Thai Pm Officially Launches Government Project To Stimulate Economy

[george]

Thai PM officially launches government project to stimulate economy

NONTHABURI: -- Thailand's Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva officially launched on Friday the government’s Stronger Thai project, valued at over one trillion baht, to boost the local economy in the next three years.

The prime minister presided over the opening of the Stronger Thai 2012 project at Impact Arena Exhibition Centre in Nonthaburi, a suburb of Bangkok.

He said the second round of the economic stimulus package will create investment opportunities with a Bt1.43 trillion action plan to be implemented from 2010 to 2012.

When the budget is allocated to its intended projects, it will create jobs for 1.5 million workers in the next three years.

Although Thailand’s public debt will increase to 58-59 per cent of the gross domestic product (GDP) in 2012, the government has estimated that the debt ratio can be managed. The public debt will drop below 50 per cent when the economy expands in 2016, Mr Abhisit said.

Investment under the Stronger Thai project involves upgrading public basic infrastructure, developing tourism and education and generating employment in the community.

Finance Minister Korn Chatikavanij said the budget for the Stronger Thai project was sought from the government loan. The Cabinet approved the first lot of the budget of almost Bt200 billion to be earmarked to four ministries to run several projects including road upgrade in the rural areas and Bang Yai-Bang Sue purple line electric train construction.

The Ministry of Finance has launched its Stronger Thai website www.tkk2555.com for the public to keep abreast of the progress of the projects and to check the transparency of bidding and procurement.

-- TNA 2009-09-04

[Rumfoord]

more photos can be found here, here and here

[TAWP]

All governments make the same mistake.

Stimulus packages are BS and will never be a healthy solution.

[jasreeve17]

The Dems are a nightmare - debt, debt debt...

[chrislarsson]

All governments make the same mistake.

Stimulus packages are BS and will never be a healthy solution.

That must be why China is doing so badly...

[KevinBloodyWilson]

There we go, "an occasion a day keeps reality at bay"

Or should that be a sound-bite a day?

Or a photo-op a day?

Or a nonsense a day?

[stumonster]

All governments make the same mistake.

Stimulus packages are BS and will never be a healthy solution.

real infrastructure projects are better than subsidsing purchases or tax reductions.

the world trading landscape is changing and Thailand is in a geographical position to benefit.

They are looking at Rail through to China , if they linked it to a port on the Indian ocean and added oil/gas pipelines they could become a very important link in China's rise as an economic giant.

[BEENTHEREDONETHAT]

If LOS is anything like most governments their projection will be about 10% of the final cost. Oh well it is only baht.

[TAWP]

All governments make the same mistake.

Stimulus packages are BS and will never be a healthy solution.

That must be why China is doing so badly...

A positive outcome doesn't mean the remedy was proper or even the best.

I can drink a glass of water and still recover from Swine Flu, where the proper medication might have take off a few days of suffering.

Here is some recommended reading for some of you: http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php?view=15 (found via http://libertariansinthailand.wordpress.co...airy-economics/ )

...cited the case of Japan as if it were evidence for his side of the argument. Exactly the opposite is true. Japan has done everything to itself that our government has done and is threatening to do to us, and with no results. From partial nationalization of its banking system to "stimulus" packages amounting to trillions of yen, from propping up zombie companies and dropping interest rates to zero, they've tried it all.

Naturally, the Keynesian response is that Japan simply didn't spend enough. Oh? Thanks to the misnamed "stimulus" packages that the Japanese government imposed on its hapless people, Japan is the most indebted country in the developed world. So becoming the most indebted country in the developed world -- and that's saying something -- still isn't enough spending for Keynesians?

And many other tidbits.

Edited September 4, 2009 by TAWP

[chrislarsson]

All governments make the same mistake.

Stimulus packages are BS and will never be a healthy solution.

That must be why China is doing so badly...

