Schengen Overstay

[Barra]

KVB

Where to start???

First off you are incorrect about Australia and 90 days in 360. Its 90 days and you can reset by leaving and returning.

More importantly (and this is where schengen fails utterly ) there are numerous other visa types that can be applied for that better suit the intended travel. eg in Australia a long stay visa.

Yes if you want to be pedantic the number of days per US state would be even less than the 3 1/2 days per country but in the US you can leave and reset your visa. Cant do that in schengen.

Oh and I would eat my hat if this mutated schengen zone fiasco was created to help indian honey mooners. No, far more likely it was a brain fart of eurozone technocrats that has slowly mutated over time to the point where it has little resemblance to its original intent.

Still thanks for the chuckle that i get from seeing you guys try and defend this scheme. Made my day!

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by K_V_B

The Schengen treaty was drafted to solve a real problem. How do we profit from the increased prosperity in countries like India of China without instituting visa free travel for nationals of those countries?

An Indian couple going on their honeymoon to Europe wants to visit Paris, Switzerland and Venice. Imagine if they had to apply to three embassies for three visa... Imagine they wanted to see more countries.

This is why Switzerland is part of the Schengen treaty btw. To many Indian honeymooning couples discovering (the hard way) that the Paris - Venice night train passes through Switzerland. And we want them to stop here and enjoy the scenery.

For the majority of tourists Schengen is a good thing, and improved things massively. For a small minority its a hassle. But remember that before Schengen you could not get a visa that allowed long stays in the whole of Europe either...

Sure, but the argument is not logical.

Just because Schengen does one great thing -- which it certainly does -- does not mean that it is ok that they screwed up the implementation of it. I don't think anyone said that Schengen should never have been done in the first place, just that it should have been done more carefully, and with less reckless disregard for well-established, existing visa practice.


Furthermore, although there is a concrete benefit for citizens of non-visa waiver countries, like for the Indian couple you mention, there is very little in Schengen for the rest of us. In the pre-Schengen days, driving for example between Germany and Switzerland, as I used to do on a weekly basis for more than a year, I typically didn't even open my passport at the border control points, just flashed the cover.

Why in Biedermeyer times, there weren't even any border controls or even passports. Not everything new is necessarily progress, or at least, not necessarily 100% progress.

[K_V_B]

Originally Posted by Barra

Oh and I would eat my hat if this mutated schengen zone fiasco was created to help indian honey mooners.

There are more Indian honeymooners (and other visitors) coming to Europe than cruisers... I think you underestimate the importance tourism from, China, India, South Korea and the Gulf states has now for Europe. Schengen makes it possible for these people to actually come.

Still thanks for the chuckle that i get from seeing you guys try and defend this scheme. Made my day!

I'm not defending it. If I had it my way we went back to passport less travel as we had before WW-I.

But I currently live in an Area that depends on tourism. And if we were to leave Schengen we would be hurt. Badly. Which is why no country in Europe is even contemplating it.

[K_V_B]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Furthermore, although there is a concrete benefit for citizens of non-visa waiver countries, like for the Indian couple you mention, there is very little in Schengen for the rest of us.

The thing is, Indians, (and Chinese) vastly outnumber the rest of us...

[hoppy]

Originally Posted by K_V_B

The information I have contradicts that. With an eVisitor its "3 months within 12 months". No resetting by flying to Bali as far as I can see.

Been through all of the discussions about this with an immigration lawyer to get my Czech GF living here. A German friend did the fly in/out tourist visitor whilst she was waiting for her relationship visa to be processed.

From my GF's eVisa

Maintaining a valid visa
Your visa allows you multiple entries to Australia until 31 October 2016. You are allowed to
stay for a period of 3 month(s) on each arrival.

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by K_V_B

The thing is, Indians, (and Chinese) vastly outnumber the rest of us...

Yes, I agree with this!

Chinese tourism, in particular, is a remarkable phenomenon which is affecting my own business on a day to day basis.


STILL, not an excuse for screwing it up like this. Why, just look at the visa policies of the totalitarian, Communist, Chinese state! They only recently even started letting their own citizens travel abroad without posting a huge deposit! Even they got it much better than the EU! U.S. citizens get a TEN YEAR multi-entry visa to China on the first try, with minimal documentation. (Chinese citizens get the same thing for the U.S.) Non-U.S. citizens get a year at a time for China, with minimum hassle. Now THAT's the way to do it, if you're going to have any visas at all.

