Orac

I agree alcohol and smoking are bad, but people should be allowed to do so. But then they have to pay for their own sickness and stuff resulting from it. So in a way if the extra tax is for healthcare of smokers its ok.

How about people consuming sugar, salt,tea and coffee, medication, msg, fat, fast food? And how about those who think ketchup is a vegetable?

Do you mean americans?

The ketchup as a vegetable controversy refers to a proposed United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Food and Drug Administration directive, early in the presidency of Ronald Reagan, that would have reclassified ketchup and pickle relish from condiments to vegetables, allowing public schools to cut out a serving of cooked or fresh vegetable from hot lunch program child-nutrition requirements.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketchup_as_a_vegetable

It is shocking to treat the poor like this.

These people have few pleasures in life. No cinemas, no bowling that they can visit or afford.

Satellite TV is unaffordable

It's a disgrace when all other household costs are rising too and the vast majority have no increase in income to offset it.

Shame on you PTP

Hmmm - so your now advocating the government sets up some sort of scheme to increase the incomes of the lowest paid in society.

Excellent, the price of alcohol can't be high enough. It's one of the most dangerous drugs in the world, it causes death and mayhem in traffic, spousal abuse and all sorts of aggression. In another thread: "Drunken Swede kills tourist from New Zealand". I am convinced he would not have killed that guy if he were sober!

Who kill most people drunks or sober people?

I guess you're just trolling, but I'll bite anyway: Only 20% of the fatal road accidents are caused by drunken drivers, so drunk drivers drive safer than sober drivers....

Only if more than 20% of people are driving drunk out there provided your 20% figure is accurate anyway.

I think a few people are assuming the increases apply to the full measure of drinks however excise duties only apply to the alcohol content.

So, for example, a bottle of Magners will increase from an already expensive 250Baht to about 350Baht a bottle!?

dam_n, I was just getting a taste for the stuff on a hot day!

I make it about 6 baht on a 330ml bottle and 10 baht on a 568ml (pint) at 4.5% by volume

Lets not panic too quickly. I work out the extra cost on a bottle of San Mig Light being 2 baht.

The text should have been "Not all Killings have committed by the army". Bet you that the fast mind of Prayuth will conclude in three and half months time that the academics have defamed the holy army.

It always amuses me when someone reads an article and distorts a summary of it to fit their preconceived ideas.

Sounds about right for The Nation.

I'd like to see Amsterdam in a Thai prison

And so would Prayuth.However's Amsterdam's main offence in his eyes (and perhaps in yours) is that he speaks no more than the truth - not a commodity valued in some quarters.However as always in Thailand the critics of Amsterdam focus on the personal, including anti Semitic slurs on occasion, rather than the substance of his charges.

I didn't even realise he was Jewish. Who has been bringing that into the argument?

Sent from my HTC phone.

Anti semitic slurs are never part of the argument.They are just anti semitic slurs.The chief offender, though to be fair he has tried to refute the charge, is S.P Somtow (actually a rather admirable guy whom I greatly respect)

How about this one:

http://www.thaivisa....75#entry3634618

Mr. Amsterdam come sown on holiday, they had booked for you at Bangkok Hilton !!!

Just look at Songhi !

When you are spreading lies you have to stand for them !

The army had told all so many times that they do not have sniper rifles in Cal. 308 (the US Army does also not use Cal. 308 for snipers) and the people killed by snipers, was shot with Cal. 308 !!

So my opinion is "That some could have shot them,s ot they thought the reds would get more symphathy"

Have all forgot that the reds was quite well armed as well !!!! Granates, rifles, pistols etc. and the reds was all sponsored by Thaksin !!

I am no gun expert but doesn't .308 calibre equate to 7.62mm which is not an uncommon calibre for sniper rifles. A quick google came up with this one:

http://www.knightarmco.com/m110.html

The Political and Economic Risk Consultancy's website is currently accessible using 3BB internet with a proxy server, as attempts to access the website without the proxy have failed, suspiciously. dcutman is right. The higher the number, the more corrupt the country. Right now, PERC's study puts Thailand as the second most corrupt of the sixteen countries ranked:

http://www.asiaone.c...08-134144.html/

It seems possible that access to PERC website is denied because someone wants this story to blow over before the usual suspects (such as myself) can rip it to shreds.

Nice figures there from April 2009

Worst corruption was Thaksin's Thailand in 2003 when he managed to get Thailand all the way up to 3rd highest corruption level in Asia.

The figures in the link provided above show that Abhisits government managed to get Thailand up to second place.

