jayboy

Forbes reckons that the Thai bubble will burst once China's does.....and when interest rates rise globally. So that's going to happen eh? What about the West's addiction and dependence to QE. That's going to end soon too , is it?

It's not a Forbes editorial view but one of a particular person who specialises in predicting bubbles.He sees bubbles in several places including Malaysia.It's interesting enough but it's not mainstream thinking and certainly not the view of major credit agencies.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

So the article WASN'T in Forbes magazine?

Er, yes but it wasn't an editorial, just the view of a contracted journalist who sees bubbles everywhere.

Forbes reckons that the Thai bubble will burst once China's does.....and when interest rates rise globally. So that's going to happen eh? What about the West's addiction and dependence to QE. That's going to end soon too , is it?

It's not a Forbes editorial view but one of a particular person who specialises in predicting bubbles.He sees bubbles in several places including Malaysia.It's interesting enough but it's not mainstream thinking and certainly not the view of major credit agencies.

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

So, it's a pathetic article because of a typo?

Forbes is not alone among the financial press in showing an amber light for Thailand's economy

Moody's themselves see enough issues to do so

Of course it's a typo.I took that merely as an example of slovenly journalism.There are many other errors and misjudgements (in The Nation piece not the Forbes article which I haven't seen.Anyone able to link?)You mention Moodys.Actually my company subscribes to the full Thailand report and while, as I mentioned earlier there are some challenges in Thailand, the overall view is very favourable.None of this means I endorse all this government's economic policies (I don't - especially the rice pledge support scheme) but it is important not to exaggerate.The infrastructure plan of this government is in fact supported by the Democrats, the objection being to off balance sheet funding.

Why don't you find it yourself? I posted the link three days ago. Then you should read, consider, inwardly digest and tell us which is pathetic - the article, or someone who condemns it out of hand without having seeing it?

I didn't condemn the Forbes article.I commented on the rubbishy Nation article which mentioned it.If you can refer me (by which I mean exactly where you posted it) to the Forbes article article I will gladly comment on it.

Great article telling it as is.

Actually it's a pathetic article with numerous errors.Its centrepiece is a Forbes article predicting a 1977 style crash.Since there was no such crash in 1977 one's confidence in its integrity is not exactly enhanced.I follow for business reasons several reputable political and economic forecasters.The political outlook is indeed very uncertain but Thailand's economic position, while facing some challenges, is very soild.If the US and Europe had Thailand's economic strength and resilience, its leaders would be delighted.

So, it's a pathetic article because of a typo?

Forbes is not alone among the financial press in showing an amber light for Thailand's economy

Moody's themselves see enough issues to do so

Of course it's a typo.I took that merely as an example of slovenly journalism.There are many other errors and misjudgements (in The Nation piece not the Forbes article which I haven't seen.Anyone able to link?)You mention Moodys.Actually my company subscribes to the full Thailand report and while, as I mentioned earlier there are some challenges in Thailand, the overall view is very favourable.None of this means I endorse all this government's economic policies (I don't - especially the rice pledge support scheme) but it is important not to exaggerate.The infrastructure plan of this government is in fact supported by the Democrats, the objection being to off balance sheet funding.

Great article telling it as is.

Actually it's a pathetic article with numerous errors.Its centrepiece is a Forbes article predicting a 1977 style crash.Since there was no such crash in 1977 one's confidence in its integrity is not exactly enhanced.I follow for business reasons several reputable political and economic forecasters.The political outlook is indeed very uncertain but Thailand's economic position, while facing some challenges, is very soild.If the US and Europe had Thailand's economic strength and resilience, its leaders would be delighted.

Asoke becomes another protest site

The Nation November 7, 2013 12:26 pm

A number of anti-bill protesters are seen at Asoke Intersection on Thursday.

Organised by a group of democracy-promoting businessmen, the protest is well backed by office workers in the

business area as well as the general public.

