Why Is Thailand A Third World Country?

[LaoPo]

I'm not so sure your theory holds siamamerican

Life Expectancy

USA: 77.85

Thai: 72.75

Infant Mortality: Number of Deaths of Infants under 1 y/o per 1000

USA: 6.4

Thai: 19.5

Did you use the CIA numbers ?

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/th.../th.html#People

Anyway, the site also says:

"note: estimates for this country explicitly take into account the effects of excess mortality due to AIDS; this can result in lower life expectancy, higher infant mortality and death rates, lower population and growth rates, and changes in the distribution of population by age and sex than would otherwise be expected (July 2007 est.)"

and:

Population below poverty line: 10% (2004 est.) -on a population of 65.000.000 million- that's a number of 6,500,000 Million people....below the poverty line.

The question is which 'poverty line' was used in the CIA World Factbook ?

LaoPo

[david96]

Before you compare East with West remove all the social security and welfare payments from the 1st World countries.

Then see how they compare.

If it was not for welfare and social security a lot of supermarkets would go out of business this is where a large part of their revenue comes from in the West.

White women would soon lose their morals and would be selling their children on the streets, have a look at the Victorian Era in the UK. A question of economic survival.

Thailand is not a "third world" country, PNG and East Timor are good examples of what a third world country looks like.

Edited April 5, 2008 by david96

[siamamerican]

I'm not so sure your theory holds siamamerican

Life Expectancy

USA: 77.85

Thai: 72.75

Infant Mortality: Number of Deaths of Infants under 1 y/o per 1000

USA: 6.4

Thai: 19.5

Other factors contribute to these numbers. Thailand has one of the worst vehicle related fatality rates in the world. The infant mortality rate is a shocker. In small part, it may be caused by the parents whisking them around town on scooters.

Seriously, the availability of medical care is probably the biggest factor. For example if you have HIV in Thailand your life expectancy is far less than the west. I still can't comprehend the infant mortality rate - 2 infants out of 100 die in the first year. I wonder what the main cause is – diarrhea caused by polluted water? My wife’s sister’s kids have had some close calls with diarrhea and dehydration.

[howtoescape]

Before you compare East with West remove all the social security and welfare payments from the 1st World countries.

Then see how they compare.

If it was not for welfare and social security a lot of supermarkets would go out of business this is where a large part of their revenue comes from in the West.

White women would soon lose their morals and would be selling their children on the streets, have a look at the Victorian Era in the UK. A question of economic survival.

Thailand is not a "third world" country, PNG and East Timor are good examples of what a third world country looks like.

If you stopped social secuity payments people would get jobs and the family unit would be closer as theyd depend on one another, the social security lifestyle keeps people in relative poverty and numbs minds of those who rely on it for an extended period.

[Iambabababor]

Because many kids do not go to school regulary.Up country schools seem to be very poor and no education means no brains.Manual work and unskilled work can give many families a decent income,but most of that goes on drink and ciggies.

Absolutely correct - but don't forget that the money also goes on the lottery, cards, debt repayment at 10% -20% a month and the unabated tambons and donations to the wat! No money left to kep the kids in school!

[ade100]

There are a thousand things wrong with Thailand. There are a thousand things that, if done differently, would make life much better.

But it's not up to us to impose our value system on the development of another sovereign territory. What people fail to realise is that most of these so-called developing countries are cramming 200-250 years of development into 20-25 years; it's obvious there will be mistakes, ructions, injustices occuring. Do you think similar things didnt happen in the UK's development? Go look at your history books and look at issues like corruption, wealth disparities, injustices that prevailed over decades and decades before - seemingly - smoothing themselves out in the 20th century.

Russia and China took a quicker, more brutal route to developing, with mixed results. Singapore and, to a lesser extent, Malaysia took another more successful route.

Thailand is doing it its own way. And as I sit in my office looking at the streets full of cars, luxury office buildings, shops full of things to buy, and well-fed people going about their business, I dont think they are doing as bad a job as we like to think.

