Thailand’s Rice Policy and Management Committee has approved a budget, amounting to about 150 billion baht, to guarantee the income of more than 4.6 million rice farming households for their 2022-2023 rice crops.

 

The committee also agreed to extend the period for resolvingthe controversial rice pledging scheme, of the former government of Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra, for another year, as there are still about 218,000 tonnes of unsold rice in warehouses.

 

Most of the remaining rice is now rotten and is often sold as inedible rice to be converted into bio fuel.

 

Full Story: https://www.thaipbsworld.com/150-billion-baht-budget-approved-to-guarantee-income-for-farmers-from-2022-2023-rice-crops/

 

-- © Copyright Thai PBS 2022-09-09

 

- Cigna offers a range of visa-compliant plans that meet the minimum requirement of medical treatment, including COVID-19, up to THB 3m. For more information on all expat health insurance plans click here.

 

Monthly car subscription with first-class insurance, 24x7 assistance and more in one price - click here to find out more!

Gosh, they're really pulling out all the stops to fix the controversial rice pledging scheme which defrauded farmers. After a mere 10 years they must need an extension after such rapid progress and the unpaid farmers must be overjoyed....

This is a huge mistake, and no doubt motivated by the desire to remain in power and buy votes. Rice is a terrible crop, and virtually insures that those growing it will remain in poverty for a lifetime. Subsidizing it leads to a lack of progress. Not smart.

 

Encouraging farmers to move into more profitable crops would represent progress and a concern for the poorest farmers. 

Edited September 10, 20223 yr by spidermike007

Correct me if I'm wrong but won't subsidizing the rice farmers and milling houses only encourage over production, subsequent higher pm2.5 pollution levels during the field burning season (late Nov - early April) and ultimately lead to higher retail prices? Otherwise I think it's a great idea. ????

 

 

 

 

Edited September 10, 20223 yr by Venom
Typo

12 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

Thailand’s Rice Policy and Management Committee has approved a budget, amounting to about 150 billion baht, to guarantee the income of more than 4.6 million rice farming households for their 2022-2023 rice crops

Now it that's not vote buying I don't know what is.

7 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

This is a huge mistake, and no doubt motivated by the desire to remain in power and buy votes. Rice is a terrible crop, and virtually insures that those growing it will remain in poverty for a lifetime. Subsidizing it leads to a lack of progress. Not smart.

 

Encouraging farmers to move into more profitable crops would represent progress and a concern for the poorest farmers. 

Actually, some time ago - many have already began the transition away from market rice on to other things, growing rice for familial subsistence only. 

 

Back when - perhaps a decade ago - there was a growing movement among rice farmers [in particular] to form independent unified cooperatives allowing themselves to be free of the government and banksters rice mafia control, whereas freeing up the free export market [where the big money is] would be to their advantage and beneficial to the broader communities......these ideals have somewhat petered out as many have seen it more fit to opt out to more advantageous agricultural/horticultural ventures. 

 

Rice is still king here and used almost used as a political tool in many instances - by all parties.

Is this a pledge to buy rice? ????

15 hours ago, Mr Meeseeks said:

Is this a pledge to buy rice? ????

It does sound similar, but the key difference here would be the lack of rice-hoarding and attempted (and failed) global rice price manipulation.  Also, without the pledge/hoarding, there is less chance of the smuggling of low quality rice from abroad, mismanagement of storage leading to most of the rice going bad, many farmers not even getting the money promised to them, and the whole thing still being an issue ten years later.

 

So, if your question is really "Wait!  Aren't they just doing the same thing that Thaksin did through his proxy sister?", the answer would be: no.

 People should appreciate rice farmers when they sit down to a bowel full on the dinner table.

With input costs around 8000 baht to grow a ton of rice and the selling price at harvest likely to be 9-10,000 baht/ton one would consider is it worth growing at all.

With the subsidy if roughly same as last year and an extra 300 baht/rai introduced this year if you don't burn after harvest the average rice farmer will receive just under 3000 baht/rai from the government which helps 4.6 million families provide a staple food for the rest of the country.

Money well spent. 

 

 

 

7 hours ago, farmerjo said:

 People should appreciate rice farmers when they sit down to a bowel full on the dinner table.

With input costs around 8000 baht to grow a ton of rice and the selling price at harvest likely to be 9-10,000 baht/ton one would consider is it worth growing at all.

With the subsidy if roughly same as last year and an extra 300 baht/rai introduced this year if you don't burn after harvest the average rice farmer will receive just under 3000 baht/rai from the government which helps 4.6 million families provide a staple food for the rest of the country.

Money well spent. 

 

 

 

Yet, the contradictories still exist - as many rice farmers find themselves [unnecessarily, I might add] prisoners to the agricultural banksters abiding by the ever present and cycling loan/credit schemes that they're almost forced to participate in a sort of buying from the company store type of situation.......never getting ahead. Most of these activities are self-induced by the respective farmers. 

 

The better news is that the greater percentage of farmers are clearly lesser dependent on the agricultural mafias for their "success" and break free from the company store scenarios. 

 

Aside from all this nonsense, the government shouldn't be in the business of controlling overseers as such applies to the all imaginary free and open markets. 

8 hours ago, BangkokReady said:

It does sound similar, but the key difference here would be the lack of rice-hoarding and attempted (and failed) global rice price manipulation.  Also, without the pledge/hoarding, there is less chance of the smuggling of low quality rice from abroad, mismanagement of storage leading to most of the rice going bad, many farmers not even getting the money promised to them, and the whole thing still being an issue ten years later.

 

So, if your question is really "Wait!  Aren't they just doing the same thing that Thaksin did through his proxy sister?", the answer would be: no.

The storylines and the criminal intent remain the same. 

The only thing that modifies are the names of the corrupted profiteers.

26 minutes ago, zzaa09 said:

The storylines and the criminal intent remain the same. 

They aren't.  They both involve a guaranteed price for rice, but the source of the money, the destination/purpose of the rice, and the execution of the endeavour are completely different.

Edited September 11, 20223 yr by BangkokReady