halloween

Just now, mtls2005 said:

I'm trying to imagine the reactions if the previous government had forced through the HSR "project" via a decree from on high?

 

The yellows would have hand-clapped and whistled themselves into apoplexy.

 

 

55555. Wasn't that what they proposed, borrowing B2.2 trillion and proceeding off-budget without parliamentary oversight?

19 minutes ago, madmitch said:

Only 25% of respondents understand the primary system yet 50% want the system! A demonstration of the typical Thai attitude toward politics maybe?

Possibly, if that attitude is that there has to be change. Not hard to see why people would be dissatisfied with the 'democratic" governments the old system was producing.

I didn't vote because none of the options fit my view. There are good arguments on both sides. A mandatory death penalty would make surrender meaningless, making life harder for security forces, and there is always the possibility of false convictions.

OTOH somebody captured wearing a suicide vest obviously cares little about their own life so why should I? Why should we go to the expense of jailing people whose desire is to kill us? There are already reports of terrorists who have been released and go straight back to terrorism.

Amazing isn't it, that quite insular people don't understand a new concept. Must be a trick to delay elections.

That decided, could we get back to the pros and cons of primary voting?

2 minutes ago, Smarter Than You said:

Blah, blah, blah ... you are my friend, the proverbial broken record.

 

The Junta has just used Section 44 to annul at least 7 laws that were "promulgated to ensure transparency and fairness in state procurement"

 

Is that a good thing?

You don't like having your lies refuted? Why would I comment on an allegation of yours without any specifics?

BTW do you ever answer questions put to you, or just ignore them as you post more propaganda? The question isn't rhetorical though I don't expect an answer.

12 minutes ago, Smarter Than You said:

You've never even heard of Thailand being one the most unequal nations on the planet? Educate yourself.

 

Actually, we are both well aware that you will not really being educating yourself anytime soon, so let me help you out a tiny bit.

 

Inequality in Thailand - Foreign Correspondents' Club of Thailand

 

It's on July 27, you should pop in get your hands on the microphone and explain to the poor sods there how taking land off the poor to line the pockets of the wealthy benefits the nation.

 

 

55555. Another casual lie, without support, that we are supposed to believe, when the facts are very different. Have you even heard of a Gini coefficient, let alone compared countries. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_income_equality

The world Bank and the CIA agree that Thailand is somewhat worse than the UK, much better than the USA, and nowhere near "being one the most unequal nations on the planet."

The agrarian revolution which reduced the number of people working in agriculture improved the living standards of all concerned.

3 minutes ago, Smarter Than You said:

Depends where the profits go doesn't it?

Taking land set aside for the poor to generate income for the wealthy surprisingly doesn't do much for the living standards of the poor.

 

Funny how it always seems that it is the poor that must make the sacrifices to benefit the nation.

You've never heard of the Agrarian Revolution? Educate yourself.

Under a primary voting system, how would Chalerm get to be #2 on the ticket? There has to be a lot of downside to balance that.

56 minutes ago, Thechook said:

 allow three main business activities – oil fields, wind farms and mining.

 

So the oil, electric and mining tycoons will benefit over the farmer struggling to make a living.  Bangkok elites getting priority. 

Why don't you get a grip on reality. What makes more sense, using land productively, or parceling out small plots for farms that will never get much above subsistence level? which benefits the nation more?

9 hours ago, Smarter Than You said:

Not sure what your definition of shot down is but the fact remains that of the 9 laws that the Junta bypassed with Section 44 - Seven of them were to ensure transparency.

 

I know how you tend to get a little confused when it comes to the Junta being less than perfect but surely you can muster the intellectual fortitude to reach the conclusion that bypassing transparency laws is not the best way to "protect the public's interests".

 

As for costs - you and everybody else have no idea at all about the Junta's costs (probably something to do with the transparency laws being Section 44'd)

Even the Democrats main man Korn doesn't know the Junta's costs (Junta says they'll get loans at 1.8% Korn thinks it will be closer to 4%)

 

As for China assisting - Korn says China should cover most costs because they benefit the most, instead the Junta geniuses misplayed their hand and ended up being stuck with the entire tab.

