totals at a rate > 10%.  My Thai wife is a US citizen.  NY state is not a problem like VA.

  

Thanks for your comments, CaptHaddock.  I would hope that we can return to the states often enough to maintain her green card status but I realize at some point that would become quite a burden.  My fear is that if she becomes a US citizen she will no longer be able to own real property in Thailand.  Currently she owns a house and another parcel of land, we own another parcel of land jointly.  I have attempted to research this a little but have not been able to find anything definitive as to whether Thailand permits dual citizenship. Some say yes and some say no,  I guess I should consult an attorney the next time we are in Thailand.

As was stated, dual citizenship is no problem.  My wife leaves here with her Thai passport, arrives in the US with her USA one, and does the reverse coming back.  All in full view of the immigration agents.  We have quite a few friends who are dual citizens of Thailand and another country.  No worries at all.  And the benefits of a USA passport are huge.  Travel is now a breeze vs. a real pain with a Thai passport!

[nakachalet]

CaptHaddock, on 2010-07-06 07:31:33, said:

Buckeye911, on 2010-07-06 01:57:08, said:

.... If your wife has had the green card for 3 years she can apply for citizenship,
In any case, good luck with your plans.

  

capthaddock

senility creeps up up quickly on me....

it seems that the immigration has modified to require minimally 5 or 6 yrs of CONTINUOUS RESIDENCY for a greencard holder to apply for naturalization.... ?

my memory could betray me again....

[PattayaParent]

reefsurfah, on 2010-07-04 14:10:04, said:

trogers, on 2010-07-04 13:24:28, said:

PattayaParent, on 2010-07-04 13:04:59, said:

trogers, on 2010-07-04 12:46:34, said:

If you have to sell your property for less, then you most likely have been speculating rather than investing. This case is most probably due to property cycles. Bought near the peak and sell during the downturn. Property cycles in many countries have a duration of 9-12 years. The recent cycle in Thailand can be trekked at peaking in 1996 before the Tom Yum Kung crisis and then a pickup in 2003 and another crash in 2008. And we know property prices can crash up to 40%, between peak and bottom prices.

But if you are to gauge comparative prices over 20 years, or two property cycles, you will find that subsequent peak prices (or bottom prices) will always be higher than the previous peak (or bottom). That's your hedge against inflation.

It sounds like you've never heard of negative equity, and it's effect on a great number of home owners, as opposed to speculators.

And when it comes time to sell up to fund your retirement and the property prices drop 20-25% making it impossible, it's really no consolation that you are better off than the last recession, when you weren't able to retire either.

And you again fail to take into account people that can't afford to own property.

Negative equity will not affect homeowners who do not over borrow. In my generation, we have never thought of buying an over-expensive place at 90% financing with 25-30 years mortgage period.

We were max at 80% for 15 years. Yes, I am in my 50s. We were able to pay back the loan through one property cycle. My first condo in Bangkok was bought in 1994 at 65% and 10-year mortgage. Tom Yum Kung crisis hit in 1997. Never had a problem with my installment even with negative equity, though the quantum of negative equity was less than 5% due to borrowing only 65%.

Agree.  Negative equity or being "under water" only works against you when you can't make the mortgage payments.  If you are looking to live in and not invest/speculate, then it shouldn't really matter what price you paid for it since you are using the place to live and can afford it.  I'm kind of surprised by all these new condos that are taken up by speculators, I guess its money chasing money..I wouldn't want to buy from these speculators anyways, just gives them more reason to buy and sell.  TIT

Mortgages, at whatever rate and duration, can be used to calculate the total impact of negative equity. People never take into account the total purchase price of their property, only the initial price paid to the seller. But when you add in all the mortgage interest payments of x% over x years the ACTUAL purchase price can be 2.5X the initial price, and more.

So you paid the seller 100k and over the x years of paying off mortgages you have actually paid 200k but the market value of the property is only 150k. That's negative equity.

