Jump to content
Chapala.com Webboard

Must have pension income or wait 4 years to go from temporal to permanente


Kevin K

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 103
  • Created
  • Last Reply

According to to The News (of Mexico City) there are 4 million low income living units abandoned in Mexico right now. That is quite remarkable.

http://www.thenews.com.mx/index.php/home-articulos/21251-lowincomeunitsbeingabandoned

When we visit Leon, Guanajuato, it looks like 25% of those abandoned are located there. Two of wife's cousins have abandoned theirs. Very cheap and poor workmanship. Even those (residentials) that sold for 2,400,000 pesos are starting to look bad. :(

Link to post
Share on other sites

True, but the waiting lists are long in many places.

years long in many places.

I am trying to think of one good reason why Mexico would wish to spend money to maintain low income housing for senior expats, as suggested by Joco.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree, Gringal. They'd probably do about as well with that as they did with the low income housing. Which also hasn't exactly been a rip roaring success NOB.

True.......but largely for different reasons.

As I've heard it, Mexico built the low income housing so far from jobs that it wasn't practical for the residents. "What were they thinking?" applies to that one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

years long in many places.

I am trying to think of one good reason why Mexico would wish to spend money to maintain low income housing for senior expats, as suggested by Joco.

I guess I should have written more clearly than just using the word Mexico. Private enterprise in Mexico. Is that better? And why wouldn't they want to build a project that will always have a customer base? Funeral homes always have a customer base and people will always age.

Charging $250 to $1200 USD or more plus fees is not exactly "low income" in Mexico. Most elderly Mexicans would be priced out of it. Charging $450 a month in the US would be low income housing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Joco continues to present her personal opinions as somehow I had said them.

I never said or even hinted that I want nor like the higher financial requirements.

I did say that in spite of the higher requirements, many US and Canadian retirees are coming here, and

in spite of the higher requirements, 40 millions more US and Canadian Boomers have the resources to come here.

Stating demographic facts does not imply approval or disapproval - as they are facts that stand alone.

Facts exist, whether we like them or not.

It's as if Joco is saying "snowyco says there are 5 dogs on his street", so that magically means snowyco somehow thinks that's too many dogs.

Keep it simple: KISS

I think Mexico will continue to benefit from the upcoming 40 million modestly affluent Boomer retirees.

Mexico will likely not benefit from the other 60 million Boomers who have no savings and no household assets.

Personal attacks are not allowed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personal attacks are not allowed.

Where is the personal attack ?

Joco keeps putting words into my mouth, and making false claims about who I am, and false claims about what I believe,

and now, yet more supposition.

I larn'd "K.I.S.S." from a Southern belle, who drawl'd it out as: "Keep it saimple, ... sweetie..."

Ya'wl can 'magine and suhmize whutevuh yuh wahnt, buht that duz not make it true.

No slight was intended, but clearly Joco feels slighted, and I apologize for that.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Let's get back to facts and back on-topic of INMs requisitos and INMs policies for getting Residente Permanente, and move away from the stalking and public imaginings about people's personal lives:

What local INM offices and which Consulates are actually using the new amended policy, described by Spencer, to require at least minimal pension income to use sufficient "savings" to qualify for Residente Permanente?

This information would be very helpful to future RP applicants.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Where is the personal attack ?

Joco keeps putting words into my mouth, and making false claims about who I am, and false claims about what I believe,

and now, yet more supposition.

I larn'd "K.I.S.S." from a Southern belle, who drawl'd it out as: "Keep it saimple, ... sweetie..."

Ya'wl can 'magine and suhmize whutevuh yuh wahnt, buht that duz not make it true.

No slight was intended, but clearly Joco feels slighted, and I apologize for that.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Let's get back to facts and back on-topic of INMs requisitos and INMs policies for getting Residente Permanente, and move away from the stalking and public imaginings about people's personal lives:

What local INM offices and which Consulates are actually using the new amended policy, described by Spencer, to require at least minimal pension income to use sufficient "savings" to qualify for Residente Permanente?

