What Did Thaksin Do For Thailand?

[Nuchanart]

At least he is Thailand's Robin Hood. Give money to the poor.

[Moonrakers]

At least he is Thailand's Robin Hood. Give money to the poor.

Not quite. Robin Hood stole only from the rich to give to the poor, Thaksin was indiscriminate in who he stole from.

[dick turpin]

This thread reminds me of monty python's "Life of Brian" movie

"What have the Romans ever done for us?"

Edited March 26, 2010 by dick turpin

[elkangorito]

Thaksin is to Thailand like George W Bush was for the USA...a 'wake up call'. I consider this to be quite positive.

[lannarebirth]

"Après moi, le deluge"

[elkangorito]

^What the hel_l does that mean? Even google won't translate it!

Edited March 26, 2010 by elkangorito

[Moonrakers]

^What the hel_l does that mean? Even google won't translate it!

I didn't know either.

But I found that it is an expression used to indicate greed and complete lack of consideration for others, or something like that.

[lannarebirth]

^What the hel_l does that mean? Even google won't translate it!

After me, (comes) the flood.

Edited March 26, 2010 by lannarebirth

[elkangorito]

^ Thanks for that ...& I fully agree.

[WinnieTheKhwai]

Anyone writing something negative about Thaksin is off-topic. As per the topic title.

[lannarebirth]

Anyone writing something negative about Thaksin is off-topic. As per the topic title.

I'd like to say I benefitted personally from Thaksin's premeirship. A LOT of money got funneled to Chiang Mai and his family was selling influence left and right up here and that led to lots of high end development. Sure they siphoned off the funds to finish the roads projects halfway through, but hey, they appropriated more and got most of it done.

The persistant rumors of casinoes got big hotels to develop and even the boondoggle "Night Safari", while killing hundreds (maybe thousands now) of exotic animals DID get a lot of money circulating while it was being built. Sure it's like a ghost town now, but it served its purpose.

Edited March 26, 2010 by lannarebirth

[mca]

Hopefully the best thing he did was getting ousted in a coup which (because of myriad events since) might make some of the dinosaurs in the military actually consider that sending the tanks in when they feel like it throughout Thai history isn't the best way forward for the country.

[geriatrickid]

Mr. Thaksin brought many issues out into the open. Issues like the festering grievances of the have nots. He also served as a catalyst that caused discussions of subjects previously kept quiet, such as the entrenched power of the military and the "elites". The role and influence of the military was exposed, as well as the role of the privy council and its place within a quasi modern democracy. It doesn't matter if Mr. Thaksin's position was right or wrong. Rather, that these were issues that needed to be brought into the open. For what it's worth, I believe the Royal Thai Navy also received more support than it had previously or since as the army had always been the dominant branch. Under Thaksin, the navy could breathe. Mr. Thaksin also restored Thailand's image in the foreign arena. He was seen as a popularly elected PM and not someone annoited by the military. If I am not mistaken, foreign investment and foreign development project funding increased under Thaksin, until the troubles began. (Of course the economic conditions were different, so it has to be taken within that context.)

[lannarebirth]

Mr. Thaksin brought many issues out into the open. Issues like the festering grievances of the have nots. He also served as a catalyst that caused discussions of subjects previously kept quiet, such as the entrenched power of the military and the "elites". The role and influence of the military was exposed, as well as the role of the privy council and its place within a quasi modern democracy. It doesn't matter if Mr. Thaksin's position was right or wrong. Rather, that these were issues that needed to be brought into the open. For what it's worth, I believe the Royal Thai Navy also received more support than it had previously or since as the army had always been the dominant branch. Under Thaksin, the navy could breathe. Mr. Thaksin also restored Thailand's image in the foreign arena. He was seen as a popularly elected PM and not someone annoited by the military. If I am not mistaken, foreign investment and foreign development project funding increased under Thaksin, until the troubles began. (Of course the economic conditions were different, so it has to be taken within that context.)

Why didn't Thaksin expose the role of the military elite when he was bribing them to get his monopoly? He could have used like a hidden camera and showed them all for what they are. Why was he trying to move his own family into military elite roles. Hey, that would have been a great chance to expose it huh? Hey, and the judiciary, he could have done like a "cabndid camera" thing and showed the hypocrisy of the judiciary when his lawyers proffered that 2 Million baht bribe.

Edited March 26, 2010 by lannarebirth

[Moonrakers]

Mr. Thaksin brought many issues out into the open. Issues like the festering grievances of the have nots. He also served as a catalyst that caused discussions of subjects previously kept quiet, such as the entrenched power of the military and the "elites". The role and influence of the military was exposed, as well as the role of the privy council and its place within a quasi modern democracy. It doesn't matter if Mr. Thaksin's position was right or wrong. Rather, that these were issues that needed to be brought into the open. For what it's worth, I believe the Royal Thai Navy also received more support than it had previously or since as the army had always been the dominant branch. Under Thaksin, the navy could breathe. Mr. Thaksin also restored Thailand's image in the foreign arena. He was seen as a popularly elected PM and not someone annoited by the military. If I am not mistaken, foreign investment and foreign development project funding increased under Thaksin, until the troubles began. (Of course the economic conditions were different, so it has to be taken within that context.)

Which mean that you can't think of a single policy of his which benefited Thailand.

The rest was just circumstantial.

[JetsetBkk]

One man's good is another man's bad. Although not a man Maggie Thatcher's policies inadvertently introduced or encouraged the greed factor into Britain for a few years. Jury out on that one, but certainly distateful.

Love her or hate her, Maggie made some very brave decisions to help bring the country out of a recession. It as afterwards that she really ballsed it all up. Although decisive, she definitely achieved things.

