Was Thaskin More Corrupt Than Previous Governments?

[chevykanteve]

The Military claimed to have mounted the Coup because Taksin was so corrupt. (Maybe if he had paid taxes on the Shin Corp. deal, he would have gotten away) I would have thought that these Generals had all the evidence and proof that Taksin is indeed corrupt at hand; after all, that's why they made the coup.

But ... but ... now, more than a year later, we still have not seen one single evidence, not to mention a conviction for his corruption.

Seems to me the coup had other reasons:

- The military wanted a bigger slice of the cake, hence 50% increase of the military budget. (They actually want to buy a submarine!

- They want to have their influence carved in stone, hence the Internal Security Act.

Even the government under the Military had its corruption cases, a few ministers had to step down, and even the Prime Minister was unable (or unwilling) to explain how he got that house in the middle of a National Park.

Corruption is a Gentleman's delict here, and as long as people view it this way, it will stay. If people actually vote for a guy like Samak, how will they ever learn?

One might further postulate, retrospectively, as follows:

-- The reasons for the coup were,

a) The ruling classes in Bangkok felt they were losing power, esteem, face, and money, because of the overwhelming popularity of TRT.

Dr. Taksin actually implemented (=did) what he promised in terms of policies. Subsequently, these policies were ridiculed as "populist" and, by implication at the time, no good, but now copied by every other party, including the Democrat Party (who have taken 'populism' to new heights with promises of free electricity). His success at implementing policies resulted in pronounced jealousy and resentment. After all, he was a businessman-outsider. Politics wasn't a family business for him. The man was/is actually sincere.

c) People, including police up to the rank of colonel, were arrested outright for doing things like possession of methamphetamines for suspected resale. Local riff-raff selling yaba (methamphetemines) disappeared off the streets practically overnight. Decent folk could walk in the evenings without fear of attack from some hop-head. Were yaba dealers shot by special police? Probably. Were they generally warned beforehand: yes. Did they continue selling their poisonous pills to teens and even children: yes. So did they deserve summary execution: why the heck not? Is formal execution outlawed in the States (for example)?

d) Really, there is no "d". Most of this is about a = perceived lose of power by the Bangkok ruling classes and their desire to turn back the clock (30 years) to the "good old days" when the peasants all clasped their hands in unison in a respectful wei. Though these people, often referred to in the Bangkok press as members of "civic groups" use Dr.Thaksin's (anti-methamphetamine) operations as a reason to condemn the man, do those same "civic-minded folk" ever publicize concerns for the poor in Thailand? Generally, they show only contempt for the poor. And who are the majority voters in Thailand?

Edited December 22, 2007 by chevykanteve

[bendejo]

To me it was his arrogance. I worked in Silicon Valley, known for it vain and arrogant captains of industry -- to me he was cut from the same stuff but with more clout. Those SiliValley chuckleheads can only fantasize about having people shot on sight!

I think the deal of selling the telcom company to Singapore, and using his kids as cut-outs, was so obvious that His Arrogance may have seen himself as untouchable at that point.

And did anyone else notice that Madame Toxin made a few trips into and out of the Kingdom in the weeks just after the coup? I'm sure it wasn't just because she forgot her lipstick.

[sriracha john]

I'd like to hear the OP's impression of whether Thaksin was more corrupt than previous governments.

[sriracha john]

I'd like to hear the OP's impression of whether Thaksin was more corrupt than previous governments.

[jumnien]

The Military claimed to have mounted the Coup because Taksin was so corrupt. (Maybe if he had paid taxes on the Shin Corp. deal, he would have gotten away) I would have thought that these Generals had all the evidence and proof that Taksin is indeed corrupt at hand; after all, that's why they made the coup.

But ... but ... now, more than a year later, we still have not seen one single evidence, not to mention a conviction for his corruption.

Seems to me the coup had other reasons:

- The military wanted a bigger slice of the cake, hence 50% increase of the military budget. (They actually want to buy a submarine!

