Cambodia one-year visa is $290/year. No financial requirements, no 90 day reporting, multiple re-entry.

If you can't make the money thing work in Thailand, maybe Siem Reap is worth considering?

@Kool ******

Who are you talking to, big white daddy/Captain Thailand?

I don't have any visa, banking or insurance problems. And for sure I don't need you farangsplaining Thailand from atop such a high horse.

Move to Mexico yourself. There's already plenty of hot air in Thailand.

@Brian *******

You have $10,000 in the bank and a $1500/month social security payment.

The average rent in America is $1500-1700 per month. Nevermind all the other expenses. Never mind all the hoops to jump through to get an apartment.

You can get an air ticket to Thailand for $1000.

You'll be homeless in the USA in six months or less. GUARANTEED.

So your answer to the guy is, buy a tent and join the homeless because you never know when you'll need your medicare.

But in Thailand, you can rent a nice condo with AC, pool and gym for $300/month and you have $9k in the bank. You may never, ever need a hospital.

And you're going to tell that guy to stay put and join the homeless campout TODAY just in case he ever needs a hospital?

Absurd. The flaw in your reasoning is that you think it is better to have health care at any cost up to and beyond homelessness "just in case" than it is to have a house, good food, and personal safety.

And if you think most hospitals in the US will give you appropriate care without resources, you're even more naive than you look.

@Andreas ********

Has it not occurred to you that the whole 800k requirement was specifically set up to allow the agent/bank/immigration to make additional profits from retirees?

The government could stop it all literally tomorrow if they chose. Yet they don't. I wonder why? Because this is Thailand, and things work differently here.

For perspective, just across the border in Cambodia, a one year multiple entry retirement visa is $290, no bank account required, no 800k baht deposit required, no 90 day reporting.

Hmmmm. . .

@Brian *******

Because I disagree with the fundamental basis of your argument. And you're simply repeating yourself as though that will reinforce your argument (another Trumpie habit by the way).

You believe that no matter the circumstances, an individual from the west will always be able to sustain themselves better in their "home" country than they can in any foreign country.

I disagree. There are many circumstances where SOME people can live more successfully in a country far cheaper than their own on a given amount of funding.

Of course it's not a smart move to risk homelessness and begging on the street in Thailand. But it's even dumber to GUARANTEE the same in say, Los Angeles, if you have already have insufficient resources for the far higher monthly cost of living there. You look just as stupid and irresponsible begging on Santa Monica Blvd as you do here.

It's nice that they MIGHT have some access to basic medical care in the USA if they ever should need it. But there is no guarantee of those resources. And there is no guarantee they will ever be needed.

But without shelter and food and basic safety, that discussion is irrelevant. They've already crossed the threshold into unsustainability months, years, perhaps decades sooner than they would living in Thailand.

A huge percentage of Americans lack the funds to cover an emergency.

A smaller but still significant percentage lack even the funds for basic shelter and food. It is illogical for them to remain somewhere homeless, with a high likelihood of dying from exposure, starvation, or criminal activity "just in case" they have a heart attack some day. Especially if there is somewhere where they can at comfortably meet their basic needs with the resources at hand.

You see the world in a very black and white way. (Another Trumpie trait).

I see nuance. The definition of a good decision is not as cut and dried as you portray it.

We disagree.

@Brian *******

And yet you are responding to this moral dilemma precisely as he would.

@Kool ******

You misunderstand me.

I have zero issues with Thailand making, and vigorously enforcing, rules about foreigners entering or staying in the kingdom. It's their country.

I DO have issues with foreigners telling other foreigners to stay home. Especially when their reasoning is hopelessly flawed.

@Brian *******

Nice change of subject, Mr. Trumpie.

Maga would be proud of you.

@Brian *******

Yes. Let them eat cake. How did that answer work out for the fable's speaker?

You are either blind, deaf, or indifferent. "No-one" is a very bold claim in a world where income inequality grows at a historically frightening rate. Unfortunately for many, smart decision making increasingly involves choosing between two very bad options.

@Brian *******

If your logic is correct, than why is there a record number of refugees in the world today?

The simple fallacy in your logic is that one's "home" country will always be the safest best place for anyone to live.

There most certainly is NOT any guarantee of health care, basic shelter, or even food and water in the home countries of 100s of millions of our world's citizens.

You are right - it is not "bright to be in a foreign country broke." But it is even less bright to remain in your country of citizenship or birth if that significantly reduces your chances of survival.

Much as those of us with plenty, luck, or even wisdom would prefer the less fortunate or even less wise to stay out of sight, out of mind and for sure, out of our hair, those people have a right and a natural instinct to fight for their own survival. To make the best of a difficult unpalatable set of choices.

When someone lacks enough for basic survival in a place, the need for daily shelter, food and physical safety will alwas trump the need to purchase insurance and have savings in a bank.

Which sometimes is an inconvenience to the rest of us.