Most Thais Think Economy Bad, Getting Worse

[JAG]

57 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

Yes, attack anyone that disagrees as uncaring. Just because people do not believe leftist programs really help the poor does not mean they don’t care.

It is interesting that you treat as fact an article that is based on a “survey”, even though none of the details of the survey were included in the article. Why is that?

 

First, I was "attacking" no one, not was I suggesting a "leftist program", or that anyone was being uncaring. I was suggesting that the criteria by which some have claimed that the economy is doing well are criteria which simply leave out or do not consider what is probably the majority of the population. I don't think that is a particularly left wing view, although your sensitivity to the idea is revealing.

 

Secondly, I was expressing an opinion, rather than quoting or attempting to disprove facts. Rather as you have throughout this debate.

[spidermike007]

9 hours ago, petedk said:

Not only the tourist industry. 

 

Yesterday I was talking to the sales director of a cosmetic company. She was telling me how much sales have dropped the last year or so. She also said that only the well established outlets can survive. Many start ups close down after 2 or 3 months.

 

As for inflation. Two recent examples.

The motorcycle taxis near my home have increased their fares by 50% (not only for me, but for Thais too).. I know the amount (5 baht) is small but 50% is a big increase.

A coffee shop I visit regularly has just increased coffee prices from 50 to 60 Baht. (20 %). The list could go on and on.

 

If I increase my prices by 50% then i would say goodbye to all my customers.

Thank you. Always nice to get some commentary from someone not living in a bubble. Anyone living in the real world, who does not have a huge income can see that inflation is very real, and prices are going up all around us. Everywhere I go these days, prices are jumping. As you say, sometimes by 20 or 30%. How is that sustainable? I see it here, and I see it throughout the US, where inflation is rampant, despite what the govt. goombahs are saying. 

[KiwiKiwi]

1 hour ago, simoh1490 said:

I'm not suggesting for one second that the plight of the impoverished and very poor is not important, I personally believe it's extremely important. But any discussion and analysis of economics is, by it's very nature, a cold hard look at facts, one of those facts is that trying to examine the behaviour and actions of the poorer people in society wont allow you a good understanding of the state of the economy - just because the rural poor are struggling in many areas doesn't mean the economy of Thailand is in bad shape hence what happens to cheap cosmetic company sales doesn't help our understanding of the economic situation.

 

If you were to broaden the subject from economics to include socio-economics a different discussion may prevail, my interest however is purely in economics, a subject which fascinates me because of its interlinking aspects. So it's not that I don't care about people, I do, very much, it's just that my focus is more clinical and tunnel-visioned as far as these debates are concerned.

 

I may be wrong in thinking this, but in my view, you might as well study voodoo as economics, or toss a coin; and in many cases, you'd end up with the same results. Economics seems to me to be a huge collection of interacting facts which is so resistant to interpretation as to represent an almost infinite variety of possible conclusions. To suggest that economics is a clinical look at facts is nonsense. Economics is surely a study of a macrocosm of interlinking aspects, which then requires an interpretation, which is what takes it out of the deterministic world, and into the speculative world. If this were not so, then put 10 economists in a room  and you'd get a single opinion - but you'll never get that, instead, if you put 10 economists in a room you'll often get a multiplicity of opinions. To represent it as a definitive field of study goes against reality, though it's doubtless psychologically flattering to hold that belief.

 

If this were not so, economists would agree with each other, instead, what they agree on are a few basic articles of faith, drawn from whichever book-writing economist's views strike a chord within them. This is not reality, it's divination, interpreting results based on personal beliefs, or worse, it's a form of religion, an aggregation of personal beliefs, which in most cases, are what you're told you have to believe in.

[simoh1490]

I'm sorry, I gave you the benefit of the doubt last time but now you're definitely going on the ignore list, I can't waste my time reading your drivel any longer. Byee!

[mogandave]

First, I was "attacking" no one, not was I suggesting a "leftist program", or that anyone was being uncaring. I was suggesting that the criteria by which some have claimed that the economy is doing well are criteria which simply leave out or do not consider what is probably the majority of the population. I don't think that is a particularly left wing view, although your sensitivity to the idea is revealing.
 
