The Thai government approved a plan to provide two cash payments of 3,500 baht to up to 31 million people.    Select the option that best expresses your views on payments.  

 

Feel free to leave a comment.

Because of the vast difference in living costs between country & city living some differential could be developed or is that also against human rights here as well?

I find none of the answers adequate, though no. 2 is on the right path. As such I voted no. 4.

"Government handouts" conveys social inequality, ie.,

The elite showing their generosity to the population in general without accountability and transparency.

And evades an elitist government's responsibility to get adequate legislation representing the 'people' to bring permanent and fair economic relief as part of a broad economic recovery.

18 minutes ago, natway09 said:

Because of the vast difference in living costs between country & city living some differential could be developed or is that also against human rights here as well?

Nope but a 3.500 for everyone or those that qualified as poor is easier to check and less likely to attract corruption. If you add location and stuff there are more options for corruption. 

 

Not that I think it will be free of corruption now but the more complicated things are the more options for corruption.

None of the above

 

Experience in my village is - lack of smartphones or knowlege on how to use the internet is a higher percentage than the government knows. Also very many villagers have never officially worked, paid tax or social security so are well under the radar for help.

 

This means there could be literaly millions who get no help as they don't meet the technology requirements, or in many cases are functionally illiterate. These packages simplyy do not apply to too many,

 

Too many big city dwellers setting out these packages with no real knowlege of the real world outside Bangkok.

 

 

I think some are missing the point that the 3500 is at the rate of 150 baht per day on the 50/50 scheme.

 

That is more than enough to eat two good meals per day from typical Noodle and Thai cafe/stall type places in rural Thailand. I think its a great idea and people will eat out more at these places with only having to pay half and it generates more business for these places in the process.

Works well from my observations in my general area.

20 minutes ago, CharlieH said:

I think some are missing the point that the 3500 is at the rate of 150 baht per day on the 50/50 scheme.

 

That is more than enough to eat two good meals per day from typical Noodle and Thai cafe/stall type places in rural Thailand. I think its a great idea and people will eat out more at these places with only having to pay half and it generates more business for these places in the process.

Works well from my observations in my general area.

It worked well for a couple of places that in my area, the one lady I know said to me while ago it helped to boost business and kept all the staff employed, our cleaners where going in the place because of the 50/50, people that would not normally go in there were now,

The big issue that is out there and open for corruption is who is and who is not.  As Saltire said there are a lot of older Thais that do not have any internet or cell phone knowledge that should be included.  The problem is how to determine who they are and how to get the money to them.

 

It is a great idea but anything in this country is fair game for corruption. 

 

Personally i think a census of each area should be carried out with the understanding that they will be verified and that the funds will be delivered by a different group.  i.e. the Province can carry out the census but the actual payment will be done by an international  NGO and any corruption will automatically mean that people will forfeit everything they and their family own as well as 10 years in jail.

Around our town many people will pool their government money and party like there is no tomorrow (or until the money runs out). The noise levels will go up by a hundred decibels for the next few weeks.

It's not really if we (and I mean the global, collective we) should help our fellow humans. Of COURSE we should help those less fortunate. It's really a matter of doing it smart. The US had a "PPP" program that was supposed to help small businesses. Joel Osteen received $4.4 million, Tom brady nearly $1 million, Kanye between $2-$5 million, and the list of millionaires/billionaires who received the money goes on. I know two friends who had small businesses and neither could cut through the red tape to get a deserved loan.

I understand that there will be some criteria to meet with this handout - unlike the last one which was more or less a lottery.

1 hour ago, Stevemercer said:

Around our town many people will pool their government money and party like there is no tomorrow (or until the money runs out). The noise levels will go up by a hundred decibels for the next few weeks.

Apparently they are not handing out cash this time. My Mrs says the payment cannot be used to buy alcohol etc.

5 hours ago, natway09 said:

Because of the vast difference in living costs between country & city living some differential could be developed or is that also against human rights here as well?

 

My understanding is that no country has made a differing payment scheme depending upon where one lives. Human rights does not come into it. It would be too damn difficult.

Answer 3 gets a lot of support but it's stupid to say that an open ended cheque can be written for many millions of people. However the current arrangement is horribly inadequate even for now, long-term jobless restaurant/massage staff to live, let alone the very, very poor. And the 'handouts' reduce the individual's final retirement lumpsum anyway. The government should be truly ashamed. 

With the virus rearing it's head again.  It's probably a good idea to plan for payments until it's over.  The difficulty is figuring out when and if this will be over.

 

Interesting that we are (nearly) all socialists now.