Yes I agree Thailand is doing it it's own way and the natives are doing a fine job.

"streets full of cars" . Yes those Bangkok streets are certainly full of cars, can't fault you there, possibly a little too full of cars, one could argue. There are some that would go so far as to say that a city roughly the size of London could do with one or two more metro lines.

"well-fed people". Well apart from the 20% of Thais suffering from malnutrition (http://www.wfp.org/country_brief/hunger_map/map/hungermap_popup/map_popup.html) indeed there are some that are very well fed. Some are positively chubby.

"shops full of things to buy,". Ah yes I remember walking around Siam Paragon in BKK and seeing loads of shops full, as you say, of things to buy. It almost looked like a shopping centre in the civilised world. Hats of to them! Admittedly you never actually see anyone in those shops buying anything and of course the price of a handbag would be equivalent to ten lifetimes wages of your average Thai. But nevertheless nice to have them there to remind the savages of everything they can't afford.

So yes I agree from an office in Bangkok things are looking pretty good, just so long as you can hop daintily over the lepers lying in the street and avoid the murderous locals, it is really almost looks like civilisation. Let's give the natives a big slap on the back…not too hard in case they are suffering from leprously…

Lawdy, I'd better add a few smileys here in case anyone thinks I am being, anything other than a little playfully provocative...:-) :-) :-)

Your post, while funny, is intellectually facile.

This thread is about whether Thailand is a poor country,or a developing one. It is not about whether it is a successfully developed first world nation. My observations remain, and I stand by them.

A city full of cars is a sign of a developing country. The urban population is acquiring cars at a faster rate than the city planners are able to support them. This is not a Thai only problem. Go take a look around LA, Paris, Beijing etc. You will no doubt counter that Thai's can't afford their cars and are getting them for face; well, I'll counter that it's the same in LA, Paris, Beijing etc.

You suggest that noone is buying the goods in the shops. Utter nonsense. Are you suggesting that the world's retailers are moving to Bkk, investing huge amounts in setting up retail outlets just for the sake of doing it? If people weren't buying goods, the retailers would not be here. Now, of course, you'll counter that it's all on credit etc etc. I will then refer you back to LA, Paris, Beijing etc.

Hunger? I'm sorry. I simply don't buy the wfp data. How can it be trusted when it suggests that 4 times as many Thai's are malnourished than Myanmarese? Putting aside issues like that, I would want to know its criteria for malnourished and its methodology. I'm not even going to start on the notion that an organisation like WFP might have a vested interested in suggesting their is more hunger than there really is. On this, I can only cite personal experience and observation. Having been to many different parts of the country I've yet to see genuinely hungry people.

Funny but facile is good enough for me :-)

Also you have anticipated all my counter-arguments and kindly saved me the bother of typing them all out.

One thing I will add, in an attempt to be slightly less facile (although no doubt much less funny), is that being “to and fro” between Singapore and Thailand, I am profoundly aware of the differences and aware of what a SE Asian country could be like.

Of course I am aware that Singapore has had a very different history to Thailand and is not, by any means, perfect. Also most people (especially ex-pats living on a fixed income) would not want Thailand to become like Singapore for obvious reasons.

However Singaporeans are not suffering from malnutrition, have access to first rate health care, top quality education, good quality and affordable government housing, can live in relative peace and security and do not have to resort to prostitution or crime to support their families. And yes it was only a hundred years or so ago that Singapore had all the problems that Thailand has now – mafia, crime, corruption, poverty, disease, etc.

I don’t know if the 21% malnutrition is a defendable statistic but what I do know is that walking round Bangkok I have seen people living in unbelievable conditions of squalor and degradation (I will spare you from details). I just believe no human being should have to live like that.

So my answer to the OP question (Why Is Thailand A Third World Country?, Why are most Thais poor?) is simple: Poor education and poor economic management of the country.

OK…now back to the quips…