lannarebirth

"Between 1999 and 2002, Mr Brown ordered the sale of almost 400 tons of the gold reserves when the price was at a 20-year low. Since then, the price has more than quadrupled, meaning the decision cost taxpayers an estimated £7 billion, according to Mike Warburton of the accountants Grant Thornton."

smartasses knew already ten years ago that gold will quadruple

Its going to quadruple again, here is your second chance if you have the brain cells to take it.

Let's say you're right. What else might be expected to go up at the same time?

1) It is a mathematical fact that the USA is headed towards bankruptcy.

Wrong all US debts are in US$ (except corporate). The US controls a printing press that can print an infinite amount of US$.

2) The USA is currently paying 20% of its tax revenue towards interest payments on its debt.

This is totally untrue. In fact there is virtually no evidence that the US has been paying interest on its borrowings or even intends to out of taxpayers dollars. Every year it runs a large fiscal deficit. Taxpayers dollars do not even cover Government expenditure. What it does is borrow more each year to pay its interest payments and revenue shortfall.

Still not feeling better.Can't any of you whiz kids say something to cheer a boomer up?

How's this:

The US is probably capable of carrying all it's own debt if need be and has several tools, including mandating banks buy it as reserves to keep interest rates fairly low.

Additionally, I expect protectionist measures are going to start to get more play soon. That ought to help balance of trade and savings, though probably not the global economy.

Alternatively, maybe the cost of getting the US on board the global currency bandwagon as opposed to fighting it would be to give the $USD a weighting higher than it probably deserves.

edit: and of course the VAT Tax is coming...

2 reasons I can think of.

1. Building material costs increased with price of oil

2. Higher domestic demand for new condo units as Thais are wary of the stock market and savings pay little or no interest

I don't think the resale non-luxury market is faring so well and is quite soft at the moment but no where near as bad as many western nations.

The suspension or reduction of transfer taxes likely saw a lot more "honest" transfer prices reported.

i admire experts who are able to forecast currency movements and wish i had a small fraction of the billions they are making

It's a lot easier to have a pretty good idea of what is about to happen than it is to profit handsomely from it. The only reliable thing I know is to buy something you know something about when it's cheap.

That said, yesterdays move not too hard to call as long thin candles burn fastest:

US and Thai politics are very different - not right now !!!

both are inextricably linked by one word……Corruption !

here's another word they have in common..... entropy.

Hard to say. All we really no for sure is that it's certainly possible he'd stab all those that have have fought for him in the back if he thought it suited him.

I doubt the significance of Chavalit having the door slammed on him today will be lost on the people he's attempting to influence. Will be interesting to see if he still does.

A rather public slap in the face indeed, all very un-Thai in reality.

I wouldn't quite write Chavalit off completely, but the odds that he can pull a rabbit out of the hat and get someone to move away from the coalition must be pretty slim.

Despite being a General (a badge of honour I guess), how much pull did or does he have in the army? I would guess today very little.

Well, there are several thousand Thai generals, both active and retired. I wouldn't put too much stock in that carrying any weight if I were you.

Fortunately not all several thousand of them have been PM yet. I was asking if anyone knew how much pull he still had, not implying that he had any other than saying "very little".

So did you answer from a point of knowledge or derision?

Neither. I know half a dozen or more Thai generals. They're all just happy to get that check each month. They try to sell influence occasionally, but that's not a big earner.

The high pollution that the North tends to experience in the month of March is almost always lower by the time Songkran arrives. By the time songkran is over it is usually already a memory.

I doubt the significance of Chavalit having the door slammed on him today will be lost on the people he's attempting to influence. Will be interesting to see if he still does.

A rather public slap in the face indeed, all very un-Thai in reality.

I wouldn't quite write Chavalit off completely, but the odds that he can pull a rabbit out of the hat and get someone to move away from the coalition must be pretty slim.

Despite being a General (a badge of honour I guess), how much pull did or does he have in the army? I would guess today very little.

Well, there are several thousand Thai generals, both active and retired. I wouldn't put too much stock in that carrying any weight if I were you.

It's a horrible piece of legislation and absolutely the right thing to do. Now that we've got it. wrote your representatives to cut out these insurance company bloodsuckers.

But if Chavalit is on the point to succeed, the probability of a coup increases, is not it?

