Walker88

I'm not so sure there isn't a worldwide banking crisis at the moment, and Thailand certainly has one of its own. (The EU also does....a matter for another article, but suffice it to say a banking system 3 times GDP, and a Sword of Damocles resulting from the way Draghi 'solved' the debt crisis gives me the willies).

That number "31.5%" related to folks who have defaulted on payments is astonishing. The ease of getting credit is also why about 1 in 15 cars on the road are Mercs.

I've looked over the numbers, and while this article is about households, the corporate sector in Thailand added debt well in excess of GDP growth since 2010, which says the 'Boom' in Thailand was just a debt-fueled bubble.

Then along came Covid. There are long periods of 'debt moratorium', so banks did not have to note NPLs. Banks also were given the option of recording 'imputed interest', which means they could run debt payments through the income statement even if borrowers didn't actually pay. Thus, bank profits are likely bogus.

I read an article sometime ago that a new law allows banks to buy asset management and debt restructuring companies, which is really just a way for banks to move bad debt off the parent's books on to these new entities, which likely will not have to be consolidated.

All of this should give one pause. It also suggests why suddenly the authorities are so anxious to restart tourism, Covid be damned. There is likely not sufficient domestic demand capability to create the growth needed to service existing debt, so the only alternative is to attract capital from outside. Tourism is one source, so now the powers that be are anxious to get that back on track.

As I noted at the start, Thailand is not along in facing a looming debt crisis, as easy credit and Covid have hit just about every country. putin's war of aggression isn't going to help matters.

Batten down the hatches.

18 minutes ago, GarryP said:

South Korea took the power away from the military too and have been much better at handling corruption.

Yes. I cannot recall if it's 2, or maybe 3 former Presidents of South Korea who were jailed for corruption. That certainly sends a message about rule of law, and encourages both foreign and domestic investment.

No surprise South Korea's soft power dwarfs Thailand. South Korea did a few things right, such as borrowing the economic model of Japan and building chaebols, the Korean equivalent of conglomerates like Mitsubishi, Sumitomo, Mitsui, etc. Working hard to improve quality, South Korean companies also followed the same road as Japan to reach world class industrial status.

Sixty years ago, if a product broke, the joke was, "Made in Japan". Then along came Toyota, Honda, Sony and a host of other companies (ironically following the industrial philosophy of W. Edwards Deming), who forced Western companies to get their acts together. South Korean quality was once poor; now few have many complaints about Samsung, LG, Hyundai, Kia, etc.

Because of the war, and the now-70 year presence of US troops in South Korea, that country had a bit of a ready audience. The country exploited that window and built upon it.

Entertainment kind of piggy-backed off of the industrial success and name recognition brought about through industry. Korean Soaps made a splash in former enemy Japan, then spread throughout the rest of Asia. It took a few decades, but now even a cutesy Boy Band like BTS is known in the US. Of course, the first big South Korean hit in the West was Gangnam Style by Psy.

Thailand lacks the industrial base that South Korea has, which put the country's name in front of consumers worldwide, and set the stage for soft power like BTS and Psy, or even kimchi. When folks elsewhere in the world think of South Korea, they think quality products at a decent price, and now even entertainment. When the world thinks of Thailand, it thinks spicy food and bargirls, or maybe Leonardo di Caprio and The Beach.

Thailand has a long way to go to catch South Korea, and shows no indication it can ever develop the industrial might that seems to be the first step in opening the door to soft power.

Of all the vices one can choose, smoking was always the one that I could never understand.

One has to overcome initial nausea just to gain an addiction which, at best, will age the smoker at an accelerated rate plus make them stink, and at worst, kill them. Even fat people enjoyed their first extra bite of food, but I doubt any smoker enjoyed the first cigarette.

To each his or her own, I guess.

And the kicker....some research in the US is showing a statistically significant correlation between those who vape and young people who suffer worst from Covid.  As an anecdote, I have a young Thai female friend, age 22, otherwise thin and healthy save for being a vaper, and she's now 3 weeks in hospital trying to beat Covid, which is likely just Omicron, not Delta.