The Political and Economic Risk Consultancy's website is currently accessible using 3BB internet with a proxy server, as attempts to access the website without the proxy have failed, suspiciously. dcutman is right. The higher the number, the more corrupt the country. Right now, PERC's study puts Thailand as the second most corrupt of the sixteen countries ranked:

http://www.asiaone.c...08-134144.html/

It seems possible that access to PERC website is denied because someone wants this story to blow over before the usual suspects (such as myself) can rip it to shreds.

Nice figures there from April 2009

Comparing figures over time is difficult with changing sources and maybe criteria leading to the figures. That might mean that only the last few years could be compared up to a point. The last few years show:

2007 - 8.03

2008 - 8.00

2009 - 7.63

2010 - 7.60

2011 - 6.57

2012 - 7.55

Note that PERC uses an higher value to indicate more perceived corruption whereas for CPI it's the other way round. It seems in 2011 PERC has said "A grade greater than 7.0 indicates that a "serious" corruption problem exists"

BTW PERC website www.asiarisk.com seems unreachable at the moment

I was also struggling to reach the PERC sight however the table in the link I quoted above states that the 2011 figure is 7.55 and 2012 is 6.57 which, using the 7.0 indicator you have also quoted as the line differentiating "serious" corruption suggests that the previous government suffered from "serious" corruption problems but the Yingluck government does not.

Wow! How stupid is she? or the people that tell her what to say?

It is clear that she does not how this point system really works. The higher the # the more corrupt. So if your country/government went from 6.57 to 7.55 then your corruption has increased greatly.

For example Singapore 1.42 Indonesia 9.27

If what you say is correct then this is a huge loss of face for the PM as it clearly demonstrates she has neither read the report , or a summary of the report and is just a puppet with nominal intelligence. Oh dear. I just hope teh Thai language news doesn't pick up on this blooper.

Or it could be the usual poor reporting in The Nation.

To clarify the figures dcutman is right in saying that the higher the figure, the worse the corruption, however, the figure of 7.55 relates to 2011 and has been lowered to 6.57 in 2012 and gained a position in the asian table from 10th to 9th due to worsening corruption in S Korea which slipped from 9th to 11th.

More ddetails here http://www.ccac.org.mo/en/plaintext.php?cat=news&page=state&file=show_news.php&kind=N〈=en&id=2784&filelink=120321.htm

"Thailand is going to the Olympics, right? The project to promote sports science to develop basic sports potential was allocated at Bt4.5 million for the whole year," Somboon said.

I think somebody should tell Somboon that the Olympics were last week.

Changes in demographics due to ageing populations and longer lifespans coupled with reduced fertility rates will probably be one of the biggest global issues of the next 50 years and not just in Thailand with countries competing for working age immigrants. Thailand is nowhere near in the worst position when you look at countries like China who, with their one child policy, are already starting to see signs of strain and more developed countries in Europe with large social security and socialised health schemes to fund.

China doesn't have a complete 'one child' policy!

If you both come from parents as an only child, as a couple who marry, then you can have 2 children no ifs - even maybe 3 children - if you can afford to pay taxes for an extra child. Even if you come from a family of 2 children, and marry, if you are wealthy you may pay extra taxes for as many kids as you like!

-mel.

Maybe so but the figures/projections are not good for China:

In 2009 there were 167 million over-60s, about an eighth of the population. By 2050 there will be 480 million, while the number of young people will have fallen.

and

In 2000 there were six workers for every over-60. By 2030, there will be barely two.

Source: http://www.guardian....eing-population

Changes in demographics due to ageing populations and longer lifespans coupled with reduced fertility rates will probably be one of the biggest global issues of the next 50 years and not just in Thailand with countries competing for working age immigrants. Thailand is nowhere near in the worst position when you look at countries like China who, with their one child policy, are already starting to see signs of strain and more developed countries in Europe with large social security and socialised health schemes to fund.

If inflation isn't the cost of living rising what would it be???

Inflation is a rise in the general level of prices of goods and services in an economy over a period of time.

This is different to someone's average daily expenses. Put it this way, is the inflation rate in Thailand 40% now, as would be implied from your numbers if they were the self same thing??

How inflation effects individuals will depend of what they spend money on. The official inflation rates however you care to measure them are a very broad brush. The figures given do not say how they are arrived at or what they cover however they do imply that the inflation rate for the demographic they are looking at is 40 % per annum which is why I am questioning them.

You are questioning them on the wrong premis.

Sure, they are related as if your living expense go up then this will have a negative effect on inflation (it will rise). But it is wrong to say that year on year inflation has risen 40% because it takes 40% more money each day to cover living expenses for someone.

They cannot be directly equated in other words.

I think we are just going to have to disagree on this one since I would argue that the cost of living and inflation are directly related.