- They want to have their influence carved in stone, hence the Internal Security Act.

Even the government under the Military had its corruption cases, a few ministers had to step down, and even the Prime Minister was unable (or unwilling) to explain how he got that house in the middle of a National Park.

Corruption is a Gentleman's delict here, and as long as people view it this way, it will stay. If people actually vote for a guy like Samak, how will they ever learn?

One might further postulate, retrospectively, as follows:

-- The reasons for the coup were,

a) The ruling classes in Bangkok felt they were losing power, esteem, face, and money, because of the overwhelming popularity of TRT.

Dr. Taksin actually implemented (=did) what he promised in terms of policies. Subsequently, these policies were ridiculed as "populist" and, by implication at the time, no good, but now copied by every other party, including the Democrat Party (who have taken 'populism' to new heights with promises of free electricity). His success at implementing policies resulted in pronounced jealousy and resentment. After all, he was a businessman-outsider. Politics wasn't a family business for him. The man was/is actually sincere.

c) People, including police up to the rank of colonel, were arrested outright for doing things like possession of methamphetamines for suspected resale. Local riff-raff selling yaba (methamphetemines) disappeared off the streets practically overnight. Decent folk could walk in the evenings without fear of attack from some hop-head. Were yaba dealers shot by special police? Probably. Were they generally warned beforehand: yes. Did they continue selling their poisonous pills to teens and even children: yes. So did they deserve summary execution: why the heck not? Is formal execution outlawed in the States (for example)?

d) Really, there is no "d". Most of this is about a = perceived lose of power by the Bangkok ruling classes and their desire to turn back the clock (30 years) to the "good old days" when the peasants all clasped their hands in unison in a respectful wei. Though these people, often referred to in the Bangkok press as members of "civic groups" use Dr.Thaksin's (anti-methamphetamine) operations as a reason to condemn the man, do those same "civic-minded folk" ever publicize concerns for the poor in Thailand? Generally, they show only contempt for the poor. And who are the majority voters in Thailand?

My opinion has always been that Thaksin was no more "corrupt" than his predecessors. He was in office longer. The coup obviously had nothing to do with his corruption and everything to do with others desire to feed at the trough and dominate the Thai people and prevent inevitable change.

[Travel2003]

In what way did Mr. Taksin make money for the country?

Pls dont misunderstand me, I am not trying to be ironic or silly here.

I would really like to know that.

if you don't want to be silly, don't ask stupid questions !

Hmm, seems like my stupid question got some interesting replies.

For the future, if I feel one of my questions might be stupid, I will make sure I run them by you first, so you can endorse them.

That is, if you are not too busy in your "think tank" then.

Feels quite liberating having someone like you around to help us less intelligent ones.

well, your statement that thaksin must be a bad guy, as he's on many NGO's blacklist, says a lot about you. Personally, I would see it as an honour to be on the blacklist of anarchistic organization, who are undermining socitey and don't contribute, despite what they want you to believe; those NGO's are soo much more corrupt, then any government organization ever !

the main reason why I reacted like that, is because you did judge Thaksin earlier on, while you obviously don't have a clue ...

to me, the whole anti-Thaksin gang belongs in the same list as terrorists; extreme-left is the main problem is these times, nothing or nobody else !

Mr. Taksin is actually on a lot of NGO lists.

That is a fact.

It was quite interesting to read about the good stuff he and his fellows did as well.

As for your comments about the NGOs, and other groups should belong on terrorist lists. Well you got me there, as I can not come up with any more words then telling you that you kind of seem a bit extreme yourself.

[jumnien]

Did you notice the photo of the military helicopter flying very low over Chiang Mai dropping leaflets reminding the voters to vote? A bit intimidating given their history of opening fire on the Thai people when the military decides it needs to save the nation.

[Ricardo]

to me, the whole anti-Thaksin gang belongs in the same list as terrorists

[jumnien]

Free speech activist Supinya herself summed it up best. The military coup was far worse than Thaksin ever was.