I wouldn't think so. Please explain your reasoning.

It's hard to be on the side that's losing. Particularly when you care if people think you have credibility.

You've been so far up Thaksin's ass for years now that it must sting mightily that a non corrupt leader might move this country forward. Yeah. when Thaksin scored some points we'd see you on your hands, moth pursed, and knees bent before him. When he said things no one on Earth could defend you'd take a step back and for just a micro second keep your stupid fuc_king mouth shut. It must be wonderful to be as bloodthirsty as you and have absolutely none of your own skin in trhe game. What a fuc_king pussy. I'd love to know your details so I could say the same to your face. asshol_e.

The sad thing is that we sit here debating whether Thaksin was better or worse than some or others, when the real manipulators could run 100 tanks into town and reset the clock for the 18th time and no one, and I mean literally no one would have any recourse to complain.

Abhisit is probably the cleanest PM this country has had, but also one of the most privileged. That isn't in any way a good reflection on the myriad of democratically elected or army appointed sleaze that has come before. There is the odd one or two who can be talked of as having the country's best interests at heart, but they are few and their motivation is also debatable.

The best thing about Abhisit is that he could actually return after a coup.

Abhisit's biggest weakness is the need to have army approval as was all PM's cross to bear.

I think alot of people debate as persons who perhaps have never employed or worked with "country" people. I'll tell you honestly, they're the only people I can even stand to hang around for more than 30 minutes. Just can't stand "upper class " Thais "for the most part". That said, most of ther country people I've met are not terribly bright. I'm glad there are people like Abhisit that have an egalitarian view about Thai society that are seeing to their interests.

I'm amazed that as far back as then, the print news was so blatantly biased as Thaksin clearly said that democracy is not his ultimate goal, and never did he say it is "not his goal". He even (may have) been saying that democracy is a "vehicle" to reach happiness and progress for the people, if the article is read giving him the 'benefit of the doubt'.

He's no saint and I'll take Abhisit anytime, but for a "respectable" broadsheet to give a misleading headline like this is appalling.

Here are a few other things he's said:

“Where in the world is a single-party government called a dictatorship? What's wrong with it when people have faith in me?”

"The protesters are exerting mob rule over the rule of law, which I can't accept.”

“I will protect democracy with my life.”

“I have decided that if I have to rest to let the country move forward, I want to rest now. It's not that I'm not willing to fight, but when I fight, the nation loses.”

Once again, congrats to the Red Shirts for keeping things peaceful. And while the blood thing was nasty and wrong, it was at least a non-violent act that succeeded in getting them some international press (although perhaps not the type they wanted).

However they don't seem to have sort of end game. Its clear they aren't going to get what they originally wanted, or what they pretended to want. What do they hope to achieve?

democracy instead of military dictatorship

Simple as that

I often wonder what percentage of the pro Thaksin element here at TV were even here for all of Thaksin's premeirship. It sure didn't feel much like a democracy then.

It is also too simplistic to view this as a merely Red vs Yellow issue.

Although for many, if you don't think that Thaksin is fit to be PM then you simply must be a yellow.

AH perfect summary with some minor substituiton. It appears to me that 80% of the posters here presuppose that by finding the current government illegitimate you must be not only RED but a huge Thaksinite.

Carry on with the one sided dance.

Or, one might be sympathetic towards those who identify themselves in the Red movement, feel Thaksin is tyrannical divisive element to Thai society and feel no one is better able to help the "Reds" achieve their stated aims than the current government.

I guess I was unclear. I didn't mean only taxing it when it changes hands, as that's basically the system in place right now. I meant that property taxes would be implemented starting with the NEXT owner or whenever the prerty is reassesed or upgraded. There are certain stes within the US which have such schemes and it has not proved to hinder the turnover in real estate.

I don't think that will solve anything. The rich aren't selling the land, so there will never be any tax on it. They need an incentive to use it now. So the tax should apply to all land, even city land.

Yes, that too. aargh!

I think seeing this as a Red and Yellow issue is stupid and facile.

I don't think land prices will drop because of new property taxes. First of all, most agricultural land that is in use will either be exempt or taxed at a miniscule rate. Secondly, I think many properties will be "grandfathered" so that taxation only applies when a transfer of ownership occurs. Also I think initial tax rates will be quite low. As with all taxes, we know where the rates go from there. ^^

I don't think doing it that way would be very effective at all. I would simply whack an extra tax on all land holdings. The government would be swimming in money. Why grandfather it? The issue is that land is sitting in huge tracts in the hands of very few, they should pay. Simple.

