Eric Loh

1 minute ago, grumbleweed said:

Go on, I dare you, send Prayuth a Palace scarf

Long enough to reach the ceiling rafter. ????

1 hour ago, Morch said:

 

Most Westerners here aren't eligible to vote, and are barred from participating in most political activities. So "turn their back" how? And where's that "real democracy" of yours taking place, exactly? The above reads like nothing more than a lame attempt to discredit anyone disagreeing with your views.

 

Firstly, real democracy is participatory democracy which most western countries subscribed. But there are those like you and Steven who prefer authoritarian military junta government and their methods to rig participatory democracy to allow the them to continue to dominate. You really don’t have to vote but just speak kindly to junta corruption and continue to malaise real democracy. 

3 hours ago, Fex Bluse said:

Disagree, and it sounds like your opinions have been co-opted by the Borg.

Surprising as many of your posts indicate a fairly balanced view.

 

The Chinese have already backed down multiple times -- from their perspective.

They have little retaliatory leverage -- mostly because they have no useful allies (other than Russia).

In other words, nobody likes them.

 

The trade war is not a grand plan to undermine China's rise.

It is, however, a grand plan to undermine their lying, cheating and stealing everything they can.

Surely you are aware of their industrial, pervasive policies to play by their own rules?

 

The net result of the trade war is that many global businesses have already started and will continue to escalate their move out of China and disentaglement with the Chinese economy. 

This is what will squash much of the Chinese ambitions.

US political parties are ALL united on fighting China, so China can't rely on the 4 or 8 year election cycles.

It will be another entire generation 20-30 years before Americans trust the Chinese, and hopefully longer as they are demonstrably, consistently untrustworthy.

The case about unfair trading practices spouted by Trump to support his tariff policy are way of mark. He is doing this for his domestic base and listening to hawkish rhetoric from his cabinet to cap China's meteorical economic rise in just a short 30-40 years. China is just seem an easy punching bag but he is wrong and the tariff war will hurt him as much as it hurt China.

First, he accused China of 'forced technology transfer' arguing that US companies must turn over the blueprint of proprietary technologies and operating systems in order to do business in China. This transfer is alleged to take place within the JV structure arrangements. Transfer of technology is in the heart of agreements of all JV and both sides will have to agree on the transfer.   This not only happen in China but every where in the world including Thailand. Companies also leverage on transfer of technology to gain competitive commercial benefits in the host countries. Portraying USA as a innocent victims is totally dishonest. 

Then the gem about China sponsoring SOE unfairly aimed at getting competitive supremacy from free and open markets like USA which they attest played by different rules. Yet, even developed countries have relied on industrial policy to achieve national economic and competitive objectives. Ain't the powerful military-industrial industry state-sponsored, tax payer funded in USA. Nasa, internet, semi-conductors, nuclear power are all state funded. I will add pharmaceutical innovations too. 

There is a reason why US companies are flocking to China and China will remain a market so large that companies can't ignore. The big companies like Apple, Caterpillar, 3M generate more than half their revenue from China. They are hurt by the tariffs but unlikely to leave because their eco-system are already entrenched in China. 

You don't have to like China to trade with China but you can't ignore the last big frontier for doing business.   

7 minutes ago, webfact said:

The 11 parties won 548,208 votes from a total of about 35 million, or about 1.5 percent of votes cast.

1.5% of the winning votes and they now sit in the government. Making a mockery of the system where the party that won the most seats and 7.2 million votes could not form the government. 

Trump not going to get China to back down with his "gunboat diplomacy'; a historic reference to the British empire forcing China to cede Hong Kong. China has worn this shame for a long time and is now a super power and will never concede to Trump's bully tactics. They know that this trade war is a part of the grand plan to undermine China's unstoppable trajectory to eclipse USA to become a technology super power. At the heart of it is that China is racing ahead in AI technology which will determine the future of both countries. 

6 hours ago, webfact said:

Grim outlook for exports as trade war escalates

The exact reason why Prayut the General should not be the PM. His honeymoon years are over and we need a PM with the competency and vision to navigate this tough economic situation.  

4 minutes ago, Morch said:

Junta aside, it's still funny how some of these parties are now labeled the "Democracy camp".

Explain.

3 hours ago, z42 said:

Thailand's judicial woes embodied in 1 pathetic incident. And the only person doing the right thing got removed from his position.

 

The judge should be removed immediately, clearly unfit to sit in a post where he can legally condemn others as criminals.

The superintendent should face the same fate, removing a subordinate for not granting (illegal) favours to a crony.

 

Well done Prayuth on this, for once I completely agree 

Only half the job done. He should use 44 to remove the judge and set a good precedent. 

1 hour ago, webfact said:

After disputed election, Thailand expected to keep junta leader as PM

So the next PM will be the one that was not elected by the people, lacking charisma, don't like debate, hate the media, lacking vision and prefer to copy and will not tolerate anyone seeking answers for his unusual wealth. Perfect candidate for an authoritarian government.  

40 minutes ago, Donutz said:

There were more uprisings, but it seems none of them were big enough. I hear some Thai talking about the need for much more massive uprisings nation wife. Though the fear would be that with 10-100 times the size of any protest we have seen before, the number of casualties could also increase exponentialy. Where is the breaking point that the army can no longer kill off it's people and be ousted from politics and civilian affairs once and for all?

They may not be big uprising but were instrumental in removing the government. The 1973 TU massacre resulted in the removal of Field Marshall Kittikachorn, the 1992 caused Gen Suchinda’s government to fall and the 2010 forced a fresh election. Now with social media, the uprising can be on the form of social condemnation and civil disobedience that can rock the government.  I dont wish to see mass uprising that played into the hands of the military and cause loss of lives.