[sriracha john]

I thought the thread topic was corruption. Does she have anything to say on this subject or is it best to rely on Khunying Jaruwan's definitive statement that corruption under Thaksin was to unprecedented levels?

Edited December 22, 2007 by sriracha john

[jumnien]

No, it's definitely best to rely on Supinya! Your adoration of the dear Khunying is however admirable.

[sriracha john]

No, it's definitely best to rely on Supinya!

Perhaps it's best to post on quotes that are thread topic-specific then.

I eagerly await your opening of a new thread.

[jumnien]

Clearly the thread has most recently been discussing the perceived loss of power by the Bangkok ruling classes to which your lady Khunying Jaruwan belongs and Miss Supinya does not. We each have our own biases don't we?

[sriracha john]

When did the topic shift from the thread title to whatever it is you're trying to discuss?

[jumnien]

Post 31 deepened the discussion beyond the usual right wing anti-Thaksin ranting. You might want to peruse it.

[sriracha john]

Perhaps in your new thread, you could incorporate that into it and allow this one to stay on the thread topic.

[jumnien]

The Military claimed to have mounted the Coup because Taksin was so corrupt. (Maybe if he had paid taxes on the Shin Corp. deal, he would have gotten away) I would have thought that these Generals had all the evidence and proof that Taksin is indeed corrupt at hand; after all, that's why they made the coup.

But ... but ... now, more than a year later, we still have not seen one single evidence, not to mention a conviction for his corruption.

Seems to me the coup had other reasons:

- The military wanted a bigger slice of the cake, hence 50% increase of the military budget. (They actually want to buy a submarine!

- They want to have their influence carved in stone, hence the Internal Security Act.

Even the government under the Military had its corruption cases, a few ministers had to step down, and even the Prime Minister was unable (or unwilling) to explain how he got that house in the middle of a National Park.

Corruption is a Gentleman's delict here, and as long as people view it this way, it will stay. If people actually vote for a guy like Samak, how will they ever learn?

One might further postulate, retrospectively, as follows:

-- The reasons for the coup were,

a) The ruling classes in Bangkok felt they were losing power, esteem, face, and money, because of the overwhelming popularity of TRT.

Dr. Taksin actually implemented (=did) what he promised in terms of policies. Subsequently, these policies were ridiculed as "populist" and, by implication at the time, no good, but now copied by every other party, including the Democrat Party (who have taken 'populism' to new heights with promises of free electricity). His success at implementing policies resulted in pronounced jealousy and resentment. After all, he was a businessman-outsider. Politics wasn't a family business for him. The man was/is actually sincere.

c) People, including police up to the rank of colonel, were arrested outright for doing things like possession of methamphetamines for suspected resale. Local riff-raff selling yaba (methamphetemines) disappeared off the streets practically overnight. Decent folk could walk in the evenings without fear of attack from some hop-head. Were yaba dealers shot by special police? Probably. Were they generally warned beforehand: yes. Did they continue selling their poisonous pills to teens and even children: yes. So did they deserve summary execution: why the heck not? Is formal execution outlawed in the States (for example)?

d) Really, there is no "d". Most of this is about a = perceived lose of power by the Bangkok ruling classes and their desire to turn back the clock (30 years) to the "good old days" when the peasants all clasped their hands in unison in a respectful wei. Though these people, often referred to in the Bangkok press as members of "civic groups" use Dr.Thaksin's (anti-methamphetamine) operations as a reason to condemn the man, do those same "civic-minded folk" ever publicize concerns for the poor in Thailand? Generally, they show only contempt for the poor. And who are the majority voters in Thailand?

Good observations regarding the motivations of the Bangkok ruling classes to moan about Thaksin's corruption in their bid to dominate the Thai people.

[sriracha john]

Was Thaskin More Corrupt Than Previous Governments?

To answer the OP's question, you'll not find a previous government matching these numbers...