[Barra]

KVB your logic seems very flawed to me -

A scheme that works for the majority is good because theres alot of people in the majority. A scheme that doesnt work for the minority is of no consequence as theres not as many of them....

How about one scheme that works for the majority (eg indian honey mooners etc) and another scheme that works for the still very substantial minorities (eg retired travellers with more time, cruisers, girlfriends visiting boyfriends etc) too??

Its where most countries get to sooner or later. For reasons we can all guess at in the eurozone that outcome cant happen. Little insight why is that you guys dont even see a problem apparently

[K_V_B]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

STILL, not an excuse for screwing it up like this.

Well, when harmonising rules across a large block of countries is hard. The easiest way is to go with a least denominator version first. That is more or less what Schengen did. I don't call this "screwing up". I call this getting it to work well enough first before adding flourishes.
AFAIK long term visas are in the works, but in the current climate this will be hard, and the amount of people that stand to benefit is small, whereas the amount of people that could abuse it is perceived to be large...

[K_V_B]

Originally Posted by Barra

KVB your logic seems very flawed to me -
A scheme that works for the majority is good because theres alot of people in the majority. A scheme that doesnt work for the minority is of no consequence as theres not as many of them....

How about
- a scheme under which is was next to impossible for the large majority of the worlds' people to go on a grand tour of Europe
versus
- a scheme under wich nothing changes for casual visitors from visa waiver countries but coming to Europe suddenly becomes possible for the 2,5 billion Chinese and Indians?

You have to keep in mind that cruisers, or people who want their girlfriend to come live with them without marrying her are edge cases. That a system doesn't handle edge cases well is not an argument in itself against the system.

Its where most countries get to sooner or later. For reasons we can all guess at in the eurozone that outcome cant happen. Little insight why is that you guys dont even see a problem apparently

Firstly this has nothing whatsoever to do with the Eurozone. Secondly I think they will eventualy get this right. Long term visas are in the works AFAIK.

[valhalla360]

Originally Posted by K_V_B

How about
- a scheme under which is was next to impossible for the large majority of the worlds' people to go on a grand tour of Europe
versus
.

Way overstating the prior issue. Yeah, it was a hassle but visa service would handle it for a small fee (relative to the cost of the straw man honeymoon). It would be even easier today as pre-Schengen was also pre- current internet where you could do all this online. In fact, India has an online visa application procedure that was quite easy. No reason not to expect that in a non-Schengen world, the EU countries wouldn't have adopted a similar approach.

Reality is 30yrs ago, no significant number of Chinese were allowed to travel and there were very few rich Indians (those rich enough to travel would typically be rich by western standards and have staff to arrange the visas). The rise of the middle class in these countries has changed while the Schengen was in effect.

Schengen wasn't implemented to help the proverbial Indian Honeymoon couple.

[jckb]

The regular criticisms of the Schengen visa seem to ignore the fact that, for "friendly" countries, you just turn up at the border with no previous permissions and get a stamp which gives you 90 days.

It is still possible in most Schengen countries to apply for permissions beforehand and get extended visas - for work, for education, for residence, for re-settlement, even just for visiting. But you have to spend some time and cash to get this permission. And once inside, your travel is un-restricted.

So the simple "turn up and come in" for Schengen is icing on the cake which makes life very simple for the vast majority of casual visitors.

EU visitors to USA have to do homework first. They have to get visas - money and time queuing at embassies. But there's some icing on the cake for those travelling by approved means of transport - airlines or cruise ships. Some dollars and a bit of on-line homework before arrival waives the need for a visa beforehand.

This waiver does not work if you're turning up in a yacht.

JimB

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by K_V_B

Well, when harmonising rules across a large block of countries is hard. The easiest way is to go with a least denominator version first. That is more or less what Schengen did. I don't call this "screwing up". I call this getting it to work well enough first before adding flourishes.
AFAIK long term visas are in the works, but in the current climate this will be hard, and the amount of people that stand to benefit is small, whereas the amount of people that could abuse it is perceived to be large...

Well, if it's not "screwing up" just because it's hard to do within the EU system, and we're supposed to accept terrible rules as a consequence, then that does not speak well of the EU system altogether.