Where on earth did they get their figures from:

"As of this past May, daily expenses averaged Bt462.31 - Bt113.92 more than August 2011"

This gives an annuallised inflation rate of over 40 %!

It is more of a 'cost of living rise' - not inflation.

If the price of fuel rose by 10% it doesn't raise inflation by 10%.

If inflation isn't the cost of living rising what would it be???

Inflation is a rise in the general level of prices of goods and services in an economy over a period of time.

This is different to someone's average daily expenses. Put it this way, is the inflation rate in Thailand 40% now, as would be implied from your numbers if they were the self same thing??

How inflation effects individuals will depend of what they spend money on. The official inflation rates however you care to measure them are a very broad brush. The figures given do not say how they are arrived at or what they cover however they do imply that the inflation rate for the demographic they are looking at is 40 % per annum which is why I am questioning them.

Where on earth did they get their figures from:

"As of this past May, daily expenses averaged Bt462.31 - Bt113.92 more than August 2011"

This gives an annuallised inflation rate of over 40 %!

It is more of a 'cost of living rise' - not inflation.

If the price of fuel rose by 10% it doesn't raise inflation by 10%.

If inflation isn't the cost of living rising what would it be???

Where on earth did they get their figures from:

"As of this past May, daily expenses averaged Bt462.31 - Bt113.92 more than August 2011"

This gives an annuallised inflation rate of over 40 %!

Well well well.. Yet another post deleted by Mods... It was a valid point... Drugs are ILLEGAL in Thailand so why are they being discussed on your site? HYPOCRITES...

Sent from my MID using Thaivisa Connect App

erm stabbing someone in a drug fueled frenzy is also illegal but that is the whole point of this discussion/thread.

The focus of my comment was that is is embarrassing that the US gave Thaksin a Visa. Yes...I had the Land location wrong, mistake accepted (insert: Ratchadaphisek Rd). But your "facts" are clearly selected for impression. Why not mention that the first real auction was cancelled? I wonder why? That is how Pojaman got her chance to put a bid in. Not Important fact? The real point here is "that Mr Thaksin had violated Articles 100 and 122 of the NACC Act which states that government officials, including prime ministers and their spouses, are prohibited from entering into or having an interest in contracts with state agencies under their supervision." Those laws exist in many contemporary societies, where you try to keep the family of the government officials from buying land from government agencies. Pretty basic law to prevent corruption. You needn't try to re-litigate the case, especially one that has many hidden details. Point is that Thaksin was found guilty by Thai courts, he is a convicted criminal, and he jumped bail. The US should never have given him a Visa...period.

The problem is that the judgement itself shows how political the whole situation was. As you state above " The real point here is "that Mr Thaksin had violated Articles 100 and 122 of the NACC Act which states that government officials, including prime ministers and their spouses, are prohibited from entering into or having an interest in contracts with state agencies under their supervision." " so how on earth could they have found Thaksin guilty but Pojaman not guilty? There is also the point that the Bank of Thailand as supervisory body for the FIDF checked with the NCCC before hand who confirmed that the deal was not in breach of Article 100.

The whole thing stinks of the witch hunt that the set up of the AEC clearly was with a clear agenda to pin something on Thaksin even to the point of them drafting the complaint for the FIDF to sign as the one that was originally submitted did not name Thaksin.

The whole thing stinks of Thaksin helping his wife buy government land. Isn't that clear? I guess it is not.... if you are a devoted Thaksin fan...but to anyone else, it clearly stinks. Thaksin was guilty because he wrote a letter giving them permission to sell the land to his wife. Your facts are selective....there is no written record of having anyone having"checked with the NCCC". And if they did, why would they have even checked? Why did they even need to ask for a letter from Thaksin, giving them permission? Why? Because everyone knew it stinked...they were trying to cover their asses.... to have cancelled the first auction and then let Thaksin's wife in to buy it in the second, and just happens to be the high bidder. On land that was valued at twice that amount previously. hmmm anything smell here? But if none of the above is getting thru to you. Then let's just allow Michelle Obama to go buy some government land by first cancelling an auction and then submit a bid slightly higher than other bids in the range of $25 million dollars...and see if any one in the US thinks its an arm's length transaction. Take the wool off your eyes. Thaksin is a corrupt, a money greedy, power greedy megalomaniac. Sorry,he is not the nice little sweet heart you think he is. Try Tai Bak, try 2500 extra judicial deaths in the drug war. Try getting the limit of foreign ownership in Thai telecoms lifted in Parliament and then selling off a huge segment of Thailand's communication systems to Singapore - Temasek (sp) .... and not paying 1 baht in taxes. (Oh... maybe the Temasek deal was ok because the CEO was the Singapore PM's wife and that couldn't be a bad thing. ) This guy Thaksin....had many supporters when he first became PM. He became corrupt. He became a sick man whose greed for power and money corrupted and blinded him.. Sorry on this. He is not a good guy.