Thaksin government cost the state 180 Billion Baht

The Thaksin administration caused more than 180 Billion Baht in damage to the country, according to a booklet by the Assets Examination Committee (AEC) to be released today.

Over 50,000 copies of the AEC's Yellow Paper will be distributed today to mark the one-year of achievement of the AEC.

The paper includes an interview with AEC spokesman Sak Korsaengruang, which reveals the obstacles the AEC has faced in its investigation.

- The Nation

Edited December 22, 2007 by sriracha john

[Old Man River]

Was Thaskin More Corrupt Than Previous Governments?

To answer the OP's question, you'll not find a previous government matching these numbers...

Thaksin government cost the state 180 Billion Baht

The Thaksin administration caused more than 180 Billion Baht in damage to the country, according to a booklet by the Assets Examination Committee (AEC) to be released today.

Over 50,000 copies of the AEC's Yellow Paper will be distributed today to mark the one-year of achievement of the AEC.

The paper includes an interview with AEC spokesman Sak Korsaengruang, which reveals the obstacles the AEC has faced in its investigation.

- The Nation

The problem is, of course, saying that he caused THB 180 billion in damage to the country is easy, but proving it is not.

[h90]

Corruption will never fade away .

guess mr t was more corrupt then the current one , but at the

same time made lots and lots more money for the country ,

and also the local economy was booming at the time .

So is corruption bad ? Yes it is , but all is corrupt anyway ,

even at the local ampuh and obetoh offices .

So the point is not about who is more corrupt , but more

about who can make something happening more , guess mr T

in that aspect was the best to get , never has a Pm done and create

so much .

About his topple , a lot of prominent people not getting their piece

got very angry , so stamp him with corruption , which they all are

Such good politics here don't ya think ?

Economy was booming at the beginning of Toxin times, and that has to do with things the gouverment did before, as all these things need years to get in effect AND the good feeling Toxin made on economic. If everyone thinks it is going better, it is going better, as companies take more staff invest and and and.

But than it only went down.

He made some good things, Internet, cleaned customs. But maybe another gouverment would have done the same as the time was ready to do it.

[SpacemanSpliff]

The Military claimed to have mounted the Coup because Taksin was so corrupt. (Maybe if he had paid taxes on the Shin Corp. deal, he would have gotten away)

Maybe if 'tax on stock transactions' EXISTED in Thailand then a lot of anti Thaksin people would have had a point. In the real world though, it doesn't.

I would have thought that these Generals had all the evidence and proof that Taksin is indeed corrupt at hand; after all, that's why they made the coup. But ... but ... now, more than a year later, we still have not seen one single evidence, not to mention a conviction for his corruption. Seems to me the coup had other reasons: - The military wanted a bigger slice of the cake, hence 50% increase of the military budget. (They actually want to buy a submarine! They want to have their influence carved in stone, hence the Internal Security Act. Even the government under the Military had its corruption cases, a few ministers had to step down, and even the Prime Minister was unable (or unwilling) to explain how he got that house in the middle of a National Park. Corruption is a Gentleman's delict here, and as long as people view it this way, it will stay. If people actually vote for a guy like Samak, how will they ever learn?

They vote for Samak becuase they honestly have no other choice, with the entire level of reasonable, competent technocrat leadership at the ex-TRT banned from politics by the junta.

I meet a lot of people who will vote PPP, but preciously few who've said "Samak is a really really great guy to run the country."

Simply a case of 'no choice'.

[SpacemanSpliff]

So... you think the Thaksin government was more corrupt than, say, Chavalit and Banharn's ? The OP was such of an almost rhetorical nature, so obviously the discussion swiftly expanded on to adjacent territory, such as the present government.

The foremost candidate for non-corrupt leadership is probably Chuan's government, which probably was less corrupt at *government* level, however it was so inert and ineffective that it did little to counter corruption in all other levels of society, which remained rife.

Again, may I just refer you to http://www.transparency.org/ , there's historical data there.

