Thailand Lacks Social Safety Net

[george]

Thailand lacks social safety net

BANGKOK: -- Thailand is in dire need of an effective social safety net in light of protracted global economic doldrums.

Ammar Siamwalla, honorary economist at the Thailand Development Research Institute (TDRI), said at a seminar held by the United Nations Friday that a deterioration in the banking sector is inevitable as a protracted recession in the US plunges local firms into insolvency.

"Certain firms have begun to show balance-sheet problems, like in the automotive sector. Many firms have survived on retained earnings and cash. But more will be insolvent as time passes. The problem in the banking sector could emerge at the end of this year, the end of next year, or in the next few years. We never know,'' he said.

The lack of a comprehensive database to identify and locate the poor could also lead to inefficient policies for addressing rising unemployment. The poor, defined as those who earn less than $2 a day, may currently stand at 8% of the population. During the 1997 economic crisis, this proportion hit 16%.

But Dr Ammar said people in extreme poverty make up 20% of the population. Poverty in Thailand could also rise rapidly as there is no effective social safety net to cushion the impact of economic downturns or natural disasters.

"Thailand does not have a welfare bureaucracy as the US and developed countries do. We cannot pinpoint who the poor are, where they are and when they increase,'' he said. "We lack a systematic approach to reducing the impacts of various shocks.''

Dr Ammar added that workers face shrinking payslips as their employers reduce work hours. Around 23 million of the country's 35 million labour force is in the informal sector and excluded from unemployment benefits.

According to a TDRI study, the rise in food and fuel prices last year primarily hurt the rural poor. But farmers generally tend to benefit from high food prices.

-- Bangkok Post 2009-03-06

[mhatami]

"But Dr Ammar said people in extreme poverty make up 20% of the population. Poverty in Thailand could also rise rapidly as there is no effective social safety net to cushion the impact of economic downturns or natural disasters."

I thought the family were the social safety net here in Thailand, or has it changed and the kids no longer take care of the family?

[Johpa]

I thought the family were the social safety net here in Thailand, or has it changed and the kids no longer take care of the family?

The kids have chased the IMF dream of globalization and have migrated to the cities whilst corporate agri-biz has taken over much of the land. There is some ability of the rural villages to absorb those wishing to return, but there is no longer enough land to open up to farming to the increased population. And of course the traditional Tai matrilocal culture, whereby sisters would tend to form clusters within villages that would lend themselves to mutual aid, have been under relentless pressure for decades from the East Asian male dominated ethos of the major Thai city populations who control the media.

[Pakeha]

"The lack of a comprehensive database to identify and locate the poor could also lead to inefficient policies for addressing rising unemployment. The poor, defined as those who earn less than $2 a day, may currently stand at 8% of the population. During the 1997 economic crisis, this proportion hit 16%."

Less than $2 day - I didn't realise it would be so low.

During 1997 - 16%. How high is it going to get this time around? 20%. 30% ???

[hammered]

The poor, defined as those who earn less than $2 a day, may currently stand at 8% of the population. During the 1997 economic crisis, this proportion hit 16%.

But Dr Ammar said people in extreme poverty make up 20% of the population. Poverty in Thailand could also rise rapidly as there is no effective social safety net to cushion the impact of economic downturns or natural disasters.

So the poor constitute 8% of the population but there are 20% living in extreme poverty? I always assumed extrme poverty would be a little worse than being poor. Anyway.

Thailand does have some social shcemes but they are all a bit of a hodge podge and not part of a planned overall social insurance shceme.

They have:

social security - for people who have been salaried at some time - includes health, unemployment, retirement, child allowance etc. It is though restrcited to those who have been salaried and still are plus those who can pay the 432 baht per month once no longer salaried.

health care - the 30-baht or free or whatever it is these days scheme is still running.

retirement. The government have just launched a 500 a month retirement allowance which villagers are signing up for.

When Thailand does get a stable political environment a full social insurance scheme for everyone in the country would be a good idea. Expanding the social secirty system they have may be the answer but getting those in rural areas to the level where they can afford the contributions may be difficult

[barky]

Some of the main reasons there is a lack of "safety net" is because too many Thais don't pay taxes and far too much of the tax revenue is either wasted by the government or simply stolen by politicians. Until the Thai populus gets up off it's rear end and demand improvements then nothing will change. However, one major stumbling block is that Thais in the main like things just the way they are (ie: corruption, waste, non payment of taxes).

[dumball]

I think you have hit the veritable NAIL on the HEAD .

[hammered]

Some of the main reasons there is a lack of "safety net" is because too many Thais don't pay taxes and far too much of the tax revenue is either wasted by the government or simply stolen by politicians. Until the Thai populus gets up off it's rear end and demand improvements then nothing will change. However, one major stumbling block is that Thais in the main like things just the way they are (ie: corruption, waste, non payment of taxes).

Make you right on the tax issue. It really needs sorting out. However, you are probably right about nobody wanting change.

[seri thai]

My understanding is that the Nations constitutional position on the"safety net" is the "sufficiency economy."

For anyone who snickered at that that in the last 10years it would appear that HRH had the right idea all along.

As such a village barter/co-operative economy has a better chance of riding out this mess that the wise ass international bankers have driven into.

Anyone have a spare rice paddy I can share in?

[Oberkommando]

My understanding is that the Nations constitutional position on the"safety net" is the "sufficiency economy."