Secondly, I was expressing an opinion, rather than quoting or attempting to disprove facts. Rather as you have throughout this debate.

I’m sorry, I thought you implied that the expanding Thai economy was benefiting the monied while leaving the poor behind, and that the article supported that.

I did not realize it was just your opinion without any basis in fact.

[KiwiKiwi]

10 minutes ago, simoh1490 said:

I'm sorry, I gave you the benefit of the doubt last time but now you're definitely going on the ignore list, I can't waste my time reading your drivel any longer. Byee!

 

Oh dear. Something I said?  ?

 

That worked then...

 

 

Edited June 8, 2018 by KiwiKiwi

[Brunolem]

7 minutes ago, KiwiKiwi said:

 

I may be wrong in thinking this, but in my view, you might as well study voodoo as economics, or toss a coin; and in many cases, you'd end up with the same results. Economics seems to me to be a huge collection of interacting facts which is so resistant to interpretation as to represent an almost infinite variety of possible conclusions. To suggest that economics is a clinical look at facts is nonsense. 

That's roughly the position of the Austrian School, led by Von Mises and Hayek...the economy cannot be explained by mathematical formulas, so much cherished by today's keynesian economists such as Krugman...

[JAG]

One is reminded of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth's comment on visiting the London School of Economics just after the financial crash, and being introduced to a group of economic forecasters - " So how did you miss this?"

[KiwiKiwi]

4 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

That's roughly the position of the Austrian School, led by Von Mises and Hayek...the economy cannot be explained by mathematical formulas, so much cherished by today's keynesian economists such as Krugman...

Agree, though I put a different spin on it. Odd to think that a few folk think what I write is drivel rather than just an opinion different to theirs - but they still read it, right to the end. 

Edited June 8, 2018 by KiwiKiwi

[KiwiKiwi]

4 minutes ago, JAG said:

One is reminded of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth's comment on visiting the London School of Economics just after the financial crash, and being introduced to a group of economic forecasters - " So how did you miss this?"

lol

 

Indeed.

[mogandave]

Let’s not confuse forecasting with measuring and reporting.

 

Like the weather, telling what the economy is going to do is much more difficult than reporting what it is doing.

 

[KiwiKiwi]

15 minutes ago, mogandave said:

Let’s not confuse forecasting with measuring and reporting.

 

Like the weather, telling what the economy is going to do is much more difficult than reporting what it is doing.

 

 

Agree, but measuring and reporting is moot if you aren't going to use the data for forecasting. Two different things I agree, but measuring and reporting anything is pointless unless you're going to use the data for prediction. With economics, the data is so complex that it reaches a point quite quickly where it can't usefully be used for prediction, so relentlessly swotting up on the latest theories is less useful than going down the pub for a pint.

Same with anything, the only point ever in gathering data is to try and make prediction. The weather is useful because the application of processing power has improved the reliability of the resulting forecasts. Economics? Not there yet despite what the true believers might want to think.

 

 

Edited June 8, 2018 by KiwiKiwi

[Sir Dude]

Getting worse/more expensive for the average Thai Joe or middle class types but getting better for a certain section of society that couldn't care less. I don't believe the official figures for a moment on things like inflation...not as if they tell everyone the truth on anything else anyhow, so why believe them on this sort of thing.

Edited June 8, 2018 by Sir Dude

[JAG]

37 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

I’m sorry, I thought you implied that the expanding Thai economy was benefiting the monied while leaving the poor behind, and that the article supported that.

I did not realize it was just your opinion without any basis in fact.
 

 

I think any reasonable person reading this exchange will realise what I said.

 

You can spin and twist it as much as you like...

[mogandave]

 
Agree, but measuring and reporting is moot if you aren't going to use the data for forecasting. Two different things I agree, but measuring and reporting anything is pointless unless you're going to use the data for prediction. With economics, the data is so complex that it reaches a point quite quickly where it can't usefully be used for prediction, so relentlessly swotting up on the latest theories is less useful than going down the pub for a pint.

Same with anything, the only point ever in gathering data is to try and make prediction. The weather is useful because the application of processing power has improved the reliability of the resulting forecasts. Economics? Not there yet despite what the true believers might want to think.
 
