Yingluck hits back after Prayut criticism over rice-pledging scheme

[candide]

2 minutes ago, Saanim said:

It seems that nobody has mentioned the topic of the OP: rice-pledging scheme.

Knowing what that was, how we can read the quote above?

 

For the ones who want to know, in short: Thaksin, and Yingluck later, had made promises to poor farmers -mainly in the Isaan - we will buy your rice for double price as before, just vote for us. When they finally bought the rice they paid by promising notes, not by money. For that time of waiting on money many farmers got bankrupt, heavily indebted, many tragedies in villages. 

 

The rice had been stored in new huge warehouses built up by state money, owned by party friends.  Keeping the rice and waiting that the world prices will soar.  In the meantime, other world players jumped on bandwagon, happy that no Thai competition. And what had happened with the rice? Half of it rotten in cheaply built warehouses, sold later for a kiss.

 

And what the clever general did when Yingluck was out ? Exchanged immediately the promising notes for money...

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

It seems you forgot to mention a few details:

- she was refused a loan by the BAAC to pay farmers, on the pretext that it was only a caretaker government,

- and of course the yellow network blocked elections so she remained endlessly in caretaker mode

- then she succeeded in getting another loan from a bank,

- however, Suthep and the yellow network called for boycotting the bank because of the loan, and the bank had to retrieve it, (of course, after that, Suthep called for farmers to join his protests because they hadn't been paid ????)

- suddenly, right after the coup, the BAAC lent the money to the Junta in order to pay farmers.

 

I'm not saying the rice scheme was successful, but the yellow network made everything they could to make sure farmers would not be paid.

[Mr Meeseeks]

24 minutes ago, candide said:

It seems you forgot to mention a few details:

- she was refused a loan by the BAAC to pay farmers, on the pretext that it was only a caretaker government,

- and of course the yellow network blocked elections so she remained endlessly in caretaker mode

- then she succeeded in getting another loan from a bank,

- however, Suthep and the yellow network called for boycotting the bank because of the loan, and the bank had to retrieve it, (of course, after that, Suthep called for farmers to join his protests because they hadn't been paid ????)

- suddenly, right after the coup, the BAAC lent the money to the Junta in order to pay farmers.

 

I'm not saying the rice scheme was successful, but the yellow network made everything they could to make sure farmers would not be paid.

Good post. Thankfully somebody here knows what is going on. 

[Eric Loh]

10 hours ago, webfact said:

Yingluck said in a Facebook post that Prayut should stop blaming her over the debt that was accumulated by the subsidy program.

Prayut should respect the decision of the court and stop the blame game. 

https://www.khaosodenglish.com/politics/2021/04/02/court-overturns-order-to-fine-yingluck-35-7-billion-baht-over-failed-rice-scheme/

[OneMoreFarang]

1 hour ago, candide said:

Lol! People were so happy to get rid of the Shins that the Junta prevented them from electing their government, for fear they would elect the same party again (the party of the people they did not like)! ????

The party of the corrupt for the corrupt. And the [insert your favorite adjective] villagers continue to vote for the same corrupt politician. Education would help ... 

[Saanim]

Perhaps the family in charge (they were 3 of them, one more was in waiting) had on their mind only the well being of the country.

 

When I recall the Cayman accounts in name of the driver and maid. However, after careful consideration, no problem for the court endorsing the sincerity of PM...

[Eric Loh]

30 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

The party of the corrupt for the corrupt. And the [insert your favorite adjective] villagers continue to vote for the same corrupt politician. Education would help ... 

The Shins are not saints but the basic rights of the people to elect their leaders must be respected. Voters suppression in form of blocking polling centers and re-writing the charter and election laws are non democratic methods to deprive the voters their democratic rights. Ultimately the Shins must have the right policies to win over the people and they keep winning consecutive elections handsomely. 

 

[ramrod711]

5 hours ago, holy cow cm said:

Hasn't bozo done a lot of rice scheme payouts himself?

I don't know if anyone is, or would, say that one is better than the other, they're both horrible. I just pointed out that she was not a good PM, doesn't mean that I think the current one is any better.