Here is some recommended reading for some of you: http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php?view=15 (found via http://libertariansinthailand.wordpress.co...airy-economics/ )

...cited the case of Japan as if it were evidence for his side of the argument. Exactly the opposite is true. Japan has done everything to itself that our government has done and is threatening to do to us, and with no results. From partial nationalization of its banking system to "stimulus" packages amounting to trillions of yen, from propping up zombie companies and dropping interest rates to zero, they've tried it all.

Naturally, the Keynesian response is that Japan simply didn't spend enough. Oh? Thanks to the misnamed "stimulus" packages that the Japanese government imposed on its hapless people, Japan is the most indebted country in the developed world. So becoming the most indebted country in the developed world -- and that's saying something -- still isn't enough spending for Keynesians?

And many other tidbits.

It's a very good article, but I don't really agree with it. Arguing that government is always bad, and the private sector good, is too simplistic. Reality is more complex that that.

I don't really think stimulus packages are the best option either. But what to do when an economy is in negative feedback loop, and no other tools are helping? Do you think the private sector can bring a country out of this?

Look at America. 70% of GDP comes from consumer spending. The times of keeping this spending up by easy loans is finished. In the next 5 years (at least), consumption will be mainly based on income, not increasing their debt. That means that people will either have to earn more money, or there need to be more consumers (i.e. lower unemployment), if there is going to be any growth.

At the moment, unemployment is going up every month (less consumers), and incomes are increasing very moderately, or not at all. This leads to less consumers, which in turn leads to higher unemployment, which in turns leads to....

So the question regarding getting out of this spiral is not about efficiency. It's about where demand is going to come from to break the spiral. There is where the role of government comes in.

But, of course, governments are supposed to save in good times, to be prepared for the inevitable bad times, so that they have the resources to give the economy the boost it needs to get back on its feet again. Unfortunately America has not done this.

[losworld]

Well the flipside is that this should bring the baht more in line with other currencies as it falls in the near future.

[animatic]

All governments make the same mistake.

Stimulus packages are BS and will never be a healthy solution.

That must be why China is doing so badly...

Here is some recommended reading for some of you: http://www.campaignforliberty.com/article.php?view=15 (found via http://libertariansinthailand.wordpress.co...airy-economics/ )

...cited the case of Japan as if it were evidence for his side of the argument. Exactly the opposite is true. Japan has done everything to itself that our government has done and is threatening to do to us, and with no results. From partial nationalization of its banking system to "stimulus" packages amounting to trillions of yen, from propping up zombie companies and dropping interest rates to zero, they've tried it all.

Naturally, the Keynesian response is that Japan simply didn't spend enough. Oh? Thanks to the misnamed "stimulus" packages that the Japanese government imposed on its hapless people, Japan is the most indebted country in the developed world. So becoming the most indebted country in the developed world -- and that's saying something -- still isn't enough spending for Keynesians?

And many other tidbits.

It's a very good article, but I don't really agree with it. Arguing that government is always bad, and the private sector good, is too simplistic. Reality is more complex that that.

I don't really think stimulus packages are the best option either. But what to do when an economy is in negative feedback loop, and no other tools are helping? Do you think the private sector can bring a country out of this?

Look at America. 70% of GDP comes from consumer spending. The times of keeping this spending up by easy loans is finished. In the next 5 years (at least), consumption will be mainly based on income, not increasing their debt. That means that people will either have to earn more money, or there need to be more consumers (i.e. lower unemployment), if there is going to be any growth.

At the moment, unemployment is going up every month (less consumers), and incomes are increasing very moderately, or not at all. This leads to less consumers, which in turn leads to higher unemployment, which in turns leads to....

So the question regarding getting out of this spiral is not about efficiency. It's about where demand is going to come from to break the spiral. There is where the role of government comes in.

But, of course, governments are supposed to save in good times, to be prepared for the inevitable bad times, so that they have the resources to give the economy the boost it needs to get back on its feet again. Unfortunately America has not done this.

