Thailand's Sufficiency Economy

[Jungian]

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.

You either didn't read the post and it is obvious you have not read His Majesty King Bhumibol Adulyadej's (King Rama IX) Sufficiency Economy. I would caution criticism of The Sufficient Economy, if you know what I mean. Bottom line is you need 5 rai of land to become self-sufficient and there is nothing wrong with the Sufficient Economy plan what so ever and it will work perfectly (take it from someone was raised as an American farmer not that I followed that path) the only thing is you need 5 rai of land...

I would also mention His Majesty has been awarded and reconized by the UN and the United States for his Sufficiency Economy Philosophy as well as given the Lifetime Achievement Award. I suppose you should also know His Majesty was awarded:

UN-Habitat Scroll of Honour Award (special citation) in recognition of His Majesty's outstanding contribution to sustaining habitats and improving the quality of the Thai people's lives, presented by United Nations Human Settlements Programme on 25 February 2004.

Golden Ear of Paddy, commemorating the outstanding leadership in Rural Development of His Majesty the King, presented by Asia-Pacific Rural and Agricultural, Credit Association Bangkok on 23 May 2005.

UNDP Human Development Lifetime Achievement Award in recognition of the global relevance of his call for a sufficiency approach to development, presented by United Nations Development Programme on 26 May 2006.

The first Dr. Norman E. Borlaug Medallion in recognition of His Majesty’s outstanding humanitarian service in alleviating starvation and poverty, presented by the World Food Prize Foundation on July 23, 2007.

So, I wouldn't be so quick to say it's a bad plan.

If you would like to know about His Majestys Sufficiency Economy here are somelinks links:

http://www.sufficiencyeconomy.org/en/

http://www.thaiwaysmagazine.com/thai_artic...cy_economy.html

http://www.chaipat.or.th/chaipat/journal/d.../e_economy.html

[Livinginexile]

This UN Paper gives a pretty good picture.

Thailand Human Development Report 2007

I tried to download the report, it's been removed.

Maybe this is part of the Sufficiency Economy.

ie: take everything and spend nothing

[CWMcMurray]

I think that the name "Sufficiency Economy" may not have the best, perphaps plan for "Long Term Sustainable Growth" may have been closer to what is being recomended.

The only problem I have with is the aim of telling the many "have nothings" that they should be satisfied and happy with what they have.

[Plus]

This UN Paper gives a pretty good picture.

Thailand Human Development Report 2007

I tried to download the report, it's been removed.

I posted a working link, it's on the global UN site

Download

>>>

Apparently there are still enough Thais to take this sufficiency principle seriously, despite raging capitalism and decline of Buddhism.

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.

I guess there are billions of people who realise that this simply will not work. There's no such thing as eternal growth.

[Heng]

The only problem I have with is the aim of telling the many "have nothings" that they should be satisfied and happy with what they have.

*unless they are willing to put in the time and effort to 'have' more.