Has Thailand Made Progress? Thaksin Taunts

[tig28]

He wasn't a democratically elected anything at the time of the coup. He was a caretaker PM, probably the longest caretaker PM in the history of the world.

I would remind you that this government first won in 2001 (the first Thai government to survive the full 4 year term) --- then they won again in 2005 with the first outright majority ever --- then 2007 ......

There may just be some reason as to why he was a caretaker PM .... i wonder ......

[tigerbalm]

The truth is he was the best PM EVER FOR THE POOR AND NOT SO GOOD FOR THE MIDDLE UPPER CLASS, SADLY THAILAND HAS BEEN IN TURMOIL FOR THE LAST 3 YEARS AND THERE IS NO END IN SIGHT

Yes i hear this from a lot of people in my village about Mt T being good for the poor people the cheap loans to the farmers and the 50Bht health scheme, i would be interested on what your self and others think of this and other things he did for the rural people How did it benefit those peoples lives .

[Plus]

By the way, I wonder if anyone can name a Thai PM not so long ago who was elected PM by parliament after his party got about 13 seats?

Seni Pramoj, in the 70s.

I cheated and looked him up though - there were two brothers, Seni and Kukrit and I was confused which one did what. Kukrit was installed as a PM later, after the military seized power.

[samran]

The truth is he was the best PM EVER FOR THE POOR AND NOT SO GOOD FOR THE MIDDLE UPPER CLASS, SADLY THAILAND HAS BEEN IN TURMOIL FOR THE LAST 3 YEARS AND THERE IS NO END IN SIGHT

Yes i hear this from a lot of people in my village about Mt T being good for the poor people the cheap loans to the farmers and the 50Bht health scheme, i would be interested on what your self and others think of this and other things he did for the rural people How did it benefit those peoples lives .

and also ask them how much debt they are now in and whether they've had to sell their property as a result?

[Gary A]

I'll tell you what I have seen in the last couple of years. The police are obscenely and openly much more corrupt. Plus being greedy to the point of being ridiculous. The military has gotten a MUCH larger budget and crime has increased substantially.

Appointments are being made because of debts owed to the yellow shirts. Is this a sign of a better government?

[TAWP]

I'll tell you what I have seen in the last couple of years. The police are obscenely and openly much more corrupt. Plus being greedy to the point of being ridiculous. The military has gotten a MUCH larger budget and crime has increased substantially.

Appointments are being made because of debts owed to the yellow shirts. Is this a sign of a better government?

But you see it through your red-tinted glasses.

So some might not agree with what you see or the conclusions you make from it.

[caf]

I wonder if Netanhyahu and Timoshenko among others should be removed from PM positions after not winning elections but being voted in as PM in parliament?

Amazing how so many people dont understand the (Westminster) Parliamentary system which Thailand in a slightly adapted form uses. I guess if bought up under one of the several different presidential systems that is understandable. Usually the head of the largest party becomes PM. However, that is not a requirement as the parliament of the elected representatives of the people has the authority to select anyone within constitutional limits they want to be PM. It really doeant matter if they are from a party of one or 400 seats and in some cases (not Thailand) it doesnt even matter if they are an MP. The parliamentary system also has the inbuilt check that if a PM falls or is disgraced then a new election doesnt have to be called but parliament can then choose another PM although in many cases as in Thailand a PM has the right to disolve the parliament. If as in Thailand the PM chooses not to disolve the parliament (Somchai made this decision) then the selection of the next PM is returned to parliament. What a parlaiment does is judged by the people when they reselect their representatives at a subsequent election and they can turf them out if they dont like what they did. However while in session the parliamnet is the supreme body and can do what it wants within constitutional limits including changing which party the PM coems from. This is not unique to Thailand in any way. Abhisit has as much right to be PM as any other constiotutionally qualified person who parliament choose. That is quite simple and that is under the parlaimentary system democratic. The people as mentioned get their say later although unless th esystem is changed will continue to not have a direct choice of who the PM is. In many places using this system the head of state invites a leader to form a government. That is how Netanyahu fornmed his government. Inviting the head of a party without the most seats in parlaiment to form a government.... That must cause utter confusion in the minds of those who confuse presidential systems with parlaimanetary ones not that it would bnother pure propagandists tryign to sell a marketable line.

By the way, I wonder if anyone can name a Thai PM not so long ago who was elected PM by parliament after his party got about 13 seats?

Sometimes it is better to look at things away from the direct propaganda of Red and yellow and the power players. Parlaimentary Poltics 101 althoug simplistic still clearly has something to offer.