Shot down is when what you claim was transparent was actually planned to be off-budget with no figures to be released - just like the rice scam. In fact, many people were convinced that the B2.2 trillion loan would be used to finance the rice scam which had accumulated an estimated B600 billion already.

What I don't support is claims by you, without any proof, that invariably turn out to be distortions of the truth or outright lies.

7 hours ago, Smarter Than You said:

If you actually get elected than you're not really "posing" are you?

You are, in fact, an elected government.

 

What shows an abundance of morality?

Making excuses for criminals because they are unelected?

I wrote " posing as a democratic government."  Being elected does not make a government democratic. Democracy under PTP was a facade for a despot enriching himself from the wealth of the nation.

Why would you deliberately misquote me to make a point not worth making? Poor attempt at trolling? Does this have anything to do with the topic of the thread?

What shows an abundance of morality?

Making excuses for criminals because they are elected?

3 minutes ago, Smarter Than You said:

It is a dud deal on so many fronts.

 

"Korn Chatikavanij, a former finance minister who initiated the bullet train concept under the Democrat government, believes the junta has misplayed its hand. He argues the regime signaled too early, too strongly its intent to build the line even without a Chinese commitment to co-invest. In comparison, Korn says he made clear from the outset that Beijing should cover most of the costs, as it stood more to gain economically and strategically from the link."

 

China-Thailand Railway Project Gets Untracked | The Diplomat

 

Junta Pilloried for Handling of Rail Project at Forum - Khaosod English

 

 

Nice change of subject, after your claim of transparency has been shot down and a reasonable explanation for increased costs found.

BTW I have only EVER supported this project as a joint freight and passenger line since its first mention some 10 years ago. Originally I supported metre gauge dual tracking, but if China is prepared to assist in a standard gauge dual purpose line, it makes sense to co-operate. 

41 minutes ago, Smarter Than You said:

Well, the thing with that particular post, is that it is actually mostly taken from a published article that I can't provide a link for because it contains LM material.

 

So, I guess one mans "casual lies" are an editorial boards facts.

 

Here's your chance to give us your view on where you think the extra 39 billion will end up.

Well that explains the obvious bias and false statements, doesn't it. Off-budget, as was the rice scam, is not what you use for transparency. In fact, quite the opposite.

The explanation was given, you just failed to grasp it. Multiple rail systems would have shared some infrastructure and costs.

8 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

So you disagreed with an international opinion because it critic your beloved junta. Typical junta hugger so full of junta kool-aid and their bs. 

I disagreed with it because it is garbage. Would you like to point out the similarities in a scheme "almost identical"?

5 hours ago, Smarter Than You said:

Using Section 44 to "protect public's interests"

 

Let us remind the anti-democrats, so driven by (crocodile) tears over “corruption,” that you do get exactly what you whistled for.

 

… Of the total nine laws that will be sidestepped, seven were promulgated to ensure transparency and fairness in state procurement and two others involve the employment of foreigners in the project.

 

… The invocation of Section 44 prompts some people to compare the [General] Prayut[h Chan-ocha] project to the one proposed by the Yingluck Shinawatra administration.

 

Like it or not, it’s obvious the project proposed under the Yingluck government, which encompassed the same 256-kilometre route, seemed far better in terms of efficiency and transparency.

 

The Yingluck version, as handled by former transport minister Chadchart Sittipunt, would have cost 140 billion baht, against [G]en Prayut’s 179 billion. Under the Yingluck administration, the rail track was included in a mega-infrastructure development package and proposed to parliament for consideration….

 

The difference between the train project of this government and that of Yingluck’s is that the previous administration’s project was open to all legal examination mechanisms and underwent international bidding, which would provide the country with the best offer.

 

You get what you whistle for: a military dictatorship that is opaque, repressive and corrupt.

Threw in quite a few casual lies in that lot, didn't you?

"Yingluck Shinawatra, the prime minister, has embarked on a mission to raise the cash. A fortnight ago parliament passed a bill that permits the government to take on off-budget debt equivalent to the combined annual economic output of Vietnam, Myanmar, Laos and Cambodia.