I have worked in the EU in agriculture where they tried to calculate how much land was under cultivation. I think Italy calculated that they had almost half the country under olive production, the other half under wheat, and the third half under tomatoes.

Trying to decide what is and isn't under cultivation to calculate taxation would be a very Thai way of solving the problem. The entire arable land area of Thailand under production would increase massively, probably to a size equal to Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia also. Of course, inevitably, calculated crop yields would plummet and the policy makers would need to mandate using more fertiliser to increase yields. The wealthy of Bangkok would probably plough up their back gardens, plant two mango trees and declare their houses farms.

Well, I'm just thinking how do you get it implemented when there is so much resistance to it. Not unlike that crappy US Healthcare law. You have to start with something and then you refine it over time. I guarantee you legislators will become addicted to the revenues very quickly and be looking around for more.

The land title system here isn't perfect, but it is there. Simply going through this process would go a long way to clearing up the discrepancies in the land titles systems anyway. Who would want to pay more than they should?

He who owns it? Here's your bill.

Another issue with only taxing it when it changes hands is that land is used as surety for loans. So even though I don't sell it, I can still derive benefit from it. If you own it, indebted to the bank or not, you pay. Pure and simple.

I mean I have to pay road tax for my car, why shouldn't I pay some land tax?

I guess I was unclear. I didn't mean only taxing it when it changes hands, as that's basically the system in place right now. I meant that property taxes would be implemented starting with the NEXT owner or whenever the prerty is reassesed or upgraded. There are certain stes within the US which have such schemes and it has not proved to hinder the turnover in real estate.

One might supose it would free up some arable land

because people want the land to pay it's tax base.

But the other hand rented land would likely also have that tax passed on

to the poor renters, not paid by the puyai owner....

It will also provide an impetus for the government to speed up land reform (craapy titles, poor surveys, etc), a major concern of Thai people, especially the poor.

What about the so called 'Kings Land' and 'Queens Land'? Kings land refers to the flat land and Queens land to mountainous land and is administered by the Royal household bureau. I've seen lots of land being rented out indefinitely to locals for a very low fee and those who rent must make some good use of that land.

It's just my opinion of course, but I think that occupancy and record of land use should be recorded as the basis for attaining real ownwership of that land for low income persons. Thaksin DID pay at least lipservice and in fact created some schemes to deal with that. That's a page from his playbook I think the current government would be wise to copy.

I don't think land prices will drop because of new property taxes. First of all, most agricultural land that is in use will either be exempt or taxed at a miniscule rate. Secondly, I think many properties will be "grandfathered" so that taxation only applies when a transfer of ownership occurs. Also I think initial tax rates will be quite low. As with all taxes, we know where the rates go from there. ^^

I don't think doing it that way would be very effective at all. I would simply whack an extra tax on all land holdings. The government would be swimming in money. Why grandfather it? The issue is that land is sitting in huge tracts in the hands of very few, they should pay. Simple.

I have worked in the EU in agriculture where they tried to calculate how much land was under cultivation. I think Italy calculated that they had almost half the country under olive production, the other half under wheat, and the third half under tomatoes.

Trying to decide what is and isn't under cultivation to calculate taxation would be a very Thai way of solving the problem. The entire arable land area of Thailand under production would increase massively, probably to a size equal to Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia also. Of course, inevitably, calculated crop yields would plummet and the policy makers would need to mandate using more fertiliser to increase yields. The wealthy of Bangkok would probably plough up their back gardens, plant two mango trees and declare their houses farms.

Well, I'm just thinking how do you get it implemented when there is so much resistance to it. Not unlike that crappy US Healthcare law. You have to start with something and then you refine it over time. I guarantee you legislators will become addicted to the revenues very quickly and be looking around for more.

One might supose it would free up some arable land

because people want the land to pay it's tax base.

But the other hand rented land would likely also have that tax passed on

to the poor renters, not paid by the puyai owner....

It will also provide an impetus for the government to speed up land reform (craapy titles, poor surveys, etc), a major concern of Thai people, especially the poor.