Some interesting points and pretty balanced but I think to say the system is a "slightly adapted form" of the UK system is very wide of the mark. The military have no role and there are checks and balances that work differently. The privy council works differently etc.

Overall, I would say so different as not to be comparable.

[caf]

I'll tell you what I have seen in the last couple of years. The police are obscenely and openly much more corrupt. Plus being greedy to the point of being ridiculous. The military has gotten a MUCH larger budget and crime has increased substantially.

Appointments are being made because of debts owed to the yellow shirts. Is this a sign of a better government?

But you see it through your red-tinted glasses.

So some might not agree with what you see or the conclusions you make from it.

Whatever tint of glasses or no glasses at all; the facts about the police the military and appointments speak for themselves. And as already posted, not comparable to other democratic systems. in my view.

[TAWP]

Whatever tint of glasses or no glasses at all; the facts about the police the military and appointments speak for themselves. And as already posted, not comparable to other democratic systems. in my view.

Police corruption has very little to do with the system itself. And as Koo82 proudly proclaimed the police to be pro-red, what should be then conclude from them being more [in Gary's opinion] openly corrupt as of late? Intentional disruption of the state?

The military's budget has been reduced as of late and that is an indication opposing with that you guys are trying to infer.

The appointments of anyone with a touch of yellow can be seen as that there are people with qualifications [read: connections, as it always works here] that also happened to support the yellow campaign. But no major player has received any benefits afaik and trying to exclude anyone with any hint of yellow and red in the current mess would sadly be hard to do, as many are slightly tainted.

Flamethrower would of course be a good start...

[Publicus]

The UN is having its annual general assembly so let's ask the UNGA to work out an international settlement of Thailand's source of its instability and madness of the past several years.

Ship Thaksin to Honduras and send Zalaya to Thailand.

Neither deposed leader will accept the rulings of the high courts of of his country and each Zalaya and Thaksin won't quit raising hel_l in their own homelands. (Even Pinochet cleared out of Chile when the law finally began to zero in on him, and Pinochet went as quietly as possible although the quiet didn't last long enuff for him.)

Each Thaksin and Zalaya want to run their own country, so let's encourage the UN to give a country to each.

Here Zalaya could be appointed a deputy PM with an inactive portfolio and there Thaksin could find his happiness and fulfillment by using his expertise of helping the poor in Honduras as there are plenty of 'em there too.

And they lived happily forever after.

[wayfarer108]

Kevin: Thanks. It's nice to see someone argue the facts and win. It's been a good and educational discussion.

Too bad for the people whose basic arguement is that they don't like him and he shouldn't be allowed to come back (to politics).

Unless there is some remedial attempt to allow the electoral process to work in the country, there will be little chance of resolving the conflicts facing the nation.

Unfortunately none of Kevin's 'facts' are worthy of that nomenclature, so he is not even in the competition

[hammered]

I wonder if Netanhyahu and Timoshenko among others should be removed from PM positions after not winning elections but being voted in as PM in parliament?

Amazing how so many people dont understand the (Westminster) Parliamentary system which Thailand in a slightly adapted form uses. I guess if bought up under one of the several different presidential systems that is understandable. Usually the head of the largest party becomes PM. However, that is not a requirement as the parliament of the elected representatives of the people has the authority to select anyone within constitutional limits they want to be PM. It really doeant matter if they are from a party of one or 400 seats and in some cases (not Thailand) it doesnt even matter if they are an MP. The parliamentary system also has the inbuilt check that if a PM falls or is disgraced then a new election doesnt have to be called but parliament can then choose another PM although in many cases as in Thailand a PM has the right to disolve the parliament. If as in Thailand the PM chooses not to disolve the parliament (Somchai made this decision) then the selection of the next PM is returned to parliament. What a parlaiment does is judged by the people when they reselect their representatives at a subsequent election and they can turf them out if they dont like what they did. However while in session the parliamnet is the supreme body and can do what it wants within constitutional limits including changing which party the PM coems from. This is not unique to Thailand in any way. Abhisit has as much right to be PM as any other constiotutionally qualified person who parliament choose. That is quite simple and that is under the parlaimentary system democratic. The people as mentioned get their say later although unless th esystem is changed will continue to not have a direct choice of who the PM is. In many places using this system the head of state invites a leader to form a government. That is how Netanyahu fornmed his government. Inviting the head of a party without the most seats in parlaiment to form a government.... That must cause utter confusion in the minds of those who confuse presidential systems with parlaimanetary ones not that it would bnother pure propagandists tryign to sell a marketable line.