[OneMoreFarang]

3 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

The Shins are not saints but the basic rights of the people to elect their leaders must be respected. Voters suppression in form of blocking polling centers and re-writing the charter and election laws are non democratic methods to deprive the voters their democratic rights. Ultimately the Shins must have the right policies to win over the people and they keep winning consecutive elections handsomely. 

Personally I am more interested in a good government compared to a democratically elected government.

If [insert what you want] villagers again and again vote for the same criminals then I am not too concerned if some people decide that it might be better to ignore those votes of those people?

The same if obviously true not only for Thailand. Democracy is far away from perfect in many places of this world. And democracy with too many stupid, uneducated and ignorant people just doesn't work.

[Eric Loh]

20 minutes ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Personally I am more interested in a good government compared to a democratically elected government.

If [insert what you want] villagers again and again vote for the same criminals then I am not too concerned if some people decide that it might be better to ignore those votes of those people?

The same if obviously true not only for Thailand. Democracy is far away from perfect in many places of this world. And democracy with too many stupid, uneducated and ignorant people just doesn't work.

Your argument is reasonable. So what constitutes a good government. In terms of Thaksin, he reduced the absolute poverty rate especially in the NE where poverty was the highest. Reasons for his popularity in the NE. He could have done more for relative poverty which required structural changes and a long term endeavor. There are other improvements in GDP, per capita, paying of the IMF loans etc. For me that sound like good governance. Yes he is corrupt relative to Thailand’s entrenched endemic corruption. 
https://www.newmandala.org/thaksinomics-poverty-and-inequality/

[holy cow cm]

22 minutes ago, ramrod711 said:

I don't know if anyone is, or would, say that one is better than the other, they're both horrible. I just pointed out that she was not a good PM, doesn't mean that I think the current one is any better.

I think she had a bunch of the yellow shirts working against and blocking her in many corners. She was far better than the Junta. I personally would have loved to see new air and Thanathorn at t he helm.

[Jeffr2]

2 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Every democratic government in the world pledges money for it's citizens in return for votes.

Very few make good on their promises though.

 

Thaksin and Yingluck were some of the very few politicians to try and keep their promises.

For the past 5 years my family rice farm hasn't been planted, under Prayut, not worth the effort.

True. But the promises they kept helped a minority of citizens and padded the pockets of many in power. Plus, put the country in debt. Which will take decades to pay off.

 

My family also grows rice and decided not to get involved with the rice scam. To their benefit.

[Jeffr2]

3 hours ago, Pravda said:

oh look, it's the sinovac guy ????

I'm getting the Pfizer jab in a few weeks.  Not sure what you are on about.

[OneMoreFarang]

1 hour ago, Eric Loh said:

Your argument is reasonable. So what constitutes a good government. In terms of Thaksin, he reduced the absolute poverty rate especially in the NE where poverty was the highest. Reasons for his popularity in the NE. He could have done more for relative poverty which required structural changes and a long term endeavor. There are other improvements in GDP, per capita, paying of the IMF loans etc. For me that sound like good governance. Yes he is corrupt relative to Thailand’s entrenched endemic corruption. 
https://www.newmandala.org/thaksinomics-poverty-and-inequality/

Imagine he would have done all that without being corrupt. He was super rich before he started in politics. He even used that argument and he told the people he doesn't have to make money from politics because he is already rich.

And then, we all know what happend.

I find it difficult to have respect for such a person.

 

And I also remember that Yingluck was reluctant to start with politics. She had everything. And then she $%#$# up her life because of her greedy brother. What a sad story.

[Denim]

1 hour ago, OneMoreFarang said:

And democracy with too many stupid, uneducated and ignorant people just doesn't work.

 

As proven in Europe and the USA and other countries ?

 

Democracy is not about perfect government it is more about accountability and transparency.

 

Once those in charge are not accountable to the electorate and are given carte blanche to run everything ' in the countries best interests ' it inevitably ends up with them forgetting all about the country and its citizens and instead lining their own pockets whilst setting up their projeny to do likewise.

 

if we want to talk about stupid and ignorant people then we need look no further than the yellow shirts who for some bizarre reason think that the military make a better job of running the country than an elected government. They are the embodiment of the saying ' You can't fix stupid '

[candide]

1 hour ago, OneMoreFarang said:

Personally I am more interested in a good government compared to a democratically elected government.