This information would be very helpful to future RP applicants.

Stop with the personal attacks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I should have written more clearly than just using the word Mexico. Private enterprise in Mexico. Is that better? And why wouldn't they want to build a project that will always have a customer base? Funeral homes always have a customer base and people will always age.

Charging $250 to $1200 USD or more plus fees is not exactly "low income" in Mexico. Most elderly Mexicans would be priced out of it. Charging $450 a month in the US would be low income housing.

For me, the reason is that if they did, they would not make any money, because there would always be complaints about the quality and workmanship of these houses. Now, they can build crap and sell it through the government and just walk away with their money and leave the problems to those who buy. So much more profitable to do what they are doing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's get back to facts and back on-topic of INMs requisitos and INMs policies for getting Residente Permanente, and move away from the stalking and public imaginings about people's personal lives:

Can I ask you when you post the "facts", would you PLEASE list your source, so I can decipher what is a fact from your source and what is your opinion. Maybe you could preface your comments with: IMO. Some of us understand that facts can be used to support any argument you wish by simply taking them out of context and omitting a word or two (You are very good at doing that). But, you can't fool some people, ever. I would expect that many here who you "bait" will eventually "wake up" and realize that the way they can live with you is to never comment on what you post, and completely ignore what you say. Hard for many, but the solution, as you will never be satisfied until you "win" in your mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is my understanding that the companies which gambled on these low cost project are tumbling like a house of cards. It is also my understanding, from the former Mexican ambassador to the U.S.A., that Mexicans do not like apartment buildings, they like stand alone houses - which may be smaller than many apartments.. They are usually built as a single fourplex, with room to expand one more floor up. The ex-amabassador says that Mexicans don't want to say "this is our elevator, our garbage chute" they don't want to share. As he sums it up "Mi casa es MI casa, not su casa".

In Guadalajara, many of the luxury condos there are crashing because a great many owners are not paying their fees.

Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot of condos as well as other developments all over Mexico are suffering hardship because the residents won't pay their HOA fees.

Cooperation and doing one's "fair share" for the general good does not seem to be a common thread running through human beings. Thus, the failure of most cooperative ventures.

Does anyone think we can back to the basic premise of this thread, which was about qualifying for Permanent Residency in Mexico?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who knows? And ask that question weekly since this whole business has been so chaotic from the beginning and it seems to be continuing.

The income requirements IMO are unrealistic and seem to fly in the face of longer term policies that seek to encourage retirement immigration.

The proof will accumulate over time. It is hard to separate short term influences from longer term one. I do think Mexico should take a look at what countries like Panama are doing, they definitely seem to have the specifics of their immigration requirements in line with their stated goal of attracting U.S. retirees.

Still, you are stuck with two choices there, either bake along the coast line or live fairly isolated in the highlands.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Who knows? And ask that question weekly since this whole business has been so chaotic from the beginning and it seems to be continuing.

The income requirements IMO are unrealistic and seem to fly in the face of longer term policies that seek to encourage retirement immigration.

The proof will accumulate over time. It is hard to separate short term influences from longer term one. I do think Mexico should take a look at what countries like Panama are doing, they definitely seem to have the specifics of their immigration requirements in line with their stated goal of attracting U.S. retirees.

Still, you are stuck with two choices there, either bake long the coast line or live fairly isolated in the highlands.

I like that last sentence. We could add that if you choose some spots like Guerrero, you could "shake and bake", too. Oh, sorry. That was baaad.

I agree that Mexico made it tough if they want to attract retirees of modest means with some solid investments and savings, rather than just those with generous pensions, and it would be interesting if someone who actually knows "what they were thinking" were on here and would share their thoughts, rather than just the speculators and the protestors.

