Thailand's Sufficiency Economy

[JimmyTheMook]

Can someone please explain this fascinating concept ?

[Dakhar]

Well, Thailand is soon going to perfecting this economic theory pretty darn soon.

[JohnGotti]

google.com

[Koo82]

It's like the poor should be happy with their poor lives because Abhisit cannot make money now and has to spend a lot.

[Plus]

This UN Paper gives a pretty good picture.

Thailand Human Development Report 2007

[Abrak]

This UN Paper gives a pretty good picture.

Thailand Human Development Report 2007

And how much intellectual credibility due you think one should give this report given...

1) --- deleted by mario2008 ---

2) The person(s) who created this theory has made no serious economic attempt to justify it.

3) They do not seem to recognize an individual rights to vote which if that is not something that should be considered 'sufficient' it is difficult to take the underlying theory seriously.

4) To the extent there is a credible theory it will never be taken seriously if it exposed by 'Eton/Oxford' PM like Aphisit - I have great respect for him but he is no position to explain such theories from his privileged upbringing and neither are others.

[Plus]

I would try to judge report on its merits rather than on anonimous Internet rants.

I guess you haven't tried to actually read it as all the links on that page appears to be broken....

[Plus]

Working link from global UN site:

Download

Or Thai news release from local UNDP

http://www.undp.or.th/newsandevents/2007/news_20070109.html

[dbrenn]

It's like the poor should be happy with their poor lives because Abhisit cannot make money now and has to spend a lot.

Inteseting thought - it's what's left over for the Thai people after Abhisit has paid off the army, Newin, the PAD et al

[cmsally]

Working link from global UN site:

Download

Or Thai news release from local UNDP

http://www.undp.or.th/newsandevents/2007/news_20070109.html

An admirable report on trying to explain something without actually explaining it!

[BSJ]

Tough question!

My take on it is the wording doesn't fully convey the meaning of what His Majesty the King said when first describing a 'Sufficiency Economy'. As an economic term 'sufficiency' doesn't sit well. In a capitalist sense it maybe hard to interprete what His Majesty the King meant....and seeing it through Western eyes there is no right or wrong, but there is a hint of vagueness (maybe).

All in all, I think the words were chosen to give meaning to a concept that involved nation building within the Kingdom without leaving anyone behind or allowing the Kingdom to suffer at the hands of outsiders. And that's a good thing.

[JetsetBkk]

Sufficiency Economy advocates taking the middle path in life as the optimal route for personal conduct at all levels: individuals, families and communities. It counsels moderation, self-reliance, honesty and integrity, while exercising knowledge with prudence.

Sufficiency Economy posits that an individual should be able to lead a reasonably comfortable life without excess or overindulgence in luxury. That is, if extravagance brings happiness it is permissible only as long as it is within the means of the individual.

Makes sense to me!

http://www.reflectedknowledge.com/clients/...sufficiency.htm

[mommysboy]

Yes, read in to it what you will as there is precious little guidance.

Sufficiency from an economic standpoint: Thailand may be able to feed itself given the amount of food grown, but it's economy is based on exports and tourism.

Sufficiency as a concept applied to Thailand: yeah right! just form an orderly queue and don't take more than you need

Ah Nostalgia!

[mommysboy]

Yes, read in to it what you will as there is precious little guidance.

Sufficiency from an economic standpoint: Thailand may be able to feed itself given the amount of food grown, but it's economy is based on exports and tourism.

Sufficiency as a concept applied to Thailand: yeah right! just form an orderly queue and don't take more than you need

Ah Nostalgia!

[Plus]

Sufficiency in this theory doesn't mean being self-sufficient at all. Sufficient here means "enough".

It's a theory based on a Buddhist premise that greed is bad and is the ultimate source of suffering, and that one should know when to say "that's enough", and gain wisdom and knowledge to know when it is actually "enough".

There's little surprise that it gets very negative reactions from some westerners who ridicule people's refusal to "keep up with the Joneses".

Suffuciency lelvel is a very personal thing, you have to learn to live at peace with yourself first. Opponents, on the other hand, always point to someone else - they have more than you, they don't follow it themselves, they want to keep you in slavery and so on. It's always about "them".

Sufficiency theory is first of all about "you", and when you are stong and confident in yourself, then you can look at "them" without envy that eats away your heart and fuels your greed.

Western economic model is built on "greed is good" principle, and Buddhists are not going to accept it, that's it.

It fits very nicely in UN sustainable development paradigm.

[mauGR1]

Suffuciency lelvel is a very personal thing, you have to learn to live at peace with yourself first. Opponents, on the other hand, always point to someone else - they have more than you, they don't follow it themselves, they want to keep you in slavery and so on. It's always about "them".