And let's ask why Asians might take exception to the term "<deleted>", when its etymology is 'worthy Oriental gentlemen'. That sounds benign, right? And isn't "Chink" just to Chinese what Farang is to Franks? (Bold because the term, oddly, was deleted, despite my just trying to make a point about intent of use.)

While many terms might have had a benign genesis, quite often the term morphs into an epithet. Farang is often used in a non-complimentary manner. So is gaijin in Japan, despite its origin. Of course some terms are epithets from the get go, such as gwai lo used in Cantonese (white devil). Once in an Armani shop in HK a service person yelled to a staffer, "Get over here and help the gwai lo" (translated to me by my HK friend, though I heard the gwai lo part).

Blacks and South Asians get worse terms tossed at them in SE Asia, and the intent is hardly benign. Most of us also know that "Darlie" toothpaste wasn't always named Darlie.

Racism is hardly a monopoly of Caucasians. When someone tosses a term intending it as an insult or epithet, however, it reflects on the speaker and is of usually no concern to the target, other than the target knowing he or she owes zero respect to the speaker.

I suspected Levis was up to something, as at BTS stations they incessantly run a commercial I happen to find particularly irritating, and not just because it's run every half minute....."these jeans...every rip and tear...tell the story of our lives......501: the number that changed EVERYTHING"

Seems god-awful pretentious, which is to say probably a genius marketing ploy aimed at the TikTok crowd who fancy themselves 'influencers' and among the most important human beings on Gawd's Green Earth. The narrator's voice seems to belong to a woman about 25 years old, so I suspect she represents the upper limit of their target demographic.

When I first heard the ad, I thought I could never be an ad exec in today's world, as I am likely out of touch with that target market. Then I realized I might actually be perfect, as innate cynicism might have me gearing copy toward a demographic that appears to be wildly self-absorbed and self-important. Perhaps it takes a curmudgeon to be cynical enough to think of what would resonate with young folks who feel themselves to be the actual center of the Universe.

Anyway, good luck to Levis.

DISCLAIMER: I'm not actually a curmudgeon; I just play one of the internet. That ad run in the BTS, however, IS irritating as well as incessantly run. And for my next missive...NOBODY looks better with a tattoo; Gawd, please make that fad go away faster than a mullet!

Too many of the Westerners on this site are far too stuck in that 'time is linear' thing. You fail to understand how domestic travel during April---and the concomitant spread of Covid---can be impacted by foreigners arriving in Thailand in May.

Fortunately Thailand is blessed with the kind of leadership that appreciates the subtleties and nuances of the spacetime continuum, and knows full well the tricks that an impish Universe can play on the unsuspecting. That and a lucky amulet or two will be the savior of the nation.

We, the great unwashed (aka 'dirty') farang masses, stand in awe.

I use the same words to describe music of today as I use to describe the phenomenon called TikTok:

"Content made by those without talent for those without taste."

Granted it is almost ritualistic for one generation to trash what comes after, but even in the 1980s people still played instruments and there was a melody. Today, few can actually play an instrument, and if there is any melody it is saved for the chorus...the rest is just talk, and banal on top of that. Yes, the Beatles could get away with "she loves you, yea, yea, yea", but once is enough. Stuff like "baby, baby, baby, oooh" takes what....one second to write?

I might have come later, but I can appreciate Benny Goodman, Glenn Miller, Duke Ellington, Miles Davis, John Coltraine....Hendrix and Santana...nobody today of comparable skill.

As for voices, female voices in particular are gone. Nina Symone had a voice. So did Stevie Nicks. Chaka Khan. Amy Winehouse had a voice. Ann Wilson of Heart could sing. Anybody today? And without Autotune? Vapid, pedestrian voices that are a dime a dozen. ZERO presence. Singers think running all around a chord is talent. Christine Aguilera started that, but it got old in an instant. Now it just sounds silly.

There used to be arrangement, too. Listen to Earth, Wind and Fire. The arrangements put together by Maurice White were both fun and sophisticated, especially when he let Philip Bailey run free in vocals.

Heck, I'm the farthest thing from a country fan, but listen to Glen Campbell on Gentle on My Mind (great lyrics) or his astonishing guitar mastery. Is there a new Michael Hedges, Leo Kottke, Eddie Van Halen, Mark Knopfler out there?  No.