If [insert what you want] villagers again and again vote for the same criminals then I am not too concerned if some people decide that it might be better to ignore those votes of those people?

The same if obviously true not only for Thailand. Democracy is far away from perfect in many places of this world. And democracy with too many stupid, uneducated and ignorant people just doesn't work.

Nice theory. The reality is that the people's vote has been ignored in order to put into power another bunch which is at least as corrupt and criminal, and not accountable to the people who cannot vote them out and also not accountable to the judiciary as they belong to the same network.

It's not as if it could not have been anticipated: all previous coups also usually resulted in a corrupt government (on top of it, Suthep as herald of anti-corruption, who could reasonably believe it?).

 

They are all crooks to a variable extent. The choice is between elected crooks and appointed crooks. I prefer elected crooks because they are accountable to voters (even if It's far from perfect), rather than appointed crooks who are accountable only to the network which appointed them.

Edited June 3, 2021 by candide

[OneMoreFarang]

25 minutes ago, Denim said:

if we want to talk about stupid and ignorant people then we need look no further than the yellow shirts who for some bizarre reason think that the military make a better job of running the country than an elected government. They are the embodiment of the saying ' You can't fix stupid '

I don't pretend that the yellow shirts are good. They removed the red mob and that is already good news. Only because one group is bad that doesn't mean the (at that time available) alternative is better.

 

And as long as millions of people continue to vote for criminals then nobody should be surprised if they have a government with criminals. It shouldn't be too difficult to understand this. 

[Saanim]

3 hours ago, candide said:

It seems you forgot to mention a few details:

- she was refused a loan by the BAAC to pay farmers, on the pretext that it was only a caretaker government,

- and of course the yellow network blocked elections so she remained endlessly in caretaker mode

- then she succeeded in getting another loan from a bank,

- however, Suthep and the yellow network called for boycotting the bank because of the loan, and the bank had to retrieve it, (of course, after that, Suthep called for farmers to join his protests because they hadn't been paid ????)

- suddenly, right after the coup, the BAAC lent the money to the Junta in order to pay farmers.

 

I'm not saying the rice scheme was successful, but the yellow network made everything they could to make sure farmers would not be paid.

There is always a reason, important that they got the votes. How hard did they try to get a loan? With their background and good friends everywhere? Even abroad as shareholders of world arm industries? That's why the "international community" incl. EU was so outraged, even with some sanctions.

 

Not so outraged when in the same time in Egypt happened even much stronger and bloody coup.  The former leader finally died in prison before should be put to death. Not something so easy like in Thailand... And no outrage so far... 

[starky]

10 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

Not really.  Some are massively corrupt, others, not so much. 

 

Obviously, they didn't do a decent job or they'd still be here running the country! ????

So being ousted by a military junta had no effect on that ya reckon? 

[Chelseafan]

10 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

Not really.  Some are massively corrupt, others, not so much. 

 

Obviously, they didn't do a decent job or they'd still be here running the country! ????

 

 

I wonder what level of corruption is acceptable these days !? ????

 

Call me old-fashioned but I think corruption is corruption no matter how you try to slice and dice it. Obviously I am out of touch and need to get with the times...

 

 

[starky]

9 hours ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

Not having a dig at you but using Wikipedia to back up your claims and in the same thread claiming you know better than others because you have been here longer doesn't do you any favours. ???? 

 

The reason Thaksin was removed was he was a threat to the elites' status quo, nothing more. He started breaking rice bowls and stopping money being diverted from the taxpayer to the government banks to the elites. One of the methods employed prior to his tenure was loan forgiveness to which the former KTB CEO lost his job under Thaksin and that's when the elites started fighting back. KTB was forgiving an unusually large amount of loans to certain people for billions of Baht.

 

Remember, a lot of these corrupt scumbags were still trying to recoup their losses from the financial crisis in 1997/98.

 

Don't forget when Thaksin stopped this, one of the big benefactors of loan forgiveness was Sondhi Limthongkul, who had personal and business loans totalling billions of Baht. Sondhi's media company went into overdrive with the rhetoric, politicising the country's highest institution and encouraging militant yellow shirt protests which cost the country billions in the end and resulted in two military coups which have set the country back decades as we are seeing now.