I don't have a pup in this skirmish since I got my green card by the long road over the years of proceeding from stage one all the way through to not having to present financials to go Permanente. I doubt if I could have made it, if it were down to pension income alone? That's a tough one. Self employed people often have retired on savings, property and income producing investments rather than "pensions". The other interesting point is that sometimes pension income from companies can disappear like summer smoke along with the company itself. OOps. :o

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I remember correctly, and this was a long time ago, only 5 countries in the world are actively recruiting immigrants/permanent residents. Definitely Canada, Australia and the U.S.A.- I forgot the other 2. In the past Mexico only facilitated immigration, it certainly did not have job fairs or open recruitment programmes. That Mexico requires proof of pension, would certainly make the paperwork easier for the bureaucrats. Although Mexico offers a great bit of 'wriggle room' in making it's selections - the U.S.A and Canada do not, careful oversight all the way. Here is story about recruitment in the U.S. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/07/us/ailing-cities-extend-hand-to-immigrants.html?_r=0

Living on the coast of Mexico is fine - you just have to accept the extra cost of triple pane 'insulated' glass, and about $16,000 for a solar system which will give you free AC electricity for the rest of your life.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For at least the past 8 years, Mexico has formally recruited new immigrants by offering Residency to people who create jobs, start businesses, bring in investment capital, bring in useful technical expertise, etc. I jumped up to a free (no $$) FM2 years ago as a scientist with useful skills and expertise.

The policy Spencer describes above appears to be only a local variation right now (so far), not national by any means.

The policy Spencer describes also has been in place at at least 2 Mexican Consulates for over a year now: Boston and San Fran.

The policy Spencer described also fits the INM Law and Lineamientos, because the Lineamientos section describing how applicants can qualify for Residente Permanente using just $$ is described as for "Jubilados" - not for youngsters. Further, since May 25, 2010, the INM Law clearly stated that "Pension Income" was one qualifying requisito for Residente Permanente applicants.

This information on pension income requirements was originally published on the WWWeb on May 27, 2010 at: http://yucalandia.com/living-in-yucatan-mexico/new-immigration-law-published-for-mexico-the-article/ , so the local INM office is actually hearkening back to the law as published in 2010 - not chaotically making up policies on a whim, as suggested above. The chaos comes as inconsistent applications of policies between INM offices and between Consulates.

What other Consulates and what other INM offices are using this policy?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This information on pension income requirements was originally published on the WWWeb on May 27, 2010 at: http://yucalandia.com/living-in-yucatan-mexico/new-immigration-law-published-for-mexico-the-article/ , so the local INM office is actually hearkening back to the law as published in 2010 - not chaotically making up policies on a whim, as suggested above.

That's good to know that on YOUR website YOU have been citing the law since 2010, that means it must be accurate.

Hud wrote:

Can I ask you when you post the "facts", would you PLEASE list your source, so I can decipher what is a fact from your source and what is your opinion. Maybe you could preface your comments with: IMO. Some of us understand that facts can be used to support any argument you wish by simply taking them out of context and omitting a word or two (You are very good at doing that). But, you can't fool some people, ever. I would expect that many here who you "bait" will eventually "wake up" and realize that the way they can live with you is to never comment on what you post, and completely ignore what you say. Hard for many, but the solution, as you will never be satisfied until you "win" in your mind.

Well Hud, now we know the facts. The facts are from Yuka's own website so we now they must be facts. Case closed.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's stick with facts, and drop the personal sniping. Read the article, and the law, and you find references to the principles in the May 2010 law I referenced and cited above. Here are the current DOF published INM Law rules on this subject, sections that I used when describing INM policies above - to show that the above claims are false, that I do not make things up:

Artículo 109. La visa de residente permanente a que se refiere la fracción VI del artículo 40 de la Ley, se expedirá a la persona extranjera que pretenda ingresar al territorio nacional con el propósito de residir de manera indefinida. El solicitante deberá demostrar alguno de los siguientes supuestos:

I. Que se encuentra dentro de las hipótesis de unidad familiar por vínculo con mexicano o con residente permanente de acuerdo con lo dispuesto en los artículos 55 y 56 de la Ley;

II. Que es pensionado o jubilado, debiendo acreditar ingresos mensuales suficientes para cubrir sus gastos de manutención durante su estancia en el territorio nacional;