Sufficiency theory is first of all about "you", and when you are stong and confident in yourself, then you can look at "them" without envy that eats away your heart and fuels your greed.

Western economic model is built on "greed is good" principle, and Buddhists are not going to accept it, that's it.

It fits very nicely in UN sustainable development paradigm.

well said,Plus

I would add that we are constantly brainwashed into buying things that are not necessary at all.

The more things we have,the less happy we are.

The real wealth is a healthy body,a wonderful tool to explore existence

[cmsally]

Buddhist principles are all very well but it is very vague for an economic model. For a start you have a vast sector of the population that doesn't really have enough to subsist on or to lever themselves out of debt. It is not a case of striving to be as good as the next Somchai, it is making enough to pay the bills.

To go back to the "on the farm" argument is also not that simple as farming involves investment to make a living and often renews the cycle of debt.

This model depending on how it is defined can also be problematic for advancement of society.

I would not agree that greed is one of the defining factors of society. There are also the factors of motivation and life satisfaction. It is not necessarily greed that drives people to better their situation many want an education, knowledge, experience. How can we say these are not desirable; most of us have the benefit of having been able to achieve these to some degree.

For the majority of Thais they would just like what a lot of Westerners see as basics as well as a good education for their family. Although a curb in the desire for material goods is a desirable thing, for this to take effect you would have to start with a massive attitude change at the top levels, and it is a very small sector of the population here. However to strive for a consensus that in some way condones a static nature as desirable in society is a bit of an escape tactic.

[Heng]

It is not a case of striving to be as good as the next Somchai, it is making enough to pay the bills.

Sometimes it isn't, often times it is. All you have to do is ask folks what kind of bills they have... if they get a sheepish look on their faces, then you know they have probably been less than 'por piang' in their expenditures.

[Plus]

Suffiency does not restricts one's personal growth in any way, be it education or motivation, it only protects one from excess greed, which usually ends in living beyond the means and being forced to spend all one's income on interest payments.

Traditionally Thai/Chinese want to pay for everything in cash upfront, no credit, not debts. Debts are considered evil.

Sufficiency economy is far more accomodating, it is not against borrowing per se, just knowing your limits.

[cmsally]

In this case it seems to be more of a loose thesis on the pitfalls of greed and not an economic theory.

Seem to be floating somewhere between Buddhism and the Chinese work & save ethic.

[jayboy]

Suffiency does not restricts one's personal growth in any way, be it education or motivation, it only protects one from excess greed ...

I don't think that the course of the last couple of years has demonstrated other that living within one's means is very good sense.

The trouble is, in the Thailand context, is that excess greed has been very much the distinguishing characteristic of the rich urban business class - not the relatively poor rural majority at whom the lessons of self sufficiency are normally directed (small scale traditional farming etc).One also gets the very strong impression that in Thailand it has a "know your place" theme.Won't work of course.

The hypocrisy in all this is of course offensive.It would a pity however if the essential good sense of the philosophy was overlooked.

[Plus]

in the Thailand context, is that excess greed has been very much the distinguishing characteristic of the rich urban business class

Not quite so, many have learned their lessons after 1997, and many from the "old money" circles live actually quite frugal lives, certainly without flaunting their money.

Modesty still goes a long way in Thai society and after all these years we haven't seen any personal scandal involving proponents of sufficiency economy.

it seems to be more of a loose thesis on the pitfalls of greed and not an economic theory.

If you get your info from my contributions in this thread, yes.

And I don't think it would ever qualify for a "real" economic theory anyway.

[bertlamar]

based on his numerous birthday speech references, and based on sound logic, sufficiency economy would appear to be basically

- living within your means

- sustainable development

- the development of longterm enduring shareholder value

apparently get rich quick schemes during the TRT years are better than the 3 principles above? Well if they were, we'd be the only country not being touched by global recession....sadly some of those get rich quick schemes (cheap debt, subsidised deiesel, etc) don't work long term, and there's ample evidence that the poor are in more debt now than before despite all the money wasted on OTOP, village funds, war on dark influences, etc. That said, 30b healthcare and a few other ideas seem like nice ways to help make the poor's lives better while keeping within their means.

Which is why most successful businesses, organisations, communities and families adher to these 3 principles (also doctrines of most religions and philosophies including Buddhism).

If the poor knew much about these 3 principles, they would have countless opportunities to not be poor; it is precisely because they don't do the last one that they can't increase their income, and because of the first one with rampant borrowing and getting into debt or the second one where they overfarm/over harvest/over produce that their meagre income isn't even sustainable.