Fortunately it looks as though the government is backing off this foolish umbrella amnesty.But for the office workers in Silom at some level some of them must wonder at the irony in which a protest based on hatred of corruption is led by Suthep,(allegedly) a past master in that area.I would be even more impressed if these mainly Sino Thai salarymen were as much protesting at the amnesty for those involved in the 2010 deaths.Strangely and I think rather impressively the dislike of the umbrella amnesty unites very disparate groups.A massive miscalculation by Thaksin.Anyway time to put on my Guy Fawkes mask (it's a joke the usual suspects manage to overlook the regicide connotations).Apparently these masks are made in Brazilian sweatshops:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/marthagill/100244704/anonymous-have-been-exposed-as-hypocrites-who-use-sweatshops-watch-them-try-to-wriggle-out-of-it/

I see Russell Brand is the current hero of the movement.Hypothetically which side would Russell support in Thailand?

*Deleted posts edited out*

I must blushingly confess that Yoshiwara is referring to me.And though it pains me to admit it when he first raised the question of the video not only had I not seen it but I had never heard of Arisman.I subsequently did track it down and while it was certainly rather wild, it lacked the overarching significance attributed to it.Whether this is "running around in circles" in debatable.Having eventually seen the video I'm not sure it proves Yoshiwara's point nor that his "little test" really proves anything at all other than he holds an irrelevant obsession.A lot of people at that time on all sides said silly things.Why single one out and give it special or sole importance? I'm afraid true comprehension requires a rather more nuanced and analytical approach - of the type that is developed at elite universities such as the one Abhisit and Korn attended for example.Otherwise a one trick pony approach leaves us with "little tests" that don't reveal much except the chaotic thought processes of the originator.Anyway at least on this occasion we are spared some semi digested and poorly understood Marxist homily.

As for the 'we are educate people' - a totally facile criticism because non-English speakers left out one letter. Not even close to illiteracy.

If you are making a class attack on rural people for their "lack of intelligence and education" and plastering the social media with class and race attacks on the country's majority, if you are going to use the English language it probably makes sense not to make idiotic errors.

This piece of stupidity was picked up by the international press and mocked all over thge world - quite rightly.As you say the error wasn't great but illustrates the hypocrisy and meanness of spirit from those involved.

Conoscenti will have recognised the same mindset in the social media from those who boorishly attack Yingluck's standard of English (not great I agree) - comically from many who can barely string a simple sentence together.

I am only amused at the frequency at which semi educated foreigners (as indicated by the poor grammar/syntax etc of their posts) feel entitled to criticise poor rural Thais - who have never had the chances afforded to foreigners (even retired sex tourists ).Without that kind of insufferable arrogance I wouldn't bother to point out slovenly expressed posts.And in any case when will you people stop confusing intelligence with education.

Returning to my post you have typically failed (again) to understand the point.It's not a question of "spouting praise" for Thaksin.He followed populist policies later copied and enhanced by the Democrats but his significance was that he was the first PM to take the rural majority seriously.Hence his commanding rank as Thailand's most popular politician - due to gratitude and loyalty.It has nothing to do with his moral character or his motives.

You just can't resist biting and showing your arrogant contempt for anyone challenging your views. I'm sure I equal if not surpass your academic qualifications, but as the forum rules say, I do not make comments about peoples' preferred style of writing, grammar and expression. You think your a genius - carry on if it make you happy.Your continued rudeness and belittling of others simply demonstrates your social inadequacies and inability to respond with intelligence and logic to those with a different view. I agree strongly with the view that educations and intelligence are not the same. You demonstrate neither. Since retiring as a sex tourist is this how you fill your time ?

Returning to your post. Usual response - hot air, conjecture and nothing of substance. Very similar to most PTP ministers news statements.

You miss the point yet again.I never refer condescendingly to members' grammatical errors, typos (I make them myself - as you do) etc unless it is to underline the hypocrisy of some foreigner making snide comments about rural, "uneducated" or disadvantaged Thais.