 

The article (and many posters here) seems to imply the data being reported is suspect, and (if I remember correctly) made no projection one way or the other.

My position is that I have no way of knowing how the economy is really doing, but it seems to me to be doing well.

I believe that if the government is reporting hard numbers, those numbers are likely true, as it is too easy to prove other

On the other hand, I find the article suspect. As I suggested previously, it would be easy enough to do a survey that would show results opposite those quoted in the article.

The article and survey could be completely accurate, I just do not have any reason to believe it one way or the other.

I also believe we are experiencing inflation, but again, given the increases in labor costs and property values, I don’t know that this can be avoided.

[mogandave]

I think any reasonable person reading this exchange will realise what I said.
 
You can spin and twist it as much as you like...

Any reasonable person would be one that agrees with you correct?

[Brunolem]

31 minutes ago, KiwiKiwi said:

 

Agree, but measuring and reporting is moot if you aren't going to use the data for forecasting. Two different things I agree, but measuring and reporting anything is pointless unless you're going to use the data for prediction. 

Many economists, including the top official ones, react to events they failed to forecast by saying "who could have seen this coming?".

 

The answer is: many did predict the 2008 disaster, not necessarily the exact timing, but certainly how the events would unfold.

 

I have books from some of them to prove it.

In one of these books, the author wrote "as usual the carmakers will be caught with their pants down".

And so they were.

Meanwhile, top Keynesian and official economist, Bernanke, was saying "the subprime crisis has been contained"...sure thing Ben...

 

These days, most open minded economists are forecasting a much bigger crisis than that of 2008 in the near future.

Their forecasting relies on observation and common sense, rather than on complicated mathematical models.

And they will be right because these guys have been right since the 70s and have made a lot of money out of it.

Edited June 8, 2018 by Brunolem

[JAG]

2 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

Any reasonable person would be one that agrees with you correct?

 

No

[mogandave]

[quote post="13059261" timestamp="1528457255" name="KiwiKiwi" Same with anything, the only point ever in gathering data is to try and make prediction.


Don’t people collect and compile data to generate index funds?

[KiwiKiwi]

3 minutes ago, Brunolem said:

Many economists, including the top official ones, react to events they failed to forecast by saying "who could have seen this coming?".

 

The answer is: many did predict the 2008 disaster, not necessarily the exact timing, but certainly how the events would unfold.

 

I have books from some of them to prove it.

In one of these books, the author wrote "as usual the carmakers will be caught with their pants down".

And so they were.

Meanwhile, top Keynesian and official economist, Bernanke, was saying "the subprime crisis has been contained"...sure thing Ben...

 

These days, most open minded economists are forecasting a much bigger crisis than that of 2008 in the near future.i

Their forecasting relies on observation and common sense, rather than on complicated mathematical models.

And they will be right because these guys have been right since the 70s and have made a lot of money out of it.

 

Accept all that. How many economists as a percentage, predicted the crash of 2008, and how many did not? That surely is the proof of the pudding, even a broken clock is right twice a day...

 

Yes, I heard predictions of a bigger crash, and to me, that is because the underlying behaviour of the traders and institutions was not corrected, The opportunity was there but instead, the US government (perhaps followed by others) handomely rewarded the people who cused the crash and took no sanctions against them, Human nature being what it is, they just carried right on doing what had been profitable for them, without considering what happens to the rest of us. Big surprise...

 

[mogandave]

 
Accept all that. How many economists as a percentage, predicted the crash of 2008, and how many did not? That surely is the proof of the pudding, even a broken clock is right twice a day...
 
Yes, I heard predictions of a bigger crash, and to me, that is because the underlying behaviour of the traders and institutions was not corrected, The opportunity was there but instead, the US government (perhaps followed by others) handomely rewarded the people who cused the crash and took no sanctions against them, Human nature being what it is, they just carried right on doing what had been profitable for them, without considering what happens to the rest of us. Big surprise...
 

Anyone that claims to know what the market will is a liar.

So what has the market done since the lows in 2009?

[KiwiKiwi]

14 minutes ago, mogandave said:

 

Anyone that claims to know what the market will is a liar.

So what has the market done since the lows in 2009?