Some songs last through the generations. I am willing to bet NOTHING from the last decade will be heard a decade or two from now. Throwaway drivel. Pabulum. Like TikTok.

12 hours ago, Led Lolly Yellow Lolly said:

. To me, all taxation is fraudulent

That's a rather State of Nature attitude, and suggests a total lack of understanding of civilized society. Perhaps you prefer the old Hobbesian view of life as 'poor, nasty, brutish & short'

There are a good many things that make society better and make it more likely to be 'civilized'.  Good roads allow both easy travel and the transport of life's necessities. Defense keeps you safe from invaders (and recent history reminds us such invasions are possible and nasty), food and drugs being tested makes it less likely you or your loved ones will be poisoned by rancid food or bad chemicals. Even things like FDIC guarantee of bank deposits (and the equivalent in other nations) gives you a place to put your savings and not worry about loss or theft. Even people without funds are afforded the chance to send their children to school. Perhaps you prefer societies where only the wealthy have access to education, kind of like the days of serfdom? Oh, and having some sort of law enforcement entity seems to have some benefits, too.

Those things cost money, and most have no incentive for a private entity to do them. Thus, citizens get taxed, and in a civilized society, most people have decided that helping our fellows makes for a more humane, as well as safer society.

Many people jump on the 'taxation is bad' bandwagon because they actually think they have entirely made their own life and harbor delusions of being some sort of 'sovereign man'. Silly. The society that allows us to succeed has a foundation built of rule of law and relative safety, and most of that is created through the tax process.

Putting aside the usual grumbling curmudgeons who call anyone who has utilized non-traditional legal permission to stay measures 'abusers', there does seem to be an Immigration reaction to the visa amnesty and extensions the PM and Cabinet approved during the Covid Era. It seems Immigration resented having a higher power usurp some of the control Immigration used to exclusively enjoy, so I/Os are playing the proverbial dog lifting his leg on bushes and stones trying to re-establish his turf.

The fact is---and this is uncomfortable both for many I/Os and expat curmudgeons---the PM and Cabinet decided that having a kind of captive market of money-spending tourists was better than nothing. Thus, a new LEGAL means of remaining, for those who so chose, was implemented. Everyone knew flights were mostly available and anyone could leave, but with a wink and a nod the PM+ decided to give a way for folks to stay. There was no 'abuse' possible, because it was 1) as legal as any visa or permission to stay that anyone has, and 2) nobody was being fooled, as everyone knew the reality. Thailand benefited from that program, and no doubt many Thais were able to remain gainfully employed. Though I ended up buying a business and changing my visa status during the amnesty/extension period, I know there was a time when the only guests in a 300+ room Bangkok hotel where I stayed were on these temp programs, and I was told by the GM the hotel would otherwise have closed and staff laid off if not for us. Certainly the curmudgeons were not going to step in and make up for our spending, had we not been granted permission to stay. So if the angry expats truly care so much about Thailand and its people, they should applaud the PM's moves and not continually moan about 'abuse'.

This PM intervention seems to have ruffled the feathers of many I/Os, hence the new effort to question arrivals. I have heard that some folks who utilized the legal amnesty and extensions, who eventually traveled outside Thailand and attempted to visit again, were turned down at Suvarnabhumi and told to take the next flight out.

1 hour ago, JimTripper said:

With bars and nightlife closed I do think a different quality of people will come around, eventually.

 

If they want family friendly and classy people that is what they need to do.

 

However, making the country a name for itself in this niche could take many years and would probably never be able to compete with established destinations in this regard.

 

 

'could take many years'

First, there might be a half dozen people on earth who have avoided visiting Thailand simply because of its worldwide reputation for nightlife. I'm at a loss as to who these 'classy' people might be, as it isn't unheard of to see multi-millionaires, Oxford-Cambridge-Ivy League types, diplomats, UN Officials, NGOs, even church deacons in the agogos.  Ain't nobody innocent when it comes to the biological imperative and how it manifests itself in entertainment decisions. I'm only slightly red-faced to admit that even I, who through no fault of my own fits multiple of my aforementioned categories, have entered an agogo or two over the years. I guess I'm of the same stripe as Oscar Wilde, who said "the only thing I can't resist is temptation". Most of us are quite human.