Since my comments on this subject have been critical of PTP policy, I'm assuming you haven't been paying attention.

The best way to sort out this mess is for PT to do what the Democrat's did when they were in power and put their constitution to a referendum.

Let the people decide not the politicians.

When did the Democrats put their constitution to a referendum?

Never.The grimy alliance of feudalists and generals who ushered the Democrats into power did that.Interesting that though they said the military imposed constitution would be implemented regardless of the referendum result and the Thai people were sick and tired of politics, the wretched document only scraped through.The amart script didn't anticipate that.

I don't disagree.The PTP parliamentary party has towed the Thaksin line.But it's far from being the opinion ofPTP/redshirt/ liberal and progressive opinion in the country at large.Nitirat - for example -, the group that the usual suspects moronically described as Thaksin lackeys, has been very clear about its disapproval.

It's not only PTP that has towed the line, it is also, for all intents and purposes, the red shirts who have towed the line. Remember them, the ones who are "more than just a Thaksin support group", the ones who are "evolving into a true grassroots movement of the people"?

As for those "friends" of Thaksin who have been brave enough to express their disapproval, let's not mislead anyone here. Their disapproval concerns the whitewashing of those involved in the deaths of the protesters. It has nothing to do with Thaksin being whitewashed. If they could have contrived a way (they may still do) in which Thaksin be whitewashed, but Abhisit and co left out, you wouldn't be hearing even a murmur of dissent right now.

No, on this you are simply wrong.There have been some excellent articles on this subject recently, notably by David Streckfuss in the other paper.

The only time you will be able to say i am wrong, is if a situation is contrived in which Thaksin gets his get out of jail free card, but Abhisit and co don't, and those "friends" of Thaksin, remain vocal in their disagreement. That is the only real test on how strongly they are opposed to Thaksin's whitewash.

My guess is that they are as strongly as opposed as all those divided of opinion PTP and red shirt MPs were, when over 300 hundred of them voted yes.

No I don't agree with your prescriptive definition.In any case we are discussing what progressive opinion (intellectuals, liberals, enlightened redshirts etc) think now not at some future point - when circumstances in the rapidly changing world of Thai politics could be very different.However if I can tentatively summarise the view of this group it is that there should be an amnesty for those at lower and perhaps even upper levels on both sides but the leaders (Abhisit,Suthep,Thaksin etc) should be dealt with by the courts.There is also a strong view that those involved inthe 2006 coup should also be tried by the courts, which obviously means a repeal of the amnesty these people awarded themselves in the 2007 constitution.Ideally the army leadership involved in the 2010 deaths would also be tried - but even the most idealistic liberal doesn't really believe in his heart of hearts that this will ever happen.But who knows - there's stormy weather ahead and nobody can predict the Thai future with certainty

I don't disagree.The PTP parliamentary party has towed the Thaksin line.But it's far from being the opinion ofPTP/redshirt/ liberal and progressive opinion in the country at large.Nitirat - for example -, the group that the usual suspects moronically described as Thaksin lackeys, has been very clear about its disapproval.

It's not only PTP that has towed the line, it is also, for all intents and purposes, the red shirts who have towed the line. Remember them, the ones who are "more than just a Thaksin support group", the ones who are "evolving into a true grassroots movement of the people"?

As for those "friends" of Thaksin who have been brave enough to express their disapproval, let's not mislead anyone here. Their disapproval concerns the whitewashing of those involved in the deaths of the protesters. It has nothing to do with Thaksin being whitewashed. If they could have contrived a way (they may still do) in which Thaksin be whitewashed, but Abhisit and co left out, you wouldn't be hearing even a murmur of dissent right now.

No, on this you are simply wrong.There have been some excellent articles on this subject recently, notably by David Streckfuss in the other paper.