Well we know how much the last 5 governments saved towards the future.

They all invested in various projects all running up debt.

The short time junta gov, doing that the least in many respects.

Did TRT save?

Did PPP? not on your tintype.

They didn't even WATCH as the USA imploded, too busy saving Thaksin and the 111

SO when it DID happen they were completely distracted.

Considering that Abhisit INHERITED a economy in near free-fall, he has held it together pretty well.

And stimulus does two things.

It gets projects started, even as they take time.

But that means longer term job prospects.

Also stimulus gives a sense of optimism in the people that SOMETHING is being done.

Jobs are starting to return and hopefully some tourism too.

It is a stop gap, but, what OTHER method would have helped?

What makes the markets optimistic is movement of some sort.

Optimistic markets bring in investment and THAT moves a country ahead.

[Plus]

Tawp, I'm not even going to read a libertarian article about virtues of the free market.

There's worldwide consensus that this current crisis was the result of trust in markets being able to monitor and correct themselves, and there's worldwide consensus that this idea needs to be buried and never touched anytime soon.

[Rumfoord]

Well we know how much the last 5 governments saved towards the future.

They all invested in various projects all running up debt.

The short time junta gov, doing that the least in many respects.

i don't know it.

would you care to explain and substantiate your statement?

thank you.

[animatic]

This isn't pre-school nor University, you can do your own research.

This isn't news, this is history, available in the internet.

Just think 5 words :

'Mega Projects' and 'Thailand Government Savings'.

[Rumfoord]

This isn't pre-school nor University, you can do your own research.

This isn't news, this is history, available in the internet.

Just think 5 words :

'Mega Projects' and 'Thailand Government Savings'.

as expected. bold statements, unable to back it up. blabber, big mouth, drivel.

[chrislarsson]

Well we know how much the last 5 governments saved towards the future.

They all invested in various projects all running up debt.

The short time junta gov, doing that the least in many respects.

i don't know it.

would you care to explain and substantiate your statement?

thank you.

The root of the current crisis, is excessive spending in the US and excessive saving in other parts of the world (mainly Asia) resulting in huge imbalances.

Thailand's debt ratio is pretty healthy at around 40% of GDP, and its foreign reserve is huge (above $100 billion).

[ding]

Tawp, I'm not even going to read a libertarian article about virtues of the free market.

There's worldwide consensus that this current crisis was the result of trust in markets being able to monitor and correct themselves, and there's worldwide consensus that this idea needs to be buried and never touched anytime soon.

So true. I don't even bother with idealogues feeding off the carcass of that dead horse anymore. They are indoctrinated beyond reason and in spite of real world evidence contradicting that paradigm. I knew Milton Friedman was off the mark in the 70's and some still can't figure out that they are chickens supporting Colonel Sanders. Friedman had catchy 1-liner quotes but "free" trade has only helped those that didn't need a dang bit of help in the first place. His idealogues HATE all government but would be the first to wither without a civil society, in the law of the jungle they propose.

yawn

[Plus]

Ding, I understand where you are coming from.

What I don't understand is why those free market remedies are proposed for Thailand now. Is it because it's kind of a hard sell at home so they look for impressionable third world countries?

Not to say that Tawp is a part of some conspiracy, but, to be honest, why is he proposing solutions that would be laughed off in the country that needs them most? Does he think that we are some gullible bunch easy to be converted or what?

After 1997 crisis Thailand has took that same free-market medicine and it is generally agreed that it wasn't a right prescription. Why is it offered again? There's a smell of snake oil salesman here.

[chrislarsson]

This isn't pre-school nor University, you can do your own research.

This isn't news, this is history, available in the internet.

Just think 5 words :

'Mega Projects' and 'Thailand Government Savings'.

as expected. bold statements, unable to back it up. blabber, big mouth, drivel.

Thailand repaid all of its loans to IMF by 2003, four years ahead of schedule.

