@Bruce ***

, whether we are contributing to the Thai economy or not doesn’t change the fact that Thailand has the right to decide whether foreigners should be permitted entry into the country or not along with the terms of said entry. No foreigner has to right to simply unilaterally declare that they will stay in Thailand for however they long want and for whatever purpose they want.

@Jason *****

, surely you know that the reason why Thailand - or, frankly, any other country - refuses to publicly draw an explicit line regarding exactly how many times that (supposed) ‘tourists’ are allowed to reenter the country back-to-back using tourist visas is because Thailand knows fully well that such ‘tourists’ would then take full advantage of whatever line is drawn.

For example, if Thailand were to publicly declare that all tourists are indeed guaranteed 2 back-to-back extensions and are therefore allowed to stay for a total of 9 months as per your request, then that would surely attract plenty of supposed ‘tourists’ who, frankly, have no interest in tourism whatsoever but rather are just seeking a 9 month residency in Thailand. And if Thailand decided that they indeed want such 9-month residents, then I have to believe that Thailand would then simply offer an upfront 9-month visa that dispenses entirely with the need for a visa run. Clearly, Thailand does not want such 9-month residents.

And that’s Thailand’s prerogative. We all have to remember that Thailand is a sovereign country that can run its immigration policy however it pleases. No foreigner has the ‘right’ to even enter Thailand at all - let alone stay for 9 months - just like Thai citizens don’t have the ‘right’ to enter our countries. After all, ultimately, it’s their country, not ours.

@Todd ********

, to be fair, not everybody has at least 500k THB (or more, depending on their nationality) in demonstrable liquid assets to be eligible for the DTV program.

@Peter *******

, look, all I’m saying is that we ought to have display some basic respect for the PhD process. The PhD degree - because it is a *research* degree - will always hold an inherent amount of randomness. One can never be sure if a particular PhD research project is going to succeed, for if you could always be sure of what the results of a particular research project are going to be before you do it, then the project wouldn’t count as ‘research’.

So, yes, there will always be some full-time PhD students whose research projects will fail, thereby necessitating a longer graduation time. Such is the nature of the PhD degree.

@Peter *******

, writer Ananya Sen took well over 7 years to complete her PhD whilst studying full-time. If you want to label her as a lazy bum, that’s your decision! I’m sure as heck not going to do so.

@Peter *******

, wait, doesn’t qualifying as a doctor at Oxford take 6 years? Doesn’t qualifying as a doctor at Stanford take 8 years (including the undergrad degree)?

Also, regarding PhD degrees, I think it should be noted that the average time of completion for the PhD degree is over 7 years.