Could the digital wallet pose a challenge to both Pheu Thai and conservatives?

[snoop1130]

 

The Thai Prime Minister, Srettha Thavisin, appears troubled as continued discussions about the government's flagship policy, digital wallet, are carried on. These discussions are especially significant as previously, many conservatives have shied away from this hot topic.

 

This platform is socio-politically impactful since it links back to Thailand's primary division - disagreement over the corruption of Pheu Thai's leaders and Pheu Thai's populist practices which some argue led to corruption and harmed the state's money management. Various people have criticized the digital wallet proposal for promoting unhealthy populism, and have suspected that it may favor large corporations. Fears of corruption have also been raised.

 

The Srettha government's digital wallet resembles the Yingluck administration's rice pledging scheme. Both these agendas have faced conservative attacks, though less so for the digital wallet.

 

Legally, the issue presents more concerns. The Constitution necessitates that the Cabinet must declare to the Parliament how it plans to fund state policies. Srettha's government only clarified its funding plans recently, which may lead to problems.

 

Furthermore, the political party law states that campaigning parties must clearly outline how they intend to fund their election promises in order to curb unaffordable or risky economic vows.

 

A primary concern is the use of the Bank for Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperatives. The Pheu Thai government attempted to pull out significant amounts from the annual budget for the years 2024 and 2025 in place of its discarded legislative loan plan. This raises questions about whether it's right to divert large amounts of the bank's assets, often a lifeline for struggling farmers, to a politically charged agenda.

 

The fact that taxpayer contributions are required for the digital wallet could be a ticking time bomb.

 

The Central Bank also opposes the digital wallet. It proposed narrowing down the participants to only those who are truly economically vulnerable, an idea the government dismissed.

 

A party named Move Forward seems to have substantially benefited by not forming a government with Pheu Thai. Yet, it has not fully capitalized on the opportunity as it did little during the election campaign and since Pheu Thai assumed power. Most of the criticisms have come from present or past finance technocrats, not politicians. Still, it's fair to say that Move Forward has managed to avoid a potential criticism bullet.

 

Photo: Creative Commons License via Google

 

-- 2024-04-26

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

[dinsdale]

How about trying to rewrite this mix of AI and translation app to something that resembales a decent article. Nah! Too hard. Have to think and actually do some work.

34 minutes ago, snoop1130 said:

This platform is socio-politically impactful since it links back to Thailand's primary division - disagreement over the corruption of Pheu Thai's leaders and Pheu Thai's populist practices which some argue led to corruption and harmed the state's money management.

 

35 minutes ago, snoop1130 said:

A party named Move Forward seems to have substantially benefited by not forming a government with Pheu Thai. Yet, it has not fully capitalized on the opportunity as it did little during the election campaign and since Pheu Thai assumed power.

 

[bokningar]

Inflation is not high enough, ad an other 500 billion to the pot to make sure it get high enough 5555

[hotchilli]

15 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

This platform is socio-politically impactful since it links back to Thailand's primary division - disagreement over the corruption of Pheu Thai's leaders and Pheu Thai's populist practices which some argue led to corruption and harmed the state's money management. Various people have criticized the digital wallet proposal for promoting unhealthy populism, and have suspected that it may favor large corporations. Fears of corruption have also been raised.

 

The Srettha government's digital wallet resembles the Yingluck administration's rice pledging scheme. Both these agendas have faced conservative attacks, though less so for the digital wallet.

Vote buying on a huge scale... but they didn't come clean with how they would fund it before making the promise.

[newbee2022]

16 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

 

The Thai Prime Minister, Srettha Thavisin, appears troubled as continued discussions about the government's flagship policy, digital wallet, are carried on. These discussions are especially significant as previously, many conservatives have shied away from this hot topic.

 

This platform is socio-politically impactful since it links back to Thailand's primary division - disagreement over the corruption of Pheu Thai's leaders and Pheu Thai's populist practices which some argue led to corruption and harmed the state's money management. Various people have criticized the digital wallet proposal for promoting unhealthy populism, and have suspected that it may favor large corporations. Fears of corruption have also been raised.

 

The Srettha government's digital wallet resembles the Yingluck administration's rice pledging scheme. Both these agendas have faced conservative attacks, though less so for the digital wallet.

 

Legally, the issue presents more concerns. The Constitution necessitates that the Cabinet must declare to the Parliament how it plans to fund state policies. Srettha's government only clarified its funding plans recently, which may lead to problems.

 

Furthermore, the political party law states that campaigning parties must clearly outline how they intend to fund their election promises in order to curb unaffordable or risky economic vows.

 

A primary concern is the use of the Bank for Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperatives. The Pheu Thai government attempted to pull out significant amounts from the annual budget for the years 2024 and 2025 in place of its discarded legislative loan plan. This raises questions about whether it's right to divert large amounts of the bank's assets, often a lifeline for struggling farmers, to a politically charged agenda.

 

The fact that taxpayer contributions are required for the digital wallet could be a ticking time bomb.

 

The Central Bank also opposes the digital wallet. It proposed narrowing down the participants to only those who are truly economically vulnerable, an idea the government dismissed.

 

A party named Move Forward seems to have substantially benefited by not forming a government with Pheu Thai. Yet, it has not fully capitalized on the opportunity as it did little during the election campaign and since Pheu Thai assumed power. Most of the criticisms have come from present or past finance technocrats, not politicians. Still, it's fair to say that Move Forward has managed to avoid a potential criticism bullet.

 

Photo: Creative Commons License via Google

 

-- 2024-04-26

Get our Daily Newsletter - Click HERE to subscribe

Interesting how it's going on. Could be disastrous for Thaksin if the money is not spread at the end of this year.🙏

 

[jippytum]

The prime minister is a puppet of Thaksin and will face similar exile to evade justice when the vote  buying scheme is declared illegal in the future. To make a financial promises in an election campaign you must declare how you propose to fund it. 

[Xonax]

I can't wait to see how the exchange rate of the THB will change dramatically, after the money has been distributed.

Edited April 27 by Xonax

[Srikcir]

23 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

The Srettha government's digital wallet resembles the Yingluck administration's rice pledging scheme.

Also PM Prayut's rubber and rice pledging schemes; his many "gifts" to the low income Thai citizens. Whatever the issue with the digital wallet scheme, it's not populist vs conservist.