By the way, I wonder if anyone can name a Thai PM not so long ago who was elected PM by parliament after his party got about 13 seats?

Sometimes it is better to look at things away from the direct propaganda of Red and yellow and the power players. Parlaimentary Poltics 101 althoug simplistic still clearly has something to offer.

Some interesting points and pretty balanced but I think to say the system is a "slightly adapted form" of the UK system is very wide of the mark. The military have no role and there are checks and balances that work differently. The privy council works differently etc.

Overall, I would say so different as not to be comparable.

I am looking at the parlaiment only in terms of westminster system and not relvent militaries or privvy councils. I say adapted form of the westminster system as the upper houses are different. The lower Thai house and system is very similar to that in the UK. This was written in response to selection of PM and not about anything else on the politcal agenda. Various colours may have points in the wider poltical arena but in respect to the selction of PM abhisit is as valid as the next man or woman constitutionally allowable. There may well be other criticisms of the system but the selction of PM whether Samak or Somchai or Abhisit or whoever the parlaiment chooses next is not differnet to what could happen in a westminister style parlaiment including westminister itself. In that way Thai parlaiment is very close to any other westminster system.

Imho we need to concentrate on the real issues rather than the propaganda pieces. The Abhisit thing is a side issue and easy enough to understand in technical and fully acceptable legal international parlaimentary or democratic terms. His weakness is not he isnt as valid a PM as Samak but that his party has a weak if any mandate although admittedly the concept of mandate is a difficult one even for advanced democracies and isnt really discussed in terms of Thai poltics where the political analysts and politicans still stick to ideas of winner takes all which surprisngly or maybe not is a less sophisticated view of democracy than that of the Thai people according to the Asia Foundation survey in which the people saw democracy more in term of rights than of representative selection. That sophisitication by the way was a nice result to see even if few analsyts if any commented on it.

[Samuian]

I'm sorry. I have out-argued you and I understand you are unhappy with it. I apologise for my offence. Tell me where you live and I'll come round and buy you a beer to cry into.

did you learn this in the psychology training camp "how to out argue someone - in simply telling him" ?

that (I assume) you did....

Quite funny, but then, maybe it ought to be....

So if "Thaksin was elected" (the time when the other parties boycotted the elections last time in 2006) .... why he didn't stay down then, when he was only a caretaker PM, when he said so?

okay, okay he wanted to "serve and save" his billions - ahem no, no, no - "the country and the poor"!

And all the trouble he is stirring up now from up road the reds, his phone ins, from his SELF CHOSEN exile, is not

because he fled the law, nope, because he "loves his country!

Yes you out-argued everyone - except the truth and the accompanying facts surrounding this scoundrel's act's!

Edited September 24, 2009 by Samuian

[Plus]

I'll tell you what I have seen in the last couple of years. The police are obscenely and openly much more corrupt. Plus being greedy to the point of being ridiculous. The military has gotten a MUCH larger budget and crime has increased substantially.

Appointments are being made because of debts owed to the yellow shirts. Is this a sign of a better government?

Plus being greedy to the point of being ridiculous? I've been accused of many things here, but greedy?

Seriously - I think you are mixing up your personal observations with opinions on national issues.

For example - increased police corruption - is it the case in your neighborhood? If so, then why do you project it on the whole country? And, as others said - the police are proudly pro-Thaksin, so how is it Democrats or the military fault?

What appointments were made as debts to yellow shirts? Is it from your personal experience, or are you talking about an aide to the Science Minister who worked for her for twenty years and happens to be yellow? Or Kasit who has a perfect resume for the job and is currently fighting PAD on the Preah Vihear issue?

And why make a fuss over those when we have plenty of real morons getting cabinet positions as a tribute to multi-party system, or factions inside one big party like it was in TRT days? The incompetent Commerce Minister has been in the headlines for the whole year and never for a good reason. Why make a fuss about Kasit who hasn't made a single mistake so far?

On a side note - Thaksin maybe the first PM who lasted the full term, but he had NINE Cabinet reshuffles in his first term alone. What does that say about the "stability" of a strong party?

[Gary A]

It's really strange that a guy who helped terrorize the airport and kill tourism is made foreign minister. I think that stinks to the high heavens.

As far as the police, I am used to paying a hundred or two hundred baht into their lunch funds. I normally was guilty of speeding. The last time I was stopped on the expressway just south of Bangkok for speeding. In that case, I had a tourist friend who was afraid of the Bangkok traffic and I was driving slowly so he could relax. A crooked cop stopped me at the toll booth and extorted two THOUSAND baht from me.