Or you paid the seller 100k and over the x years of paying off mortgages you have actually paid 200k and the market value of the property is 250k, but when it comes time to sell to retire the market has crashed and the value is 165k (30% drop). Negative equity again

Nothing to do with speculators, purely affects homeowners.

The theory of market cycles only works when you use the comparison to the peaks and troughs of inflation over the same period to determine if there has been a 'hedge against inflation' or not, but of course inflation is never a -ve number so there are no troughs, and as I said above you have to also adjust for ACTUAL cost not just look at market value.

[craigt3365]

nakachalet, on 2010-07-06 08:14:36, said:

CaptHaddock, on 2010-07-06 07:31:33, said:

Buckeye911, on 2010-07-06 01:57:08, said:

.... If your wife has had the green card for 3 years she can apply for citizenship,
In any case, good luck with your plans.

  

capthaddock

senility creeps up up quickly on me....

it seems that the immigration has modified to require minimally 5 or 6 yrs of CONTINUOUS RESIDENCY for a greencard holder to apply for naturalization.... ?

my memory could betray me again....

We got my wife's done in 3 years.  I believe you had to be in the US for at least 1/2 the time.  We took many trips, and a few to Mexico where she could just use her green card and not have the passport stamped.  It was an easy process.  Fair amount of paperwork, but easy.

[trogers]

PattayaParent, on 2010-07-06 08:35:07, said:

reefsurfah, on 2010-07-04 14:10:04, said:

trogers, on 2010-07-04 13:24:28, said:

PattayaParent, on 2010-07-04 13:04:59, said:

It sounds like you've never heard of negative equity, and it's effect on a great number of home owners, as opposed to speculators.

And when it comes time to sell up to fund your retirement and the property prices drop 20-25% making it impossible, it's really no consolation that you are better off than the last recession, when you weren't able to retire either.

And you again fail to take into account people that can't afford to own property.

Negative equity will not affect homeowners who do not over borrow. In my generation, we have never thought of buying an over-expensive place at 90% financing with 25-30 years mortgage period.

We were max at 80% for 15 years. Yes, I am in my 50s. We were able to pay back the loan through one property cycle. My first condo in Bangkok was bought in 1994 at 65% and 10-year mortgage. Tom Yum Kung crisis hit in 1997. Never had a problem with my installment even with negative equity, though the quantum of negative equity was less than 5% due to borrowing only 65%.

Agree.  Negative equity or being "under water" only works against you when you can't make the mortgage payments.  If you are looking to live in and not invest/speculate, then it shouldn't really matter what price you paid for it since you are using the place to live and can afford it.  I'm kind of surprised by all these new condos that are taken up by speculators, I guess its money chasing money..I wouldn't want to buy from these speculators anyways, just gives them more reason to buy and sell.  TIT

Mortgages, at whatever rate and duration, can be used to calculate the total impact of negative equity. People never take into account the total purchase price of their property, only the initial price paid to the seller. But when you add in all the mortgage interest payments of x% over x years the ACTUAL purchase price can be 2.5X the initial price, and more.

So you paid the seller 100k and over the x years of paying off mortgages you have actually paid 200k but the market value of the property is only 150k. That's negative equity.

Or you paid the seller 100k and over the x years of paying off mortgages you have actually paid 200k and the market value of the property is 250k, but when it comes time to sell to retire the market has crashed and the value is 165k (30% drop). Negative equity again

Nothing to do with speculators, purely affects homeowners.

The theory of market cycles only works when you use the comparison to the peaks and troughs of inflation over the same period to determine if there has been a 'hedge against inflation' or not, but of course inflation is never a -ve number so there are no troughs, and as I said above you have to also adjust for ACTUAL cost not just look at market value.

And how many investors in the stock and commodity markets also consider financing costs in their margin trading, especially in times of forced selling?

At least financing cost in acquiring real properties can be partly offset by rental income, or if self-occupied, rent saved.