[chrislarsson]

Ding, I understand where you are coming from.

What I don't understand is why those free market remedies are proposed for Thailand now. Is it because it's kind of a hard sell at home so they look for impressionable third world countries?

Not to say that Tawp is a part of some conspiracy, but, to be honest, why is he proposing solutions that would be laughed off in the country that needs them most? Does he think that we are some gullible bunch easy to be converted or what?

After 1997 crisis Thailand has took that same free-market medicine and it is generally agreed that it wasn't a right prescription. Why is it offered again? There's a smell of snake oil salesman here.

In the 1997 crisis, IMF forced many things in exchange for its bailout packages; some good, some bad. Among the bad ones were high interest rates. As you can see now, America themselves has a 0% interest rate in their own financial crisis.

Korea and Malaysia were the only countries who could afford not take the medicine offered by IMF, and they were also the two first countries to recover from the crisis.

So why did IMF try to force high interest rates? Because IMF's primary mission was to ensure that banks in the West would get their loans to Asia repaid, and the mission to help countries in crisis was secondary (high interest rates is more likely to cause higher exchange rates).

[animatic]

This isn't pre-school nor University, you can do your own research.

This isn't news, this is history, available in the internet.

Just think 5 words :

'Mega Projects' and 'Thailand Government Savings'.

as expected. bold statements, unable to back it up. blabber, big mouth, drivel.

Thailand repaid all of its loans to IMF by 2003, four years ahead of schedule.

Then consider the longer term, lower interst loans Thaksin took from Singapore

to pay off the IMF early. And thus end the strong medicin attached to IMF loans.

Singapore makes more money in the end, thatkisn gets a less encumber playing field,

and no more prying eyes on his deals. And Thaksin makes a better trade friend for

his interests, and political fodder for local consumption.

More slight of hand.

Slag off the big bad IMF...

of which Thailand IS a founding member by the way,

and then quietly refinance the loan.

Then later he quietly prepares the Shin Sale to... who, WHY SINGAPORE,

and then jigers the tax laws just before hand...

Something impossible with IMF constraints of fiscal probity in effect.

[SHYTALK]

Wow the guys in the pics sure look pleased about the size of the stimulus.

One for you ,one for me.

How much of that will get "donated " to the democrats, about 258 methinks, they seem to like that number.

But only after the coupmakers have filled their boots.

[sokal]

All governments make the same mistake.

Stimulus packages are BS and will never be a healthy solution.

That must be why China is doing so badly...

China had real money to spend, they did not borrow it. They still don't make any sense and never will. Keynesian economics is BS

[sokal]

I

t's a very good article, but I don't really agree with it. Arguing that government is always bad, and the private sector good, is too simplistic. Reality is more complex that that.

I don't really think stimulus packages are the best option either. But what to do when an economy is in negative feedback loop, and no other tools are helping? Do you think the private sector can bring a country out of this?

Look at America. 70% of GDP comes from consumer spending. The times of keeping this spending up by easy loans is finished. In the next 5 years (at least), consumption will be mainly based on income, not increasing their debt. That means that people will either have to earn more money, or there need to be more consumers (i.e. lower unemployment), if there is going to be any growth.

At the moment, unemployment is going up every month (less consumers), and incomes are increasing very moderately, or not at all. This leads to less consumers, which in turn leads to higher unemployment, which in turns leads to....

So the question regarding getting out of this spiral is not about efficiency. It's about where demand is going to come from to break the spiral. There is where the role of government comes in.

But, of course, governments are supposed to save in good times, to be prepared for the inevitable bad times, so that they have the resources to give the economy the boost it needs to get back on its feet again. Unfortunately America has not done this.

The reason the US has 70% of its economy in consumer spending is because it has huge trade deficiets. All the US ever exports is debt. Every time the Chinese economy is mentioned on TV they show people working hard in huge factories, every time the American economy is mentioned on TV they show fat Americans in huge shopping centers.

