Thailand's goal is to become a 'developed' country within 20 years

[Lingba]

How about starting with getting your flood issues taken care of

[Aj Mick]

Had the same objective 20 years ago, as I recall, and largely achieved by the elite, who enjoy a standard of living better than upper middle class folk in developed countries. As for the hoi polloi.... not likely to happen in the next 20 years, or the 20 following, as long as the upper echelons continue to depend on cheap labour to create their wealth.

[stylishgolfer]

You need a government without corruption first.  That will take 100 years.  Then you need a police force without corruption, that will take 1000 years.  Then you need a tourist board that actually works to get tourists here.  Banning smoking on beaches, well the chinese and germans wont like that. Banning vapes and shisha, well there goes your Malaysian market. do you need me to go on..........

 

[attrayant]

As long as superstition and jingoism continue to be two of the three pillars of society, there isn't much hope for achieving developed nation status.  Thailand still has not gone through an industrialization phase, but seems content to remain the labor pool supporting the industrialization of other countries.  Thailand also holds up tradition as sacrosanct, rejecting any advancements that are seen as threats to tradition.  I suggest a more results-oriented three-legged stool for Thailand to rest its success upon:

 

Human capital investment (Educate children [STEM], offer new skills to adults)

R&D (Industrialization, leading uni research)

Democratic form of government with checks and balances

[jenny2017]

 

             I do have the feeling that the country is going two steps back with every step forward. 

 

       What happened to the "We are ASEAN euphory?" What happened to all the hubs, from the "well planned" educational to all the medical hubs?

 

  The way it looks, Thailand will always be in hands of the military, and if they don't like a certain party, they just take over as they always did.

 

  The quality of education is something that didn't improve within the last 10 to 15 years, even with free websites where people could "theoretically" learn English for free. The students' English didn't get better in the last decade and some might wonder why not. 

 

  The ordinary folks who attend primary, then high school, do not seem to know much about anything that's outside of Thailand. The better the people in a country are educated, so better the infrastructure will be.

 

  Sontaya, a soon 19 year old student has just realised that he made a huge mistake to study electronics at the local technical college. He basically knows nothing about electronic, the pair of speakers they had to built, never worked.

 

He's now on his way to become a police officer, not yet sure how he can afford the very high "entrance fee" to become a browny. 

 

  Sontaya is only one example of  a failed education policy in this country. I strongly believe that it's the bad education that hinders the country in all aspects. How can  a country develop when its educators don't?

 

 As long as a university degree from the various Rajabhats don't mean anything in a more developed country, there'll be no change at all.

 

It's the education that makes a country to what it is. Fire all the guys at the MoE and start over again. A country with such a sick education can't be successful. 

  

  

 

  

Edited October 15, 2017 by jenny2017

[lvr181]

1 hour ago, jenny2017 said:

 

             I do have the feeling that the country is going two steps back with every step forward. 

 

       What happened to the "We are ASEAN euphory?" What happened to all the hubs, from the "well planned" educational to all the medical hubs?

 

  The way it looks, Thailand will always be in hands of the military, and if they don't like a certain party, they just take over as they always did.

 

  The quality of education is something that didn't improve within the last 10 to 15 years, even with free websites where people could "theoretically" learn English for free. The students' English didn't get better in the last decade and some might wonder why not. 

 

  The ordinary folks who attend primary, then high school, do not seem to know much about anything that's outside of Thailand. The better the people in a country are educated, so better the infrastructure will be.

 

  Sontaya, a soon 19 year old student has just realised that he made a huge mistake to study electronics at the local technical college. He basically knows nothing about electronic, the pair of speakers they had to built, never worked.

 

He's now on his way to become a police officer, not yet sure how he can afford the very high "entrance fee" to become a browny. 

 

  Sontaya is only one example of  a failed education policy in this country. I strongly believe that it's the bad education that hinders the country in all aspects. How can  a country develop when its educators don't?

 

 As long as a university degree from the various Rajabhats don't mean anything in a more developed country, there'll be no change at all.

 

It's the education that makes a country to what it is. Fire all the guys at the MoE and start over again. A country with such a sick education can't be successful. 