Second, even if it was a noble goal to erase the nightlife image from Thailand's reputation, before those 'classy' types will pile into the country, it might help to clean the air of 2.5 particulate matter, ban open field burning, install proper sewer systems, stop the flow of untreated effluent into the waters, get rid of dual pricing, and remind officials---whether elected or appointed like cops---that public service does not mean always having one's hand out waiting for tribute.

Now cleanup of a society where corruption is entrenched is possible, but not easy. Hong Kong used to be equally corrupt decades ago, but an anti-corruption effort was put in place and---at least until the commies took over---HK had built a reputation for being pretty darn honest. Perhaps, given a miracle, Thailand can do the same.

All of this is not to say Thailand does not have its pluses, as it surely has many. One of these pluses, however, to a good many people, is the very thing some authorities are wont to eradicate. They might remember the old line, whose source escapes me at this time:

"If my demons leave me, I fear my angels will soon follow".

Perhaps the PM is being influenced by the actions of his role model, President-for-Life Xi of the PRC.

It's bizarre what is now happening in one of the world's largest cities, Shanghai. In lockdown, as part of Xi's Zero Covid policy, the masses are beginning to rumble as many have neither money nor food. The CP is woefully inefficient in trying to address the food needs of tens of millions of locked down subjects. Of course, anyone would be unable to adequately meet the needs as well as corral so many people, except in an authoritarian State. And therein lies the attraction.

A question remains: why is Xi so hellbent on total control of Covid? Does he believe it is even possible, save via keeping China ringfenced and its borders locked for the next five years? Does he have some special knowledge of Covid no one else has? Is it simply his penchant for wanting total control over people whose 'votes' he obviously will never need, plus a kind of delusionary view of how long even the CP and PLA can keep a billion four hundred million Chinese under their bamboo hand? Does Xi think he can keep economic activity at a high enough level to sustain China's growing debt and RE problems under lockdown?

In any event, it seems Xi's actions might be inspiring Thailand's PM to maintain the 'advantages' of Covid fear in a self-appointed and unpopular regime.

There are no two sides to this issue, other than right and wrong.

A country was at peace, going about daily life just like folks in New York, London, or Bangkok. The country represented no threat to anyone.

Then, because a psychopath suffering from Napoleon Complex and SDS, decided he wanted to rebuild the USSR, he launched an unprovoked and horrific attack aimed squarely at causing terror---striking schools and hospitals, destroying food storage facilities, and engaging in rape and summary execution. The war crimes are the worst Europe has seen since Srebanica, and before that the Concentration Camps of Nazi Germany.

To side with russia, or to try to suggest some sort of moral equivalency, is bogus, immoral and at best, willfully ignorant. To anyone suggesting such things, may the same hell be unleashed on you, your life and your loved ones. See how you like it.

In 1992 Ukraine gave up the nukes stationed on its soil in exchange for a non-aggression pact from russia. Ukraine abided by that agreement 100%. It is only because little vlad the psychopath felt he should be Nicolas II reborn that he launched his invasion.

That putin supposedly felt fear because NATO was expanding is his own fault. Nations such as Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Poland, Hungary, the former Czechoslovakia, Bulgaria, and Romania asked to join NATO is because they suffered under the heel of the former USSR that putin is hellbent on rebuilding. These nations also saw the slaughter putin carried out in Chechnya, Georgia and Syria, so they wisely sought safety under the umbrella of NATO. It is no surprise that even Sweden and Finland are asking about joining NATO after the Ukraine invasion.

The world was pulling out of the Covid Recession, but all of that is under threat now because of putin. Rising fossil fuel prices and higher prices for grains (Ukraine previously produced 14% of the world's wheat). This is going to lead to inflation across the globe. Of course, I suspect the ones trying to pretend there is some moral equivalency in this war will find a way to blame Biden or their own leader.

2 hours ago, BritManToo said:

The COVID restrictions have destroyed the western economy, they desperately need 'bad guys' to point the finger of blame towards, in order to distract the proletariat. Russia or China are equally good in the role of 'bad guys'.