Last week a drunk cop near our home up country ran into the back of a large parked truck. My wife ran to help him and the onlookers told her it was a cop. She walked away too. He died. Why was it that no one would help him? I moved here in 1991 and have never seen the Thai people hate the local cops as they do now.

[TAWP]

It's really strange that a guy who helped terrorize the airport and kill tourism is made foreign minister. I think that stinks to the high heavens.

Hyperbole without facts is so useful. So lets just agree to disagree...

As far as the police, I am used to paying a hundred or two hundred baht into their lunch funds. I normally was guilty of speeding. The last time I was stopped on the expressway just south of Bangkok for speeding. In that case, I had a tourist friend who was afraid of the Bangkok traffic and I was driving slowly so he could relax. A crooked cop stopped me at the toll booth and extorted two THOUSAND baht from me.

Last week a drunk cop near our home up country ran into the back of a large parked truck. My wife ran to help him and the onlookers told her it was a cop. She walked away too. He died. Why was it that no one would help him? I moved here in 1991 and have never seen the Thai people hate the local cops as they do now.

2k extorted from you? Why would you pay that? Unless you had 5 kilo of cocaine in the trunk, it would have been cheaper to say you want to real ticket and refuse to pay him in the hand...

But you can hardly blame the current government for the mafias actions, if they are reportedly not even an ally of them...

[samran]

It's really strange that a guy who helped terrorize the airport and kill tourism is made foreign minister. I think that stinks to the high heavens.

As far as the police, I am used to paying a hundred or two hundred baht into their lunch funds. I normally was guilty of speeding. The last time I was stopped on the expressway just south of Bangkok for speeding. In that case, I had a tourist friend who was afraid of the Bangkok traffic and I was driving slowly so he could relax. A crooked cop stopped me at the toll booth and extorted two THOUSAND baht from me.

Last week a drunk cop near our home up country ran into the back of a large parked truck. My wife ran to help him and the onlookers told her it was a cop. She walked away too. He died. Why was it that no one would help him? I moved here in 1991 and have never seen the Thai people hate the local cops as they do now.

a bit off topic, but why pay 2000 when the max real fine would have been 400?

[Plus]

It's really strange that a guy who helped terrorize the airport and kill tourism is made foreign minister.

Maybe because Abhisit didn't think the airport was terrorized and the tourism was killed.

It might stink to you, but did it make any difference as far as Thai foreign policies are concerned? Has the country suffered any disadvantage in foreign relations?

As far as the police, I am used to paying a hundred or two hundred baht into their lunch funds. I normally was guilty of speeding. The last time I was stopped on the expressway just south of Bangkok for speeding. In that case, I had a tourist friend who was afraid of the Bangkok traffic and I was driving slowly so he could relax. A crooked cop stopped me at the toll booth and extorted two THOUSAND baht from me.

Last week a drunk cop near our home up country ran into the back of a large parked truck. My wife ran to help him and the onlookers told her it was a cop. She walked away too. He died. Why was it that no one would help him? I moved here in 1991 and have never seen the Thai people hate the local cops as they do now.

And how is ANY of it government fault?

[Gary A]

Maybe that's exactly the problem. The police report to who???? I would appear that the police ARE the mafia and report to no one. So you think that police corruption is not a government problem?

The cop keeps my driver's license and tells me that if I don't want to pay two thousand baht to go to the police station to pay my fine. Where is the police station? I have no idea. When is the crook going to take my license to the police station? I told him to go to the police station and I would follow him. He told me that he couldn't leave. I'm supposed to hang around or come back to Bangkok when I live upcountry 600 kilometers?

[rixalex]

My wife ran to help him and the onlookers told her it was a cop. She walked away too. He died. Why was it that no one would help him?

If someone was in front of me dying on the street i think i would ignore the gossiping mumblings of the gawping onlookers who have ran from their houses simply to stare at the terrible scene, and actually try to do something.

When someone is dying shouldn't you help them first and ask questions later? Seems to me that's what a normal human-being woud do.

[rixalex]

The cop keeps my driver's license and tells me that if I don't want to pay two thousand baht to go to the police station to pay my fine. Where is the police station? I have no idea. When is the crook going to take my license to the police station? I told him to go to the police station and I would follow him. He told me that he couldn't leave. I'm supposed to hang around or come back to Bangkok when I live upcountry 600 kilometers?