  

  

 

  

The word "education" seems to be a misnomer in the Kingdom  

 

In a feudal society lack of education keeps the masses in their place at the bottom of the class system! Unfortunately Thailand is not alone in this - but this is a Thailand Forum.

 

If you give the drowning man a straw to clutch at they think they may be saved. Ain't going to happen.

[taipeir]

The notion that Thailand will enter the fully-developed countries just can't be taken seriously.  Japan, S. Korea, and Taiwan manufacture and export high-value products that can compete on the international market.  Japan and S. Korea rank fourth and fifth for exports.  Taiwan is fifteenth while Thailand is number twenty-two.  However, the exports of the NE Asian countries are high-value manufactures while Thailand's exports are agriculture.  This is not by accident.  In the Park Chung-hee era S. Korea permitted Japan to build factories there, but insisted on technology transfer enabling the eventual creation of Korean companies manufacturing autos and pianos of sufficient quality to compete on the international market.  After initially following the Japanese examples the Koreans developed their own technology and became global leaders in flat screen tvs and LPG tankers. 
 
Despite thirty years or so of making hard disk drives and autos for foreign companies there is no Thai company manufacturing and exporting either hard drives or autos.  No foreign companies have set up R&D centers in Thailand as Microsoft and IBM have done in India.  There is no Thai company that international recognition like Samsung or Toyota, nor is there any Thai designed export product with any global recognition.
 
The Thai development model is to rent out its labor cheaply to foreign companies.  This model has in fact worked very well to bring Thailand to its current level of development, but without high-value exports and technological innovation Thailand will remain stuck in the middle-income trap.  This is true, because the vested interests in Thailand are quite satisfied with the status quo, which is a local economy divided into monopolies and duopolies controlled by Thai interests.  They have not been interested in trying to export into the competitive global market. By far the largest Thai exporter is Charoen Pokphand, a producer of food products.
 
Thailand, like the other SE Asian countries, but unlike the countries of NE Asia, lacks a military incentive to develop its economy since it has no reason to fear invasion by its neighbors.  The economic leaps achieved by Meiji Japan, the S. Korea of Park Chung-hee, and Taiwan after the Communist Revolution were driven by exactly this motivation.
 
 

Excellent analysis.

I feel Thailand had a good opportunity to attract a lot of investment and foreigners to live and work there if they made it easier and improved their infrastructure and made it a more stable place.

The infrastructure has improved a lot so there is that.

For me it's always an interesting question as to which country has a chance to move forward faster.

Perhaps Vietnam because they seem to have a lot of people in IT and huge foreign investments and attractive place to live for some.

Malaysia is the most developed of all the nations in the region excepting Singapore.


Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

[taipeir]

Education is key or else importing educated immigrants is key.

If Thailand can do this (at same time as maintaining the health system and providing food and shelter) then it can prosper with no limky.

Otherwise.....nope.

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

[Jonah Tenner]

18 hours ago, Lingba said:

How about starting with getting your flood issues taken care of

That requires work, hard work. Much better to sit around and talk about Thailand 4.0 and other pipe dreams...

[Srikcir]

11 hours ago, taipeir said:

importing educated immigrants is key

The drawback is that there is a point where such educated immigrants begin finding better employment within their own country driven by modernization, social and judicial equality. On the last two aspects Thailand is now failing in part to ineffective government legacy, culture and tradition.

In practice a better educated domestic (vs foreign) work force can work against a nation in the form of brain drain. This is true for even developed countries.

http://www.scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/article/1420233/china-must-find-way-reverse-brain-drain-talent-flows

https://www.voanews.com/a/us-trying-to-stop-reverse-brain-drain-131899558/146669.html

 

[CaptHaddock]

41 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

The drawback is that there is a point where such educated immigrants begin finding better employment within their own country driven by modernization, social and judicial equality. On the last two aspects Thailand is now failing in part to ineffective government legacy, culture and tradition.

