Eric Loh

3 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Not if Britain crashes out of the EU with no deal! Then expect the pound to plummet.

The consolation being a boon to the manufacturers and a swing from dependence on its financial services. 

How to attract investments when he and his military are the source of political uncertainty. Best thing he can do to attract investment is for him to back off from the election and pledge that he and his military will never ever stage any coups. If he surrender to the court and be trialed for treason, it will be icing on the cake.

35 minutes ago, phantomfiddler said:

None other than Thaksin. The redshirts were a violent bunch, committing murders almost daily until the coup came along with Prayut restoring law and order.

Really a well conceived plan by creating and instigating violence for Prayut to seize power claiming to restore law and order. Go ask Suthep. 

10 minutes ago, robblok said:

I am Dutch in my country there is an organisation that takes all the plans of parties and puts them in a computer model for a few different kind of economic scenarios. All the plans must pass this scrutiny so parties can't make election promises that are impossible to keep. (centraal plan bureau is the organisation that does that in my country)

 

I thought it would be something all mature democracies have, to make sure that promises can be kept and would not be based on hot air. Seems like a logical thing to do so there is a level playing field. 

 

 

(below an news article about it in Dutch sorry, it shows not only if the promises can be kept but also how it will affect the economy, education, differences between income, ect) This way the voters in my country get clear information before voting. 

https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/zo-pakken-de-partijprogramma-s-uit-bekijk-de-doorrekening-per-onderwerp~b403a57e7/?referer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F

 

 

 

 

Thanks but I don't read Dutch. In any case, just for argument sake, what if the political parties in your country had policies nicely balanced in your model assimilation and renege or change the policies after elected. Good example in USA when Trump went on a populist agenda to renege and gave tax cuts to the rich after being elected. Really not a effective method IMO.

Here the parties campaigned on their policies and if they win will have to be accountable to the people who voted them in. They will have to ensure that there are sufficient funds to finance those policies within the Fiscal and Financial Law on budget deficit and debt to GDP. In addition to them being under the eagle eyes of legal entities, oppositions, activists and NGOs. When their tenure is over, the voters will be the ultimate arbitrators of their performance. 

1 hour ago, robblok said:

said it before its quite normal to have this in real democracies, at least where I come from. Not doing so is just a sham.

Not sure which body you referring to that scrutinize political parties policies. Are you referring to the PBO which is the parliament scrutiny of the budget. Are you mixing things up to make a point. Would like you to clarify and identify the entity.

11 hours ago, webfact said:

All populist policies, be it cash handouts for the poor, free social security or a welfare state, can only be implemented using tax revenue, yet none of the parties have explained their planned tax measures to raise the funds needed for their implementation, said the professor.

I can agree to that comment and we can be sure that any excessiveness and budget overreach will be scrutinized within legal framework, debates in Parliament and freely expressed by media and activists when we have democracy and an elected government with a tenure. Who can say it’s not an improvement over the current opaque and free expression bounded by intimidation non elected government. No comparison at all. Bring back democracy and rid this current corrupt coup government. 

In this land of world most unequal country and where 1% richest Thais owned 66.9% and rising every year, any populist policies that extract more from the rich to pay for the poor is most welcome. Double that welcome if we can cut the military frivolous spending and the fat cat generals. 

5 hours ago, rooster59 said:

Somchai said a case that took only one or two days for a decision, as occurred over Thai Raksa Chart’s possible dissolution, was rare. However, by not using a sub-committee to help determine the case, the EC could be putting themselves at risk, he added.

  

Perhaps ex-EC commissioner was being sarcastic when he said that the EC was brave. Judging from precedent, the court should throw out the case. But there again the court is known for making judgement based on political expediency for the incumbent. 

If he talk like his dull monologue on Fri TV, let him campaign. May have to pay the audience to cheer and clap, 

On 2/28/2019 at 3:47 AM, webfact said:

Thailand recruits some 100,000 conscripts yearly for its military operations as support for soldiers who have joined the military voluntarily.

Thailand may have 100,000 conscripts yearly but just how many are military reservists. There are vast difference in the role of conscripts and reservists. Singapore has 35,000 conscripts every year and almost 1 million reservists who can be activated and join their units in less than a day. Thailand has no such system. Conscripts contribute very little in supporting the military except for being servants and gardeners for the senior officers. 

31 minutes ago, fullcave said:

It's not about religion it's about money and power. 

It’s about corruption and self enrichment. 

49 minutes ago, scorecard said:

 

Well now el, your so vocal, such strong comment. If your so serious about this how come your idols did nothing to reign in the military and it's spending? They had some 12 to 14 years to change this picture (and many other pictures, examples: education and police reform). They did nothing, totally nothing.

 

 

That’s diversion at the highest order like the General. Fools seldom differ. 

5 hours ago, webfact said:

“The country can call troops out any time of the day for a mission. If you downsize the armed forces, who will help out in times of disaster?” asked Prayut, who himself was once an Army chief.

Bullshit at the highest order. As an army chief he should have his intelligence apparatus to know any immediate and imminent security threats and there are none except for the insurgency in the southern provinces that require professional trained soldiers; not conscripts. 

He should know as a General that the political and security contexts have changed from what it was in 1954 when the Military Service Act for conscription was promulgated. Conscription is not applicable in current context. 

3 hours ago, Lungstib said:

Well, how about that, a parliament

With due respect, this is not a Parliament but the NLA. Vast difference. Parliament has elected MPs while NLA has junta appointed rubber stamping stooges. 

Parliament by by law will be dissolved before election and thereby can’t legislate new laws. The NLA break all those rules. 

Central banks manipulating their currencies downward to gain export competitiveness. Sound a simple strategy. If every central banks can do that, it really re-set the new level and a race to the bottom. Maybe there are other fundamentals in play to determine currency rates. ???? 

4 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

Import tax and greedy monopolies. Plus the belief that all foreigners are rich and willing to be fleeced.

There are local alternatives. Try 'Amoy' baked beans instead of Heinz Beanz. 

5 hours ago, jayboy said:

The widespread experience of participation in debates of this kind (except in the US where the custom is now entrenched) seems to be that participants will join if they perceive it be to their advantage in doing so. General Prayuth (correctly) probably sees no upside in debating with rivals - only downside, and therefore almost certainly will not do so.

 

 

The EC got his back and they will now look into the 'legality' of his participation in the debate. ???? The EC verdict is predictable and he take no part in the debate as it's deemed illegal.  ???????? He will then react that he was actually looking forward to the debate but alas he has to accept the ruling. ????