 

 

I couldn't tell you to be truthful; I don't regard economics as a real science, I think it's voodoo with enough successes only to sustain the fiction, and most of those involve interpretations of fairly simple scenarios.. I might be wrong, but that's my opinion.

 

Flipping a coin would be at least 50% correct (depending upon the question). or, I think I have a deck of tarot cards somewhere, though that is also an interpretive process - to achieve yes or no answers requires something different. I have no data which suggests that economics provides yes or no answers with a certainty of more than 50%, which, if correct, means my jaundiced view is probably correct.

Edited June 8, 2018 by KiwiKiwi

[Jonah Tenner]

On 6/7/2018 at 11:54 AM, mogandave said:

 

Yes, it’s getting almost as bad as the EU.

 

Unfortunately you are more right than I like...

[mogandave]

 
I couldn't tell you to be truthful; I don't regard economics as a real science, I think it's voodoo with enough successes only to sustain the fiction, and most of those involve interpretations of fairly simple scenarios.. I might be wrong, but that's my opinion.
 
Flipping a coin would be at least 50% correct (depending upon the question). or, I think I have a deck of tarot cards somewhere, though that is also an interpretive process - to achieve yes or no answers requires something different. I have no data which suggests that economics provides yes or no answers with a certainty of more than 50%, which, if correct, means my jaundiced view is probably correct.

What do tarot cards an coin flipping have to do with regurgitating historic data?

[KiwiKiwi]

1 minute ago, mogandave said:

 

What do tarot cards an coin flipping have to do with regurgitating historic data?

Not a thing, but then neither does economics. I wrote a few posts back that the purpose of accumulating data is so you can use that data to make predictions. If anyone can show me how that process in complex scenarios is more accurate than flipping a coin or getting the tarot cards out, then I'd be happy to revise my opinion. So far it hasn't happened.

[5633572526]

On 6/6/2018 at 2:36 AM, bkk6060 said:

Where you hear those complaints?  Some of the 1000 bars or massage shops in Pattaya?  "Slow, no customer"...

I am hearing/seeing just the opposite at many businesses.  Growth is at a five year high, people are coming here in droves, and the economy is doing well.

Most Thais have no education on economics and would have no clue what the "economy" is.  But, people love to wallow in negativity and sadness for themselves in some odd way it makes them feel empowered.

 

Thank you mr. apologist for your “almost” coherent comment 

[bkk6060]

4 minutes ago, 5633572526 said:

Thank you mr. apologist for your “almost” coherent comment 

You are certainly welcome.

Hope you can figure it out.

[mogandave]

Not a thing, but then neither does economics. I wrote a few posts back that the purpose of accumulating data is so you can use that data to make predictions. If anyone can show me how that process in complex scenarios is more accurate than flipping a coin or getting the tarot cards out, then I'd be happy to revise my opinion. So far it hasn't happened.

If you don’t know, just say you don’t know, no point is stringing it out.

Based on historical data, one can accurately predict US gas prices will go up in summer.

[KiwiKiwi]

7 minutes ago, mogandave said:

If you don’t know, just say you don’t know, no point is stringing it out.

Based on historical data, one can accurately predict US gas prices will go up in summer.

 

Certainly. I don't know.

 

"accurately predict US gas prices will go up in summer."

 

Hmmm. Can you accurately predict by how much they will go up. Perhaps the word 'accurate' means different things.

 

The prediction off gas prices going up may well be one of the simpler scenarios. Would you be as confident if you were asked for a prediction of a number value for USA exports?

Edited June 8, 2018 by KiwiKiwi

[ELVIS123456]

If the Thai economy was being measure and monitored by truly independent and trustworthy organisations, then I would believe that it is booming, but it is not in my opinon. It is not being measured or monitored truthfully or independently - the figures are being doctored.

The economy is not booming due to productivity - the main growth is being built on debt - both private and public.  

In my experience, false untruthful economic growth like Thailand has 'reportedly' had for several years, will eventually crash - the truth will out.

Japan and China are recent examples that come to mind - both became so used to and dependent on growth, that they made sure sure growth was reported (by using debt).

But when the crash comes, and it will, then as long as the Baht falls back to reality - then that is a good thing.

 

Edited June 8, 2018 by ELVIS123456