In practice a better educated domestic (vs foreign) work force can work against a nation in the form of brain drain. This is true for even developed countries.

http://www.scmp.com/comment/insight-opinion/article/1420233/china-must-find-way-reverse-brain-drain-talent-flows

https://www.voanews.com/a/us-trying-to-stop-reverse-brain-drain-131899558/146669.html

 

Of the countries in the post-war world that have succeeded in joining the group of rich countries, none have done so by importing foreigners.  So, that would be South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and Finland.  You could add the People's Republic of China if you consider GDP instead of GDP per capita.   All of these countries developed excellent education systems to train highly educated work forces.

 

Where did you get the idea that importing a foreign work force is a model for successful development? 

[Srikcir]

8 minutes ago, CaptHaddock said:

Where did you get the idea that importing a foreign work force is a model for successful development? 

I didn't. That was taipeir's comment "importing educated immigrants is key ..."

My response held that his premise - if true - was unsustainable for long-term successful development. In fact there has been a brain drain from the entire ASEAN.

https://www.adb.org/news/op-ed/stopping-aseans-brain-drain-bambang-susantono

 

 

[taipeir]

Of the countries in the post-war world that have succeeded in joining the group of rich countries, none have done so by importing foreigners.  So, that would be South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, and Finland.  You could add the People's Republic of China if you consider GDP instead of GDP per capita.   All of these countries developed excellent education systems to train highly educated work forces.   Where did you get the idea that importing a foreign work force is a model for successful development?    

 

 

Singapore.Ireland.Israel.

Hong Kong.

Australia.

New Zealand.

 

Lots of examples out there.

If silicon valley or greater London were countries you could throw it in there too.

 

The US high tech industry is dependent on foreign talent.

 

China and India are interesting. A large part of their move up the value chain is due to returning emigrants and diaspora. Also their population and countries are so big that big cities such as Shanghai and Mumbai can attract the most talented individuals from across their nations. Internal migration is a strong benefit due to the large pool they can draw from.

 

Human talent is key in moving up the value chain.

 

If there is not enough local talent it can be imported. They can also be used to train up locals, it's not either or!

 

 

 

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[CaptHaddock]

2 minutes ago, taipeir said:

Singapore.

Ireland.

Hong Kong.

Australia.

New Zealand.

 

Lots of examples out there.

If greater London was a country you could throw it in there too.

 

Human talent is key in moving up the value chain.

 

If these not enough local talent it can be imported. They can also be used to train up locals, it's not either or!

 

 

 

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

 

 

 

You don't know much about development.  Singapore and Hong Kong are specialized depot economies based on trade only due to their size and location and do not offer an example that can be followed by countries without those advantages, such as Thailand.  Although Singapore does attempt to attract foreign talent they nevertheless mostly grow their own, for instance, via the two of their universities that are ranked among the top ten in Asia.  Ditto HK.  Ireland has a highly-educated work force, but their economy is mainly based on tax incentives provided for foreign companies, without which they wouldn't have an economy.   Immigration to Canada, Australia, and the US has mainly been uneducated workers.  All of these three countries developed their own education systems to supply educated workers and did not rely on the importation of workers educated elsewhere.  Indeed, the US limits the number of foreign-trained doctors permitted into the US healthcare system (via the bottleneck in the medical residency system) in order to maintain high compensation levels for US doctors.

 

For a country to develop from a middle-income economy, such as Thailand's, to join the group of rich countries, developing a competitive education system is a requirement.  While many countries do make efforts to import educated workers, no country ever became successful relying on immigrants.

[taipeir]

You don't get to make up your own facts to suit your narrative.

 

Ireland for one has a massive IT and pharma industry with very large numbers of foreign professionals working in them as well as locals. It's not only about tax. The most important part is being an open economy and being able to bring in foreign workers pretty easily!

 

You totally ignored Israel and silicon valley and London.

 

You are wrong about Singapore which is absolutely dependent on foreign talent and investment. The two go hand in hand. Same in Ireland (which houses European HQ of most American IT multinationals).

 

I don't have time to go through them one by one.

 

Here is a relevant article about Vietnam.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphjennings/2017/06/07/vietnam-is-losing-ground-to-china-because-it-lacks-skilled-workers/?c=0&s=trending#3a81aa431365

 

I work in high tech in Asia at the moment China is upgrading itself at a tremendous pace everybody else are minnows compared to them. In our industry they account for over 70 per cent of entire Asian sales! Incredible.