Edited by trogers, 2010-07-06 10:52:55.

[PattayaParent]

^ best just to pay cash for the property, then you don't delude yourself that you've made a profit or have a hedge against inflation as your cost is fixed on purchase and sale.

Edit: Oh, and don't forget in your inflation calculations that the inflation rates should be compounded as the figures given are the year on year rate.

Edited by PattayaParent, 2010-07-06 12:11:15.

[PattayaParent]

trogers, on 2010-07-06 10:47:08, said:

And how many investors in the stock and commodity markets also consider financing costs in their margin trading, especially in times of forced selling?

At least financing cost in acquiring real properties can be partly offset by rental income, or if self-occupied, rent saved.

Anyone who doesn't figure in financing costs of 100%+++ into their calculations isn't going to be a very successful investor.

[Buckeye911]

Wow, I really appreciate all the help you guys have given me. It's great to know that my wife can gain US citizenship without giving up her Thai citizenship. We are about the same age and we met in the states, she already had a green card when we met.  There's no way I'm waiting until I'm 70 to retire, I'm giving it up at 60.  With my Virginia Law Enforcement pension I can get full retirement at age 60. I can also get a supplement of a little over $1000/month until I chose to start collecting Social Security. Oh, by the way. What I meant when I stated earlier that at some point returning to the US every six months or so would become a burden is just that as we get older there may be health problems that eventually could make long trips more difficult. Also, I am by no means wealthy. At one point I was making pretty good money in manufacturing but I just got a little fed up with the corporate world and made a career change. I took a job in law enforcement making about 40% of what I had been making and have been much happier and healthier since. I was good at what I did before but I just didn't like what it was doing to me.

Nackachalet, Capthaddock, craig3365 and Pib, thank you so much for your invaluable contributions of information. I greatly appreciate it, I feel a lot better about my future retirement in Thailand.

Edited by Buckeye911, 2010-07-06 15:15:57.

[sarahsbloke]

I've been here 2 years,
when I came 51bht to 1UKP,
last time I changed big money 54bht to 1UKP,
it went down to 46/47bht to 1 UKP twice,
It's now at 49bht to 1UKP (and creeping up).

If it reduces to 35bht to 1 UKP I'm starting to get into trouble, above that a few less nights out will sort it.
If it goes over 55bht to 1UKP I will buy a couple of million BHT.
Those living hand to mouth will always be in financial difficulties, those with the ability to change money at the right rate, won't.
No need to play with gold, unless you like the look and feel of it.

I'm already spending LESS UKP than I was 2 years ago as I have set up a home, wife and not every dinner is in a western eating place.
So far Thailand has been a dam_n cheap retirement destination for me, maybe I could find somewhere cheaper, but not worth the effort at the moment.

Edited by sarahsbloke, 2010-07-06 16:30:22.

[Robby nz]

Havent read through all the stuff on this thread and can only say from my point of view that it still is cheap to live here.

Depends of course where you want to live, what you want to do, drink and eat.

If You want a flash house or condo in one of the tourist places and want to drink and party and eat at big restaurents it will cost you.

In my situation I only pay 2% tax on investment income and nothing on pension, see http://www.thaivisa....nts-and-others/

I live in a nice 2 bedroom house in a small town, rent 4000b per month. I dont have or need a car, eat mostly Thai food which I like and rarely pay more than 35b for a good feed, lunch today green curry at the local supermarket 15b.

Give the Mrs 15,000b a month, out of that she pays the rent, power and water and other expenses like food. I use perhaps another 5,000b a month.

Went on a visa run to Lao last week, took 5000b and came back with just 15000b,free visa great stuff. Plan a trip to Kanchanburi later this month or early next then in Sept a visa run to Mae Sai where I havent been before.

Got a small vege garden and take the sister-in-laws young fella fishing in the river on weekends, lifes good and dont want to be anywhere else.