He should publically challange the PT party to get on board. Though they never proposed such sweeping change on behalf of their constituents, it is clear they are the chief beneficiaries. Make the dialouge, public, wide and loud.

It is the ultimate situation of turkeys voting for Xmas. I think Korn is the man for this one. He seems to be far less fearful of standing his ground and explaining the economic benefits of policies.

The problem is that ALL of the protagonists in the political spectrum stand to lose something not just PT. The quickest and easiest way to get rich in Thailand has been to accumulate land and rent it back to farmers. I giggled when I found out that the taxes I owed the local government on my house up country were 92 baht per year, and yet the roads are potholed in the city and the drains are cracked. I would willingly pay 1000+92 if it meant the city didn't flood every year and the traffic lights worked, but I somehow doubt all the other's on my road don't see it that way.

If there is one thing about the wealthy in this country, they largely despise giving back anything for the "greater good". Tax raising efforts in this country are truly pathetic. I would find it difficult to argue with anyone that for every 100 baht raised by this tax 30 satang of it could be misappropriated. I applaud Abhisit's efforts, but I am waiting for someone in the parliament to stand up and point out the fact that Abhisit's family probably doesn't own 1000's of rai so it won't effect him. Of course there is also the sticking point about the corporation that is the largest private land owner in the country.

Of course, if land prices dropped because of a new supply of land onto the market, maybe Abhisit could propose that foreigners could purchase some of it to stabilize prices. Now that would be one to see.

I don't think land prices will drop because of new property taxes. First of all, most agricultural land that is in use will either be exempt or taxed at a miniscule rate. Secondly, I think many properties will be "grandfathered" so that taxation only applies when a transfer of ownership occurs. Also I think initial tax rates will be quite low. As with all taxes, we know where the rates go from there. ^^

This is a tax on the so called elite, drafted by the very people it will tax the most.

Many of these landowners own vast tracts of land, thousands upon thousands of Rai, tens of thousands even. (I have met many of these owners and seen their portfolios). This wealth in land is not an exaggeration.

This new tax will encourage (but not force) owners to sell what they can not use. If this does release unused / unwanted land, it will most be likely be priced to sell (those who can afford the taxes will still not be motivated sellers), and values may (Shock! Horror!) fall in certain areas!

So, it is an incredibly unpopular tax, especially with the Democrats support base, but they will go ahead with it, because it is in the best interests of the Kingdom.

Either by potentially making land more affordable, or even just swelling Thailand's tax receipts, unless you own thousands of rai, or hugely expensive homes, I cant see how you can think this tax is anything but good for Thailand.

I can't see that Abhisit will be able to make this pass. This tax runs straight into the heart of the concept of how this country works. He is an amazingly brave man for even trying to propose it. The opposition to this is not split on party lines, rather it is purely based on economic lines.

He should publically challange the PT party to get on board. Though they never proposed such sweeping change on behalf of their constituents, it is clear they are the chief beneficiaries. Make the dialouge, public, wide and loud.

Waiting the Court decision about democrat 258 Millions. I am afraid the decision will reinforce the double standard feeling and give more momentum to the Class war.

More mealy-mouthed Thaksin apologetics.

One of the issue is that we are immediately classified pro or con T, this is too much simplistic.

I am not supporting T. I do believe that unfortunately the mixing between the interests of poor rural population and T interests is damageable to the debate.

Let's say a house is on fire and you wanted to rush in and put the fire out. Would the fact that a rabid Pit Bull with a history of attacks is blocking the gate, be something you need to deal with? Maybe not, maybe you could go in another way. Maybe that's being tried, but we wouldn't know about that.

Apologies for dredging up a seven year old old thread, but I think its useful to reflect on just what Thaksin is actually fighting for, and where a lot of this sentiment has come from. Seven years is a long time, and its understandable if some people forget what he told he the world what he actually wants.

It sure as heck is not Democracy. He does not give a hoot about democracy now, or when he was in power. Its all rhetoric. The only thing he cares about is regaining a strangle hold on the reins of power.

Remember too how he also once said "my government will work for those who vote for me". This is the guy many people on here want to see regain the seat of power in this country. Scary stuff.

I can't find a link, but this all fits with the talk he gave about how corruption is a very normal part of how a government functions. Tin pot dictator aspirant.