You are very quick to condemn others but your post shows an astonishing ignorance of the divisions of opinion within PTP and the redshirt movement on the expanded amnesty.

Of course yes, they are so divided on this matter, that every single PTP MP, bar four, voted yes. Those voting yes included 8 red shirt leaders. Those four brave principled souls who didn't vote yes, couldn't bring themselves to vote no. They dare throw Thaksin a look of displeasure, as a bit of theatrics for the benefit of their supporters, but they daren't slap the man in the face.... that would be rude.

People within PTP and the red shirts who don't matter, who don't have a say, who don't carry power, they may well be divided, but the people who do matter, who do have a say, and who do carry power, they, as always, have, almost to a man, stuck beside Thaksin.

I don't disagree.The PTP parliamentary party has towed the Thaksin line.But it's far from being the opinion ofPTP/redshirt/ liberal and progressive opinion in the country at large.Nitirat - for example -, the group that the usual suspects moronically described as Thaksin lackeys, has been very clear about its disapproval.

Meanwhile, Thaksin's lawyer, Robert Amsterdam, who enjoys a large following on Twitter, tweeted on Monday: "The proposed blanket amnesty provides absolutely no benefit... I am deeply saddened by Pheu Thai's position."

Of course he is saddened, there is a chance that he is about to lose a major source of income.

The world is running out of dictators and wannabe dictators, thankfully, who else would hire him.

But since Robert Amsterdam's international record has been campaigning against dictatorship, your comment is particularly fatuous.Just ignorant bar talk

His comment about the revised amnesty reflects the views of many including myself that this is a ridiculous and inappropriate step that reflects very badly on the PTP and Thaksin (and presents a free gift to the likes of Suthep)

Ow that stung enough for you to flame him as an ignorant bar fly, jayboy. I didn't realise you and Fab4 were so close to Amsterdam.

"He was taken on by Thaksin to serve as International Lawyer and Advisor to the UDD, not the PTP."

So Thaksin is paying the UDD's legal bills to fight his own amnesty bill, Fab4?

Stung? I responded to rank stupidity (suggesting that Amsterdam's stand was driven by the prospect of lost income).Amsterdam's involvement in the fight against repression is a matter of record, in Zambia and Russia for example as well as Thailand.Anyone can research this though you obviously have been too lazy to do so or too entrenched in prejudice.He is a certainly paid lobbyist but he does not work for principles he does not share.The current PTP/Thaksin initiative on the broad amnesty is clearly wrong, and Amsterdam notwithstanding his affiliations has had the honesty to say so.He should be praised for his integrity.

Meanwhile, Thaksin's lawyer, Robert Amsterdam, who enjoys a large following on Twitter, tweeted on Monday: "The proposed blanket amnesty provides absolutely no benefit... I am deeply saddened by Pheu Thai's position."

Of course he is saddened, there is a chance that he is about to lose a major source of income.

The world is running out of dictators and wannabe dictators, thankfully, who else would hire him.

But since Robert Amsterdam's international record has been campaigning against dictatorship, your comment is particularly fatuous.Just ignorant bar talk

His comment about the revised amnesty reflects the views of many including myself that this is a ridiculous and inappropriate step that reflects very badly on the PTP and Thaksin (and presents a free gift to the likes of Suthep)

 

 

 

That's a bit unfair, jayboy. Remember that there are still several cases awaiting for k. Thaksin to hear the charges? With such a backlog and our criminal fugitive still on his bail jumping tour not much progress there. We have to rely on Abhisit/Suthep for amuzement as they will appear to hear the charges against them.

 

 

 

I don't think it's unfair at all.Why wasn't the drugs war case taken up in the first place.We know that the old elites were frantically looking around for a judicial hook to hang Thaksin on long before they settled on relatively trivial charges.Why was the greatest crime ignored?

Because as legally horrendous it was to execute a lot of people, a lot of very important people didn't care, or even tacitly supported it.

 

 

Eureka.Someone finally gets it.