 

Expect several years of hate from the media.

 

The US GDP grew 6.9% in Quarter 4. That would seem to be something other than destroyed. Also, job creation hit a record in 2021. I was just back in the US for a month, and virtually everywhere there are Help Wanted signs. The number of people employed is at a record, so companies are hard pressed to attract staff.

Again, not quite 'destroyed'.

On 4/2/2022 at 1:14 AM, LaosLover said:

They think you're going to support them for no good reason and you think they're going to give you the sex you want for no good reason.

 

There has to be a non-toxic, rational reason for these unusual events to happen.

Not sure if the reason is toxic---either toxic masculinity or toxic femininity---but it is chemical.

We will always dress it up for more than it is, because it makes us feel we have things like free will and all that, but most every action we take in life is driven by the instinct to propagate our gene pool. We males can produce an almost unlimited number of offspring, but not every women will have us, so we possess that drive from about age 13 to (hopefully) 80+. Women's chances are limited by the toll it takes on her body, so her drive has her seeking support, which in today's world tends to be financial. After menopause, her instincts fade, as she isn't going to be able to propagate her gene pool anymore. If she has a particularly sensitive bit of lady parts, she might still want to engage in the deed, but for many women it seems the thrill is gone.

All things considered, I see no Earthly reason why I would ever want to be female....who the heck would want to endure, even one time, nine months of discomfort and a body out of control. That's not even to mention around 40 years of that 'monthly visitor' or whatever the quaint term for menstruation is. A males function in the reproductive process is pure pleasure, and unless one is a responsible sort of fellow, can be one and done in an hour's time. That's a biological advantage of males of most every species that's tough to beat.

So what's love got to do with it? It's just a way humans put frosting on a cake. Obviously it can be a joy, but dopamine's main function isn't love, it's to get us randy and in the mood for love (making).

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

Most rational complaints about the appointment system of US ambassadors is that it's politically tainted. People with no diplomatic experience are appointed as reward for contributing large sums of money to one party or the other.. It takes a very special kind of thinking to criticize appointees on the grounds that they are professionals.

There is a very good reason why ambassadors appointed to major posts are selected....it costs a lot of money to be the ambassador to most major nations. Access to the POTUS is an added plus, but---for example---the US Ambassador to the Court of St James (the UK) is out of pocket maybe $20 million per year. Most of the entertaining ambassadors do is out of their own pocket, not foisted on the taxpayer. The Amb to the UK is quite often a billionaire.

Posts at smaller, less significant nations are usually filled by a career diplomat, who is not---contrary to another poster here---a 'yes man'. Most have done good work in other posts. Often they have specific direct knowledge of the nation and its issues, but generally those appointed just have a good record of leadership and management skills. Obviously this isn't always the case, but more often than not it is.

Expats tend to have an incorrect impression of the job as well as what aid they can expect from an embassy. Some expats think embassies are responsible for them. One hears things like "I pay my taxes so the embassy owes me blah blah blah", when in fact few expats pay much tax. Of course citizens who are not expats but just at home would beef that 'some guy who chose to go to Country X expects my tax dollars to support him or get him out of trouble'. So you see....it depends on where one views the issue.

Any embassy is going to have senior people who fill in for any knowledge an ambassador may lack. There's always a Political Counselor, Economic, Commercial, Consular, Chief of Station, etc., who represent the collective knowledge. Getting into the foreign policy arm of the govt is an onerous process, requiring a great deal of varied knowledge. Agency folks not only must pass knowledge tests, but also IQ tests, psychological evaluation, and a rigorous security check.

All appointees---career or FOP (Friend of POTUS) must turn in a resignation upon Administration change. The resignation need not be accepted, though all political appointees are accepted.

Occasionally some Ambassadors royally mess up...such as when Amb Lewis (to the UK) remained on holiday when the Falkland War began, while recently the US Amb to Germany was about as ill qualified, inept, and offensive as any Ambassador had ever been. He was then appointed to head the DNI and was tasked with trying to collect names of deep cover assets in certain countries (Russia). The IC, of course, thwarted his efforts, as he had no need to know and it was assumed the covert assets would be given to the then POTUS, who would give them to his friend putin.