III. Que cumple con las categorías y el puntaje mínimo requerido para ingresar por sistema por puntos conforme a las disposiciones administrativas de carácter general que emita la Secretaría y que serán publicadas en el Diario Oficial de la Federación,

and

Artículo 139. La condición de estancia de residente permanente prevista en el artículo 52, fracción IX, de la Ley se otorgará a la persona extranjera que demuestre alguno de los siguientes supuestos:

I. Tener reconocimiento de la condición de refugiado, otorgamiento de protección complementaria, asilo político o determinación de apátrida en términos de la legislación en la materia;

II. Tener vínculo con mexicano o persona extranjera residente permanente, conforme a las hipótesis de unidad familiar en términos de lo previsto en el artículo 55 de la Ley;

III. Ser pensionado o jubilado con ingresos mensuales suficientes para su manutención durante su estancia en el territorio nacional;

and

"Artículo 141. Las personas extranjeras con situación migratoria regular en el territorio nacional pueden cambiar de condición de estancia en los siguientes supuestos:

I. El visitante o residente temporal podrá cambiar a la condición de estancia de residente permanente, por vínculo familiar, cuando: ...

...

B) Sean jubilados o pensionados que perciban del exterior recursos suficientes que le permitan vivir en el territorio nacional, o ..."

etc.

The catch is that the "pensionado" category is always mentioned as a qualified "or" , meaning that "jubilados" with qualifying income or savings also qualify, without pension income.

The local INM office has chosen to ignore the qualified "or" for now.

Really, this is just like the INEGI annual report, and the US Census Bureau data published on the web:

Anyone who wants to know the law can read it for themselves at: http://www.dof.gob.mx/nota_detalle.php?codigo=5270615&fecha=28/09/2012

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cooperation and doing one's "fair share" for the general good does not seem to be a common thread running through human beings. Thus, the failure of most cooperative ventures.

Off-topic it may be, but I cannot let this stagement pass unchallenged. The opposite is actually true: sociologists are continually surprised by humans' tendency to cooperate, even in seemingly non-rational circumstances. We are a deeply cooperative and collaborative species.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You see - this why people get so angry with you - you make up crap and pass it off as fact.

Facilitate - yes, but not recruit, not advertise, not work the consulates looking for software engineers, aerospace workers, etc. Please provide just one example of the government of Mexico recruiting skilled immigrants - all they do is grease the rails and in the case of retired pensioners, they cannot even get that right!

For at least the past 8 years, Mexico has formally recruited new immigrants by offering Residency to people who create jobs, start businesses, bring in investment capital, bring in useful technical expertise, etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Off-topic it may be, but I cannot let this stagement pass unchallenged. The opposite is actually true: sociologists are continually surprised by humans' tendency to cooperate, even in seemingly non-rational circumstances. We are a deeply cooperative and collaborative species.

A lot of condos as well as other developments all over Mexico are suffering hardship because the residents won't pay their HOA fees.

Cooperation and doing one's "fair share" for the general good does not seem to be a common thread running through human beings. Thus, the failure of most cooperative ventures.

Does anyone think we can back to the basic premise of this thread, which was about qualifying for Permanent Residency in Mexico?

I have actually witnessed the decline of 2 fairly decent housing developments in Leon, Guanajuato, for failure of "cooperation" and "doing one's fair share".(Wife's family lived in them). In both, residents were asked to contribute a small sum to keep guards and entrance/exit checkpoints. As time passed( a 5 year period), the fee, of course, had to increase, because fewer and fewer paid their fair share. Eventually, both areas have no guards, no checkpoints, and the graffiti is terrible, as is the crime. There were many attempts to have community meetings by concerned residents, to no avail. True cooperation is not in the vocabulary of lots of Mexicans. "YO" seems to be the magic word for many here, as has been pointed out to me many times when I have asked for music to be turned down, or if they would please move their car so I could pass. Sociologists forgot to poll Mexico. (No, I think this thread will continue to ramble.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...