Gary, i have to say i'm amazed that you couldn't find a way of talking your way out of this situation - or at least bartering him down a bit. For a man of your time and experience in Thailand to have accepted being relieved of 2,000 baht seems both unfortunate and unusual.

[Plus]

Maybe that's exactly the problem. The police report to who???? I would appear that the police ARE the mafia and report to no one. So you think that police corruption is not a government problem?

They policemen who harassed you report to their bosses, a station chief, who reports to the district chief, and so all the way up, to the police chief who reports to no one, but is appointed by the PM.

Right now Abhisit is at his wits end how to get his police chief choice confirmed by the board. The retiring chief was appointed by Samak and was kept on as a tribute to Newin.

So, how exactly is Abhisit responsible for your police troubles?

[tig28]

On a side note - Thaksin maybe the first PM who lasted the full term, but he had NINE Cabinet reshuffles in his first term alone. What does that say about the "stability" of a strong party?

It's pretty hard to answer that question ,Plus --- no other government in Thailand's history ever lasted long enough to compare.

Had they have done so they also may have had many cabinet reshuffles ---- unfortunately we shall never know.

It may well have been that in his never ending endeavors to better serve the nation he was ceaseless in attempting to get the best people into cabinet. What do you think??

Plus being greedy to the point of being ridiculous? I've been accused of many things here, but greedy?

Hear ! Hear !

[sabaijai]

Check the cabinet.thaigov.go.th website for a list of every PM that ever served in Thailand. Thaksin was not the first PM to serve a full term. He was the fourth.

[Ulysses G.]

He was not the first to be accused of corruption either!

[Plus]

It may well have been that in his never ending endeavors to better serve the nation he was ceaseless in attempting to get the best people into cabinet. What do you think??

Yeah yeah, serve the nation.

You know what I think.

[brahmburgers]

It may well have been that in his never ending endeavors to better serve the nation he was ceaseless in attempting to get the best people into cabinet. What do you think??

Yeah yeah, serve the nation.

You know what I think.

Rather than 'serve the nation', T was endeavoring to 'bilk the nation.' ...which he was quite successfully doing, until PAD started making noise and ruining his party.

T wasn't trying to get 'the best people' - he was putting 'yes-people' in positions of power, in order to insulate himself from any impediments to gaining a total stranglehold on power institutions, and increasing his wealth unchecked. Not one of T's many cabinet appointments is looked upon, then or now, as a decent legislator.

Edited September 24, 2009 by brahmburgers

[sabaijai]

He was not the first to be accused of corruption either!

No one's saying he was. There are many myths floating around about Col T ('first PM to be elected,' 'first to serve out his term,' 'left villagers better off than they were before'), but that's not one of them

And his 30 baht health scheme went much further in terms of cutting medical profession profits and taking taxpayer revenue than anything Obama has proposed.

[Publicus]

He was not the first to be accused of corruption either!

No one's saying he was. There are many myths floating around about Col T ('first PM to be elected,' 'first to serve out his term,' 'left villagers better off than they were before'), but that's not one of them

And his 30 baht health scheme went much further in terms of cutting medical profession profits and taking taxpayer revenue than anything Obama has proposed.

I dunno how we got from Thaksin to Obama or from Baht to USDollars$, or from the Old World, Third World decrepit civilization of Thailand to the New World of the US and its own imperfect but continually progressing civilization.

The post to which you respond essentially says Thaksin's corruption wasn't any or much worse than that of other Thai PMs and governments, presumably over several decades or more.

You're out in the sticks if you're trying to compare or contrast the US to Thailand. Is Obama wildly and unashamedly corrupt as Thaksin was but is machinating and thus delivering to a particular narrow constituency--the Old World peasantry of Thailand--as Thaksin was? Do you say Obama is dealing with a national legislature that is a market place of money politics into the pocket of every MP and where every ministry's budget is padded, and where the annual budget repeatedly gets raped, instead of a Congress that is held accountable to an educated body politic which is further represented by expert groups that comprise a civil society?

I'd hope not because if that were the connection being attempted, it would be so wild and absurd as to be immediately and summarily dismissable--and dismissed.

STAMP

[sabaijai]

Publicus, I think you misunderstood my intended meaning. I was referring to UG's earlier comment to the effect that Obama was bringing America down with his new health plan. I was pointing out that the negative effects of Thaksin's 30-baht health scheme were probably more extensive (based on what I hear from Thai friends and colleagues, at least) than any negative effects Obama's proposed national health plan may generate. In fact I support the proposals made by Obama and his advisors.