In answer to specific questions you raise:

"there is no written record of having anyone having"checked with the NCCC". And if they did, why would they have even checked?"

Though the written evidence has not been produced the BOT claimed the checks were made. The reason for the checks seems rather obvious given what happenned.

However, Bank of Thailand (BOT) Assistant Governor Phairoj Hengsakul, who is also a manager of the Financial Institutions Development Fund (FIDF), said yesterday the BOT had asked the National Counter-Corruption Commission (NCCC) for their opinion on the land purchase documents.

Former BOT governor MR Pridiyathorn Devakula had requested the NCCC to comment on whether it violated the Counter Corruption Act Article 100 before signing the contract. One of the NCCC members said the sale and purchase of the land plot was legal, Phairoj said.

"Before the sale and purchase, the former BOT governor consulted related people, including the Council of State, the NCCC and prosecutors but we haven't found any written evidence," he said.

http://www.nationmul...es_30017709.php

"Why did they even need to ask for a letter from Thaksin, giving them permission?"

As Pojamans husband he was required to sign off on the deal same as any spouse would be required to do. This wasn't a special letter specifically for Thaksin.

I have never claimed that Thaksin is a good guy but the problem is the powers aligned against him are so inept that they have been unable to pin anything on him. The land deal was clearly full of holes at the time when, as you rightly say, there were plenty of other more substantive issues that could have been addressed.

As an American Citizen, I am embarrassed by our US government's groveling at the feet of Thaksin.

The fact is that he is a convicted criminal, who jumped bail. That is a fact. And there is no way under US law he should be granted a visa...unless higher ups in the Immigration Dept approved it and told the lower grade officers to give him a visa. Despicable in my view. He has no right to enter our country. He is a convict. He was tried by the Thai judicial system, not by the coup makers. His wife, with Thaksin's written permission, was given the special right to buy a huge tract of valuable government property near Suvarnabhumi Airport, just before the government auctioned the land, at a huge discount. Classic corruption....as was Thaksin's arrogant style. Those were the types of things that got him thrown out of power. His buying his way back into power.... by funding huge sums of money to Puy yai bans, Orbortors, MP's, etc through out the northeast and north....is common knowledge...not even disputed. But the US government decides to play sides and act like this was just a political prosecution and a political injustice. Embarrassing...for me.

Don't let little things like facts get in the way of your discourse there - you can't even get where the land in question is right.

There was no 'special right' to buy the land let alone a huge discount involved. The bid from Pojaman was higher than the Land Departments valuation and also was higher then the other two bids received from Land and House and Noble House. Also there was the issue of Article 4 of the National Counter Corruption Act which states that the accused must directly supervise the damaged party when at the time the FIDF came under The Bank of Thailand.

The focus of my comment was that is is embarrassing that the US gave Thaksin a Visa. Yes...I had the Land location wrong, mistake accepted (insert: Ratchadaphisek Rd). But your "facts" are clearly selected for impression. Why not mention that the first real auction was cancelled? I wonder why? That is how Pojaman got her chance to put a bid in. Not Important fact? The real point here is "that Mr Thaksin had violated Articles 100 and 122 of the NACC Act which states that government officials, including prime ministers and their spouses, are prohibited from entering into or having an interest in contracts with state agencies under their supervision." Those laws exist in many contemporary societies, where you try to keep the family of the government officials from buying land from government agencies. Pretty basic law to prevent corruption. You needn't try to re-litigate the case, especially one that has many hidden details. Point is that Thaksin was found guilty by Thai courts, he is a convicted criminal, and he jumped bail. The US should never have given him a Visa...period.

The problem is that the judgement itself shows how political the whole situation was. As you state above " The real point here is "that Mr Thaksin had violated Articles 100 and 122 of the NACC Act which states that government officials, including prime ministers and their spouses, are prohibited from entering into or having an interest in contracts with state agencies under their supervision." " so how on earth could they have found Thaksin guilty but Pojaman not guilty? There is also the point that the Bank of Thailand as supervisory body for the FIDF checked with the NCCC before hand who confirmed that the deal was not in breach of Article 100.

The whole thing stinks of the witch hunt that the set up of the AEC clearly was with a clear agenda to pin something on Thaksin even to the point of them drafting the complaint for the FIDF to sign as the one that was originally submitted did not name Thaksin.