 

If you recall after the coup in 2006 the then military junta struggled to find solid evidence to charge Thaksin with anything, despite the many allegations from the yellow shirts and other detractors.

 

If he were so corrupt as everyone claimed, there would have been several charged laid on him back then straight away but there wasn't. Instead they had to go after his wife for the Rachadaprisek land purchase.

 

As it stands now, most Thais are realising that they are worse off than before, and going on current sentiment, most would welcome him back with open arms.

Spot on.

[Graemej100]

12 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

On the surface yes. But times were good back then, the global economy was rocking.  Easy to hide all their corrupt actions.  Of which there were many...thus...their current status as criminals on the run. 

If their 'corrupt actions' were hidden, how do YOU know about them?

[BritManToo]

3 hours ago, OneMoreFarang said:

And democracy with too many stupid, uneducated and ignorant people just doesn't work.

Democracy with too many rich people/companies manipulating the candidates doesn't work either.

[alyx]

12 hours ago, jacko45k said:

Booted out.... I thought they both 'did a runner'.

If I remember correctly, Taksin was in New York when the coup took place. Who, in their right mind would come back to a place where they would end up in jail...at best. That is the same in every country and for everyone I guess...

 

[alyx]

11 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

But why didn't they stay and fight the charges?  It wouldn't have been that difficult to do considering the money and power they had.  Seems some here need to read up on the crime and corruption they were involved with.  Stunning.  But for sure, coups are not the way to handle the situation.  Terrible how the military has done this.  Some 20 or 30, not all successful.

 

There's also a lot behind the scenes that's not discussed.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thaksin_Shinawatra

Would you ?

[kickstart]

13 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

He was loved by the poor masses because of his populist agenda.  Remember the cheap tablets to students?  The ones that never worked and were broken almost immediately?  They loved him for that, even though all it did was put money in government officials pockets, and increase the country's debt.

 

 

And he brought in the30 baht heath care ,my wife's autistic daughter is still getting 800 baht/ month ,the over 60s are still getting they 600 baht/month.

No other government  have stopped these payments ,because they were his idea. 

About the only Thai PM to get re-elected for a second term ,the coup that outed him was because he upset someone at the top of the ladder .

 

[aboctok]

On 6/3/2021 at 7:46 AM, Jeffr2 said:

Not really.  Some are massively corrupt, others, not so much. 

 

Obviously, they didn't do a decent job or they'd still be here running the country! ????

No, not obvious at all, given the discredited mechanism by which they were removed. The whole point of electoral conventions is the mandate, which depends on transparency. Instead of a clear outcome, Thailand gets a murky one: Military coup, then a junta that clings to power as long as possible before its contentious leader is smoothly "elected."

[Red Forever]

On 6/3/2021 at 7:46 AM, Jeffr2 said:

Not really.  Some are massively corrupt, others, not so much. 

 

Obviously, they didn't do a decent job or they'd still be here running the country! ????

Nothing to do with "didn't do a decent job". They were both driven out by right wing nationalist junta.

[herfiehandbag]

19 minutes ago, Red Forever said:

Nothing to do with "didn't do a decent job". They were both driven out by right wing nationalist junta.

Whose fellow travelers on this forum attempt to justify by statements such as:

"Personally I am more interested in a good government compared to a democratically elected government.

If [insert what you want] villagers again and again vote for the same criminals then I am not too concerned if some people decide that it might be better to ignore those votes of those people?

The same if obviously true not only for Thailand. Democracy is far away from perfect in many places of this world. And democracy with too many stupid, uneducated and ignorant people just doesn't work."

[Mr Meeseeks]

On 6/3/2021 at 4:48 PM, OneMoreFarang said:

And democracy with too many stupid, uneducated and ignorant people just doesn't work.

So the Thais are too stupid to be allowed to vote? That's what you are saying? ????‍♂️

[hotandsticky]

15 minutes ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

So the Thais are too stupid to be allowed to vote? That's what you are saying? ????‍♂️

 

 

That would be a rhetorical question then...........................