The centrepiece of the spending plan is a network of high-speed railway lines to connect the country’s four main regions with Bangkok."

http://www.economist.com/blogs/banyan/2013/10/infrastructure-spending-thailand

You forgot to mention the B400 billion line to Chiang Mai. No doubt they would have shared some infrastructure.

2 minutes ago, Chris Lawrence said:

Can anyone show the link where the figures have been audited to show the loss of Ms T Government Rice scheme monies

 

 

The old troll question - how can they know exactly how much was wasted when those managing the scheme declined to keep records? Pity that supports the charge of negligence, isn't it?

6 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

I still like the opening narrative:-

 

"Before the military coup which brought Prayut Chan-o-cha to power in 2014, he was a staunch critic of Yingluck Shinawatra’s rice subsidy schemes. Now he has launched an almost identical scheme of his own to appease rural voters, and the hypocrisy only shows a lack of fresh ideas on solving the crisis". 

You would, because it is garbage that suits your agenda. The question I asked was how is it "almost identical" when there are so many differences? The only real similarity is it involves rice farmers who need support in the aftermath of Yingluk's rice scam.

6 minutes ago, Chris Lawrence said:

Don't feed this Troll.

I'd really like to know, what does reservations about the hi-speed train have to do with the junta's rice subsidy.

41 minutes ago, Smarter Than You said:

Interesting point of view, sort of begs the question as to why "these poor farmers" still support Yingluck in their millions though?

Could it be their lives were better under a Yingluck government?

People were wondering where a woman with no assets gets B2 million per month. Are they supporting her directly, or did she "accumulate" it from them while in office?

"I want to die in my sleep, like my grandfather. Not screaming like the other people in his car."

Would you want ot travel in a car driven by someone with a seriously impairing medical condition? Get someone else to drive.

1 minute ago, Confuscious said:

 

If the PA insurance at Kasikorn was basically the same as mine, you should have a free choice of hospital in case of an accident.

 

On a side note, to bring this discussion back to topic, when I married by wife (now ex-wife) I opened a bank account for her at the same bank as mine (UOB).
The bank account for my wife (a Thai national) had a FREE PA insurance.
So, a Thai national don't even have to pay for a PA insurance to get the benefits of it.
I don't understand why they make such a fuzz about an accident which is completely their fault and their ignorance.
If the mother did really care for her sons, why not spend a few pennies for a good PA insurance.

http://www.uob.co.th/en/personal/debit-card-uob-vcare.html
 

Working on the basis there is no such thing as a free lunch, I am assuming that the "free PA insurance" was limited, and that to get it certain account conditions had to be met. Not everybody would be able to meet those conditions, or afford the yearly premium.

And I find it hard to see the benefit when you are dead after being hit by a driver running from the BIB. Do you think he was keeping to a safe speed?

A really class act. I remember when the engagement was announced, he produced a medical certificate to show his fiance wasn't pregnant. Lucky her.

12 hours ago, Pigdog747 said:

I believe she is a very smart woman but put into a position of power surrounded by corruption. Her biggest problem was she was to nice of a person, not ruthless enough to control the corruption surrounding her. Her heart was in the right place to try and help the poor. The problem today is that the people still like her and know she tried to help them. As we see by Deputy Prime Ministers remark that it was OK to seize Yingluck's assets, even before the courts decide if she's guilty or not only goes to show that they still fear the woman and want to destroy the family. I don't care what anyone says but my heart goes out to this woman

You lost all credibility by the time you got to 'but". I know intelligence is relative, but what leads you to believe she is "very smart" when all appearances are that she is an airhead?

22 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

Too ashamed to be a general at this time. RIP. 

That explains why politicians don't commit suicide - they have no shame.

9 hours ago, YetAnother said:

perhaps someone can share with me why the import tax is 300%

To protect the local car industry and their balance of payments. If a car driven in Thailand is made here, most of the price remains in the country.

Oz had something similar (not as high a rate) which was gradually reduced/removed. Now we don't have a car industry.