By the way, Switzerland was held up as a shining example of correct policy and excellently structured relationships within Europe, by the pro-Brexit camp during the Brexit referendum. Not in the EU, but functioning extremely well in cooperation with it.

I don't want to start a Brexit pro and con discussion -- we've done it to death. I'm agnostic about it, personally. But the EU needs to aim a lot higher than how Schengen has been implemented, in my opinion. In my opinion, "hard to harmonize across a large number of countries" is no excuse at all; on the contrary, it's an argument for abolishing the EU.


Imagine talking to potential EU members (or members who are deciding whether to stay or not): Give up to Brussels a section of your sovereignty, hand over the rule-making power from your own bureaucracy to ours, then let us screw it up because it's "hard to harmonize across a large number of countries; we can only work to the lowest common denominator". The logical response surely is "If it's impossible to do this rule-making well across a large number of countries, then why in the world should we hand it over to you? I think we'll keep that power ourselves, thank you very much." And as we all know, that's basically what the UK has done, and what Switzerland decided a long time ago.

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

In the U.S., you get "Leave to Enter for Six Months", and like in the UK, you can leave for one day and come back and get another six months. I am presuming that you are a Swiss citizen. Furthermore, you can get a one-year or three-year B1/B2 visa which lets you come and go as you please -- cruise, or drive a camper van around the U.S. aimlessly for three years -- no problem.

I am putting aside the fact that U.S. states are mere provinces with less status than the Cantons of Switzerland, and in no way comparable to the nations of Europe.


"Issues" is the understatement of the year. Schengen is a mess. The deviation from normal visa practice for long term travelers is just bizarre. I don't know of any place in the world, where it is so hard to be a long term traveler. Even Russia and China are easier -- far easier.

Strange.. I'm often greeted with.. 'Remember.. you've just 90 days.. or we'll deport you and you cant come back' or variations like 'We love deporting people'..
Your C&I like to make me feel welcome..

[boatman61]

Originally Posted by Dockhead

Well, if it's not "screwing up" just because it's hard to do within the EU system, and we're supposed to accept terrible rules as a consequence, then that does not speak well of the EU system altogether.

By the way, Switzerland was held up as a shining example of correct policy and excellently structured relationships within Europe, by the pro-Brexit camp during the Brexit referendum. Not in the EU, but functioning extremely well in cooperation with it.

I don't want to start a Brexit pro and con discussion -- we've done it to death. I'm agnostic about it, personally. But the EU needs to aim a lot higher than how Schengen has been implemented, in my opinion. In my opinion, "hard to harmonize across a large number of countries" is no excuse at all; on the contrary, it's an argument for abolishing the EU.


Imagine talking to potential EU members (or members who are deciding whether to stay or not): Give up to Brussels a section of your sovereignty, hand over the rule-making power from your own bureaucracy to ours, then let us screw it up because it's "hard to harmonize across a large number of countries; we can only work to the lowest common denominator". The logical response surely is "If it's impossible to do this rule-making well across a large number of countries, then why in the world should we hand it over to you? I think we'll keep that power ourselves, thank you very much." And as we all know, that's basically what the UK has done, and what Switzerland decided a long time ago.

Of course Switzerland gets favoured status.. that's where a lot of politicians money is.. after touring the banks round the world..

[Dockhead]

Originally Posted by boatman61

Strange.. I'm often greeted with.. 'Remember.. you've just 90 days.. or we'll deport you and you cant come back' or variations like 'We love deporting people'..
Your C&I like to make me feel welcome..

Well, naturally. Six months is for "respectable" people What do you expect?

Kidding aside, I think that we Yanks have the worst bureaucrats in the world in terms of attitude and intelligence, and certainly the worst LEO's in terms of attitude. One reason why I have chosen to live outside of the States for these past 25+ years.

Which is why for the U.S. to have a more enlightened visa policy than the EU reflects REALLY badly on the EU

You should be getting six months at a time; ask politely next time. Wear a clean shirt and smile. Assuming you give a d***, of course.



Your lot are extremely nice to me. They even gave me a magic card which allows me to use the UK citizens' e-passport gates. I didn't even ask for it, they just pulled me out of the line one day and gave me the forms. Rule Britannia! Course I'm usually sober, shaven, and wearing a suit