 

 

That's the conspiracy theory answer.

 

The real answer is that, apart from a very few cases - most notably the Kalasin case - relatives of those who were killed were too fearful of coming forward to give evidence against the police. With no tangible evidence it would have been futile to take up a case against Thaksin.

 

Oh so that's the real answer.How convenient for the enthusiastic amart supporters of the drugs war who would have shitted themselves if Abhisit had the courage to take Thaksin to task for this.

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

That's a bit unfair, jayboy. Remember that there are still several cases awaiting for k. Thaksin to hear the charges? With such a backlog and our criminal fugitive still on his bail jumping tour not much progress there. We have to rely on Abhisit/Suthep for amuzement as they will appear to hear the charges against them.

I don't think it's unfair at all.Why wasn't the drugs war case taken up in the first place.We know that the old elites were frantically looking around for a judicial hook to hang Thaksin on long before they settled on relatively trivial charges.Why was the greatest crime ignored?

Because as legally horrendous it was to execute a lot of people, a lot of very important people didn't care, or even tacitly supported it.

Eureka.Someone finally gets it.

I commented that it was significant he had never been charged and that there were reasons for this omission by Abhisit.You ignore all this - challenging I know actually having to think issues through.

Strange isn't it when reasons are given you are totally unable to accept or even understand them and you then as per your normal tack like a good many other Thaksin fans set up a diversion from the real facts to protect your hero.

Try looking at reality then you might have second thoughts about cheering for Thaksin and his devilish deeds.

Believe me there has been extended analysis beyond the limits of Thai Visa about why Thaksin was never charged with drugs wars offences.If this is news (ie that it had the fervent support of the unelected elites backing Abhisit),so be it.But you should be proud of the puerile insult - "cheering for Thaksin and his devilish deeds"

That's a bit unfair, jayboy. Remember that there are still several cases awaiting for k. Thaksin to hear the charges? With such a backlog and our criminal fugitive still on his bail jumping tour not much progress there. We have to rely on Abhisit/Suthep for amuzement as they will appear to hear the charges against them.

I don't think it's unfair at all.Why wasn't the drugs war case taken up in the first place.We know that the old elites were frantically looking around for a judicial hook to hang Thaksin on long before they settled on relatively trivial charges.Why was the greatest crime ignored?

Oh right, he was "preoccupied with other matters".But since Abhisit's main preoccupation in office was hounding down Thaksin, it is on the face of it inexplicable he shouldn't find the time to press the one charge that woulds actually have neutralised Thaksin forever.Unless of course there is another reason different from your childish and absurd interpretation.

Sad to see even now your blinkered childlike adoration of the school bully.Facts are facts and Thaksin is as guilty as hell regarding his murderous and varied other unpleasant activities including the outright support of civil unrest.

It is amusing to be titled ''childish'' by your good self.

It is said that it takes one to know one doesn't it. By that yardstick I can only but presume your opinion is based upon your own personal experience and action and makeup.

Are you able to read and comprehend simple posts? I am aware of Thaksin's guilt regarding the drugs war.I commented that it was significant he had never been charged and that there were reasons for this omission by Abhisit.You ignore all this - challenging I know actually having to think issues through.

Did Thaksin buy Abhisit because the latter did nothing to press drug war charges against the former when the latter was in power? Don't think so. Army may have approved but wasn't really involved in drugs war - a police matter.

You would do well to remember that Abihist was somewhat preoccupied with other matters that were being financed and managed by Thaksin and his motley crew , thus the matter of the unlawful massacre of many innocent people in ''the war on drugs'' could not be followed up.

Oh right, he was "preoccupied with other matters".But since Abhisit's main preoccupation in office was hounding down Thaksin, it is on the face of it inexplicable he shouldn't find the time to press the one charge that woulds actually have neutralised Thaksin forever.Unless of course there is another reason different from your childish and absurd interpretation.