This video simply proves that Keynes makes things worse

[sokal]

Tawp, I'm not even going to read a libertarian article about virtues of the free market.

There's worldwide consensus that this current crisis was the result of trust in markets being able to monitor and correct themselves, and there's worldwide consensus that this idea needs to be buried and never touched anytime soon.

You have it 100% wrong. The reason the whole crisis happend was from moral hazard that the government created. Fannie May and Freddie mac were government institutions that were co-signing peoples mortgages for them. Also the federal reserve is CONTROLLING interest rates and keeping them too low.

Would you sign co-sign anyones mortgage ?

would you lend your own money out at .05% interest ?

Niether would anyone else except government of course. The government created the problem.

[sokal]

Tawp, I'm not even going to read a libertarian article about virtues of the free market.

There's worldwide consensus that this current crisis was the result of trust in markets being able to monitor and correct themselves, and there's worldwide consensus that this idea needs to be buried and never touched anytime soon.

So true. I don't even bother with idealogues feeding off the carcass of that dead horse anymore. They are indoctrinated beyond reason and in spite of real world evidence contradicting that paradigm. I knew Milton Friedman was off the mark in the 70's and some still can't figure out that they are chickens supporting Colonel Sanders. Friedman had catchy 1-liner quotes but "free" trade has only helped those that didn't need a dang bit of help in the first place. His idealogues HATE all government but would be the first to wither without a civil society, in the law of the jungle they propose.

yawn

So true ? I hope you where joking.

[Thai at Heart]

Tawp, I'm not even going to read a libertarian article about virtues of the free market.

There's worldwide consensus that this current crisis was the result of trust in markets being able to monitor and correct themselves, and there's worldwide consensus that this idea needs to be buried and never touched anytime soon.

You have it 100% wrong. The reason the whole crisis happend was from moral hazard that the government created. Fannie May and Freddie mac were government institutions that were co-signing peoples mortgages for them. Also the federal reserve is CONTROLLING interest rates and keeping them too low.

Would you sign co-sign anyones mortgage ?

would you lend your own money out at .05% interest ?

Niether would anyone else except government of course. The government created the problem.

The start of the problem was the creation of the Community Reinvestment Act about 30 years ago. The end was the government being either unable or willingly unable to understand the concept of securitisation of loans.

I remember listening to a George Carlin skit about the use of language to make things sound better.

He described how Shell Shock eventually became Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.

Sub-prime securitisation is just another way of saying we actively granted a lot of "Non Performing Loans".

I think those of us in Thailand long enough remember those don't we.

[animatic]

While the CRA set a ground work for higher risk loans,

it still was intended to improve areas of poverty and social squalor,

and not as a banking issue. It did do that job.

I have a friend in NYC who got one of these loans, and has made a solid go of it.

It was and often DID work well. When crack cocaine come on the scene in the 80-90s

many did fail, but that didn't bring down the system.

What was the final things to swamp the boat?

Under regulated sales of repackaged 'Mortgage Risk Derivative Instruments'.

A truly DAFT concept, created buy a greedy fool or two,

and seconded by some even more fooolish politicians.

And the final trigger or coup de grace was the last Bush term/last year artificial oil price raise,

that I predicted in 1999 when he won the nomination.

That was clearly the quid pro quo for Dubya's 8 years in power.

I don't think the 'brilliant minds' that let that sop to big oil float,

imagined the knock on effect would be so devastating.

Edited September 7, 2009 by animatic

[TAWP]

Tawp, I'm not even going to read a libertarian article about virtues of the free market.

There's worldwide consensus that this current crisis was the result of trust in markets being able to monitor and correct themselves, and there's worldwide consensus that this idea needs to be buried and never touched anytime soon.

Ofcourse you will not, because reading [an opponents views and forming your response to them] might make you enlightened and that is a risk you cannot take.

Edited September 7, 2009 by TAWP