 

 

Last point: Thailand is in a very good location in South East Asia. It could most definitely be developed more as trading center and logistics hub and regional business location.

 

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[CaptHaddock]

28 minutes ago, taipeir said:

You don't get to make up your own facts to suit your narrative.

 

Ireland for one has a massive IT and pharma industry with very large numbers of foreign professionals working in them as well as locals. It's not only about tax. The most important part is being an open economy and being able to bring in foreign workers pretty easily!

 

You totally ignored Israel and silicon valley and London.

 

You are wrong about Singapore which is absolutely dependent on foreign talent and investment. The two go hand in hand. Same in Ireland (which houses European HQ of most American IT multinationals).

 

I don't have time to go through them one by one.

 

Here is a relevant article about Vietnam.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/ralphjennings/2017/06/07/vietnam-is-losing-ground-to-china-because-it-lacks-skilled-workers/?c=0&s=trending#3a81aa431365

 

I work in high tech in Asia at the moment China is upgrading itself at a tremendous pace everybody else are minnows compared to them. In our industry they account for over 70 per cent of entire Asian sales! Incredible.

 

 

Last point: Thailand is in a very good location in South East Asia. It could most definitely be developed more as trading center and logistics hub and regional business location.

 

Ireland has a pharma industry the way Thailand has an auto industry, i.e. they rent out local workers to foreign companies.  Big Pharma in Ireland is all foreign companies: Lilly, Abbott, Boston Scientific, Glaxo,  drawn to Ireland by its low corporate tax rate as well as its well-educated workforce.  There are virtually no foreign workers and no Irish-owned companies of any scale.

 

In the US Silicon Valley is where it is because of its proximity to universities like Stanford and UC Berkeley, which produced its educated workforce.  Similar, if smaller, tech centers have grown up along Route 128 in Massachusets, in Pittsburgh near Carnegie-Mellon, and near UT Austin.  The fondness that Bill Gates and Steve Jobs had for foreigners with H-1 visas was strictly about cutting compensation costs. 

 

Singapore tries to attract educated foreigners, but not because it doesn't produce its own.  With a population of only 5 million, Singapore has two universities rated among the top ten in Asia, hardly a case of developing their economy by relying on imported talent.

 

South Korea, Japan, and Taiwan did not become rich countries by relying on foreign workers. 

 

You overestimate your own importance.

[taipeir]

Many of those giant silicon valley companies such as Google were started and run by foreigners!

 

Solar city and Tesla another example.

They could not be successful without utilising foreign workers and grad students as they get the cream of the crop from aroind the world.

 

It matters not a whit if companies are owned by foreigners or not in Ireland. The policy has been EXTREMELY successful in attracting invesment and creating jobs for locals and foreigners alike. Facebook, Google, Oracle, Apple, LinkedIn all have huge investments there.

 

Ireland also has some world famous biopharmaceutical institutes such as NBIRT. They are moving up the value chain.

Look it up!

 

Ireland continues to be successful as finance workers from London will move to Dublin and many will also move to other cities in Europe. Talent is mobile and they will go where the opportunities are. Many of those workers were working for non British firms also. Nobody cares who owns the companies.

 

If you don't have enough educated and experienced professionals locally you need to be open to importing them to develop different industries.

 

Taiwan and Japan have stalled somewhat due to these factors. The Taiwan government has overhauled all its immigration and investment law as it knows it desperately needs foreign talent injection .

I actually worked for the Taiwan government on industrial development for a time!

 

Korea still prospers in manufacturing but they aren't doing that great in worldwide traded services. But even Korea has worked at attracting more educated migrants .

 

 

 

 

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Maggusoil]

Yes and a modest improvement in the justice system is worth a mention isn't it?

Really is anything else needed to produce "real' civilisation. 

 

Edited October 17, 2017 by Maggusoil

[wakeupplease]

Developed country, well its defiantly no 1 for coups and bullSh>> and that is about as far as it will go with its current set up.