Hard to feel sorry for the poor when you can see countless examples of SOME poor people rising from nothing within a generation; the idea you can get that rise instantly from some square faced politician's handouts reeks of get rich quick schemes.

And get rich quick = get poor quicker.

Edited May 21, 2009 by bertlamar

[Texpat]

In a capitalistic economy, like Thailand, risk is inextricably linked with reward. If you're satisfied with slow progress, this ain't a bad tact. But you might find yourself at the back of the pack -- look no further than Singapore.

In the sense that I try my hardest not to rely on anyone else here (water storage/not reliant on city plumbing, car/no taxis, vegetable garden/small but not insignificant) I agree with the sufficiency economy.

Only because it relieves me from having to deal with cheats, schemers and idiots. The more one can isolate himself from dependence on others, the better off he is.

I'm launching a communications satellite from my backyard next week. UBC be warned.

[rgs2001uk]

Sufficiency in this theory doesn't mean being self-sufficient at all. Sufficient here means "enough".

It's a theory based on a Buddhist premise that greed is bad and is the ultimate source of suffering, and that one should know when to say "that's enough", and gain wisdom and knowledge to know when it is actually "enough".

There's little surprise that it gets very negative reactions from some westerners who ridicule people's refusal to "keep up with the Joneses".

Suffuciency lelvel is a very personal thing, you have to learn to live at peace with yourself first. Opponents, on the other hand, always point to someone else - they have more than you, they don't follow it themselves, they want to keep you in slavery and so on. It's always about "them".

Sufficiency theory is first of all about "you", and when you are stong and confident in yourself, then you can look at "them" without envy that eats away your heart and fuels your greed.

Western economic model is built on "greed is good" principle, and Buddhists are not going to accept it, that's it.

It fits very nicely in UN sustainable development paradigm.

I sometimes ask myself if I am actually in a country that follows Buddhist teachings, irrespective of what the TAT brochures etc may tell us.

Never mind keeping up with the Joneses, most seemed to me more concerned with keeping up with the Somchais.

Face face face, seems to be everything, flaunt it if you have got it, if you dont have it or cant afford it no problem get it on credit, credit risk, bank refused your loan, no problem go see your local loan shark and pay back 5% per month.

This not only allows you to look good, it also gives you the warm satisfaction than you have just rubbed your next door neighbours nose in it.

Jeez when some people have more respect for the loan sharks than they do for themself what hope is there?

Western economic model is built on "greed is good" principle, and Buddhists are not going to accept it, that's it.

I dont know in what part of the Kingdom you live, not going to accept it, they have embraced it and welcomed it with open arms.

The phrase som nam na springs to mind.

[Texpat]

Western economic model is built on "greed is good" principle, and Buddhists are not going to accept it, that's it.

I'm a western male. I've had the same mobile phone since 2002. Still works fine.

I'd guess less than one percent of Thai mobile phone owners can make that claim.

They're as drawn to progress and advancement as anyone.

You can't put the genie back in the bottle.

Edited May 21, 2009 by Texpat

[tomjoad56]

The idea of a sufficiency economy is simply not viable in the modern world. You can't keep tempting people with all sorts of material goods and then ask them to reject all but the basics. You can't make it really easy for folks to buy cars (because that's good for the economy) and advocate a simple life at the same time. I live in Bangkok and I would describe this place as the poster child for how not to build a city. Where is the leadership? How bad does the traffic have to get before restrictions are placed on driving? I don't understand anyone who owns a car here, but that speaks volumes about how silly a notion a "sufficiency economy" is.

[abdulrahman]

Sufficient economy is a dream.A beautiful,worthy,impossible dream.Remember Socialism?It was a dream,too.

ALL the Countries in the world are trying to escape the financial crisis.How?Starting to consume anew,more as before,the PIL must go up every year,people must buy,use,throw away,more and more.You are indoctrinated from a very young age to do so,in Thailand as everywhere else.

It's the Capitalism:every Country embraced it and the wise words of His Majesty the King are not enough to change this fact.

Only when all resources will be used up people will awake.Too late.And the poorest will suffer the most!

[Texpat]

Didn't the supreme ruler recently get some new fancy yellow cars?

What was wrong with the old ones?

[Heng]

Apples and oranges. One of the major points of being sufficient is not to compare yourself to those who have more than you. That only plants the seeds of living beyond one's means. It's not a team sport.

I think I can safely say that I lead a fairly "sufficient" life. That's not to say I don't have toys though. It'd be against the spirit of 'sufficiency' to look at someone else's toys or whatever assets in general and automatically assume that that could be 'enough' for you as well. It can be, but you have to work to make it possible, NOT just acquire the assets first.

Edited May 22, 2009 by Heng