Thailand's ranking:

1998 : 61

1999 : 68

2000 : 60

2001 : 61 <-- the year TRT won their first landslide election victory and Dr Thaksin became PM.

2002 : 64

2003 : 70

2004 : 64

2005 : 59

2006 : 63 <-- towards the end of this year the military coup happened.

2007 : 84 WORST ranking in recent history.

[sriracha john]

I think it's presumptive to assume what precisely was and was not rhetorical in the OP's post. Perhaps we should wait for further clarification from him before proceeding.

[Tony Clifton]

Was Thaskin More Corrupt Than Previous Governments?

Governments huh...

Now, back to your question, how many previous governments does it take to balance the scale?

[Pundi64]

No mater how you spell it, corruption is corruption!

[geronimo]

As reported yesterday, his government cost the country to lost some 180 billion baht??

OMG!!!

Ok, seriously: check just about any publication on the economy.. Or ask the people.. poor, middle class.. Thaksin turned Thailand back on the right track economically.

"COST Thailand money.. "

I couldn't agree more! T put this country back on the map and trod on some big toes, hence his removal.

[tracker]

A prime-minister, having a party "thai love thai" and then "letting" sell thailand's most profitable company to singapore (were people are jailed if they speak out of their government) should (and probably will) go into the history-books as the most un-patriotic act of alltime.

enough said.

[SpacemanSpliff]

A prime-minister, having a party "thai love thai" and then "letting" sell thailand's most profitable company to singapore (were people are jailed if they speak out of their government) should (and probably will) go into the history-books as the most un-patriotic act of alltime. enough said.

Enough said? Well.. let me try.

Shin was Thaksin's compay, that he built from the ground up.

In a free country, people are allowed to sell things that they own. A car, a house, a company.

in a free country, people are allowed to sell things they own to anyone. Their friend, their neighbour, a foreign investor.. It does't matter, it's their stuff and therefor their business. Thais for sure don't seem to be shy to buy stuff in other countries!!

So now it's un-patriottic to sell your own company to an investment company in Singapore, a country which is actually a member of ASEAN and all governmets actively SUPPORT trade between members?

Do you realize what you're saying is kind of like saying that if I own a house in the UK and I sell it to an Irish person, I am then un-patriotic?

Nuff Said!

(Though no doubt people will jump in trying to derail the discussion by various contrived tangents. I hope they'll be good. )

[THAILIBAN]

In what way did Mr. Taksin make money for the country?

Pls dont misunderstand me, I am not trying to be ironic or silly here.

I would really like to know that.

if you don't want to be silly, don't ask stupid questions !

Hmm, seems like my stupid question got some interesting replies.

For the future, if I feel one of my questions might be stupid, I will make sure I run them by you first, so you can endorse them.

That is, if you are not too busy in your "think tank" then.

Feels quite liberating having someone like you around to help us less intelligent ones.

well, from his profile we can learn he is from "Khaosan-Road", so r u really sure u he will be able to help us, the "less-intelligent-ones" ???

[sriracha john]

In what way did Mr. Taksin make money for the country?

Pls dont misunderstand me, I am not trying to be ironic or silly here.

I would really like to know that.

if you don't want to be silly, don't ask stupid questions !

Hmm, seems like my stupid question got some interesting replies.

For the future, if I feel one of my questions might be stupid, I will make sure I run them by you first, so you can endorse them.

That is, if you are not too busy in your "think tank" then.

Feels quite liberating having someone like you around to help us less intelligent ones.

well, from his profile we can learn he is from "Khaosan-Road", so r u really sure u he will be able to help us, the "less-intelligent-ones" ???

The Dr.'s highly developed olfactory abilities are very accurate.

< unnecessary-to-repeat blathering snipped >

I think I smell TROLL.

*edit* To Thaliban: I see you were quoting the remarks of the "other one" but referenced the the domicile of "this one".... but it's ok... it's often difficult to keep "them" separate.

Edited December 23, 2007 by sriracha john