For anyone who snickered at that that in the last 10years it would appear that HRH had the right idea all along.

As such a village barter/co-operative economy has a better chance of riding out this mess that the wise ass international bankers have driven into.

Anyone have a spare rice paddy I can share in?

Can I have some of what you are smoking/imbibing?

[Heng]

Stick with the 'not being in debt' and 'not living beyond your means' aspect of His Majesty's philosophy and you'll be fine. "Sufficiency' can be interpreted a number of ways and doesn't necessarily have to involve growing your own rice and veggies.

Don't buy 10 rai, when 8 rai is enough.

Don't send your kids to Chula when Kasetsart will do.

Don't buy that 5 bedroom, when a 4 bedroom fits your family perfectly.

Don't buy that Ferrari, when a BMW is just fine..

[henryalleman]

A social safety net is the best protection against a downfall spiral of the economy. because the simple fact that there is a bottom where the downfall spiral will stop. In countries without there is no bottom so the downfall spiral can't be stopped.

I mean a social safety net always guarantee an income, so they have always some money to spend, while in the other case this isn't so the economy can collapse completely because there is no more money to spend by the consumer.

my lack of English made it very difficult to explain, but I hope you understand the meaning.

[animatic]

A social safety net ensure the disabled can still eat and survive.

I see many conservatives say they should just go to work,

but in an economic downturm the 1st to go are the incompetent

holding a job working for a decent boos, but one who suddenly lacks funds to pay.

Some people are not able to make enough money to survive.

Couple that to being without a family support structure.

Do we as a society let them die or not?

Do we prevent them from resorting to 'survival necessity crime',

and the concurrent damage to society as a whole,

by giving them direct organized support,

or give them the SAME level of support,

in a incarceration setting after society deems them a threat to order?

Social safety nets are more than just for those beeing kept afloat,

but ALSO for those still doing ok that would be victimized by

the person jst trying to survive.

[Oberkommando]

The rest can eat cake while the coffers swell further past, what is it now? $40Billion?

[animatic]

Meaning foreign currency reserves?

Or some political jab at the government?

[Scott]

Many of the ideas of the sufficiency economy are, of course, very good. However, over time, the birth rate has dropped, so less children to support the elderly. Also, the working generation is supporting their own kids (and parents) and facing dwindling pay checks. As urbanization has grown fewer people are connected directly to the land and farming. Farming is also more expensive now--fewer buffaloes and more tractors, which require repair and fuel.

Not only in Thailand but in much of the world, there are simply too many people chasing too few resources. The most marginalized of these people will suffer the most.

[seri thai]

Stick with the 'not being in debt' and 'not living beyond your means' aspect of His Majesty's philosophy and you'll be fine. "Sufficiency' can be interpreted a number of ways and doesn't necessarily have to involve growing your own rice and veggies.

Don't buy 10 rai, when 8 rai is enough.

Don't send your kids to Chula when Kasetsart will do.

Don't buy that 5 bedroom, when a 4 bedroom fits your family perfectly.

Don't buy that Ferrari, when a BMW is just fine..

Thanks heng. My point too, but you put it more practically. Having said that, I expect to see a lot more people planting veggies in their garden in the future. and not only in Thailand!

[JoeThePoster]

Stick with the 'not being in debt' and 'not living beyond your means' aspect of His Majesty's philosophy and you'll be fine. "Sufficiency' can be interpreted a number of ways and doesn't necessarily have to involve growing your own rice and veggies.

Don't buy 10 rai, when 8 rai is enough.

Don't send your kids to Chula when Kasetsart will do.

Don't buy that 5 bedroom, when a 4 bedroom fits your family perfectly.

Don't buy that Ferrari, when a BMW is just fine..

Don't list 4 examples when 1 would be enough.

[Johpa]

A social safety net ensure the disabled can still eat and survive.

I see many conservatives say they should just go to work,

but in an economic downturm the 1st to go are the incompetent

holding a job working for a decent boos, but one who suddenly lacks funds to pay.

National TV news here in the US highlights that the newest inhabitants of a tent city in California are nor the incompetent but people who were solidly middle class who lost their homes due to unemployment. Perhaps they can be accused of modest incompetency in financial matters, but they were for the most part skilled workers.

Thanks heng. My point too, but you put it more practically. Having said that, I expect to see a lot more people planting veggies in their garden in the future. and not only in Thailand!

Local newspaper here in the US this morning notes a double digit increases in sales in local vegetable seed companies, with the number one seller being the venerable seed potato, the traditional staple of the poor in temperate climate zones.

[Thai at Heart]

And whilst the banks are being bailed out, wouldn't a tripling of welfare have got the money flowing into the system that much more quickly?

Aside from it's obvious social benefits, social security/unemployment payouts to individuals in this circumstance are one of the simplest ways to reduce the effect of a lack of spending by the ever increasing amount of unemployed.

[Heng]

Stick with the 'not being in debt' and 'not living beyond your means' aspect of His Majesty's philosophy and you'll be fine. "Sufficiency' can be interpreted a number of ways and doesn't necessarily have to involve growing your own rice and veggies.

Don't buy 10 rai, when 8 rai is enough.

Don't send your kids to Chula when Kasetsart will do.

Don't buy that 5 bedroom, when a 4 bedroom fits your family perfectly.

Don't buy that Ferrari, when a BMW is just fine..

Don't list 4 examples when 1 would be enough.

Have always believed in "sufficiency plus interest" myself.