But this is about Thaksin, so what did he do for Thailand?

I agree about Maggie - one of the best PMs ever.

Re. Thaksin: the problem for the Yellows is convincing the Reds that he didn't do lots of good things for them. What he actually did is fairly irrelevant if the Reds believe he helped them more than his predecessors and successors did.

[fiddlehead]

I am certainly no Taksin supporter.

But have learned it is a good idea to always try to see things from all sides.

From what i understand, he had a lot to do with the infrastructure that has been modernized considerably in the past 10 years that I've been here.

I hear that before Taksin, you didn't really need a license plate, insurance or any vehicle registration on your car or motorcycle.

He apparantly changed that.

Bangkok traffic used to be considered the worst in the world.

I think I can get through there in an hour or three now, depending on the time of day.

The 30 baht plan is a good one IMO.

I don't know how much of it was his ideas but it really does help the poor.

he did a lot of strange things that some may consider to be a good thing: stopping liquor sales certain hours (I really don't understand the concept but apparently some people think it's a good thing)

Then there's the one about gas stations closing up at night. (not allowed to be open after midnight?)

i think this is to stop drinking some how. It worked for me one night as i had to go home rather than make a detour to a bar.

You must admit, Thailand has cell phone service in most of the whole country and that is a plus. I don't know if he was responsible but, i know I appreciate whoever was.

Didn't he refuse donations for the tsunami for some reason.

I've heard that this has something to do with the strong baht now but, again, i don't understand the philosophy behind it.

He is a smart businessman and I believe if his intentions were more patriotic instead of personal, this country could have even better infrastructure.

I believe he was going to make wireless internet available to all through a satellite although this was purely for profit I believe.

But it is a bit of a joke now isnt it. He won't give up and now is into disrupting the country rather than helping it.

Again, I believe it's mostly for his own greed and..........well, it's just too bad. He could've been a great leader.

Anyway, it's not easy to weigh the good against the bad. The scales have been tipped a bit.

[neverdie]

He certainly got the sales of Red Shirts and handclappers moving.

[Moonrakers]

One man's good is another man's bad. Although not a man Maggie Thatcher's policies inadvertently introduced or encouraged the greed factor into Britain for a few years. Jury out on that one, but certainly distateful.

Love her or hate her, Maggie made some very brave decisions to help bring the country out of a recession. It as afterwards that she really ballsed it all up. Although decisive, she definitely achieved things.

But this is about Thaksin, so what did he do for Thailand?

I agree about Maggie - one of the best PMs ever.

Re. Thaksin: the problem for the Yellows is convincing the Reds that he didn't do lots of good things for them. What he actually did is fairly irrelevant if the Reds believe he helped them more than his predecessors and successors did.

Asides from needing to point out that anti-red does not mean pro-yellow, I think that you are spot on.

[Krungbin]

^What the hel_l does that mean? Even google won't translate it!

I don't care about whatever happens after I "die"...

Would have been said by the French king Louis XV speaking about his successor.

[anotherpeter]

At least he is Thailand's Robin Hood. Give money to the poor.

Not quite. Robin Hood stole only from the rich to give to the poor, Thaksin was indiscriminate in who he stole from.

Not only was he indiscriminate in who he stole from. What he stole he didn't always give to the poor.

But this thread isn't about the negatives ...

[JetsetBkk]

Asides from needing to point out that anti-red does not mean pro-yellow, I think that you are spot on.

Agreed

[anotherpeter]

I am certainly no Taksin supporter.

But have learned it is a good idea to always try to see things from all sides.

From what i understand, he had a lot to do with the infrastructure that has been modernized considerably in the past 10 years that I've been here.

I hear that before Taksin, you didn't really need a license plate, insurance or any vehicle registration on your car or motorcycle.

He apparantly changed that.

Bangkok traffic used to be considered the worst in the world.

I think I can get through there in an hour or three now, depending on the time of day.

The 30 baht plan is a good one IMO.

I don't know how much of it was his ideas but it really does help the poor.

he did a lot of strange things that some may consider to be a good thing: stopping liquor sales certain hours (I really don't understand the concept but apparently some people think it's a good thing)

Then there's the one about gas stations closing up at night. (not allowed to be open after midnight?)

i think this is to stop drinking some how. It worked for me one night as i had to go home rather than make a detour to a bar.

You must admit, Thailand has cell phone service in most of the whole country and that is a plus. I don't know if he was responsible but, i know I appreciate whoever was.

Didn't he refuse donations for the tsunami for some reason.

I've heard that this has something to do with the strong baht now but, again, i don't understand the philosophy behind it.

He is a smart businessman and I believe if his intentions were more patriotic instead of personal, this country could have even better infrastructure.

I believe he was going to make wireless internet available to all through a satellite although this was purely for profit I believe.

But it is a bit of a joke now isnt it. He won't give up and now is into disrupting the country rather than helping it.

Again, I believe it's mostly for his own greed and..........well, it's just too bad. He could've been a great leader.

Anyway, it's not easy to weigh the good against the bad. The scales have been tipped a bit.

Not sure what he had to do with Infrastructure. I understand he got Suhvarnabhumi airport going, not sure what else.

The 30-baht health plan was good for the poor. But I don't think he funded the hospitals to cope with the influx of patients.

I think he changed laws about bar opening hours and alcohol sale times. I wasn't aware of the petrol stations.

He made sure the mobile phone coverage was much better. He owned the company that did most of it. The wireless to satellite would have been through his company too.

The strong baht now is nothing to do with him. That's more about the weak pound/euro. The baht just follows the $US, and doesn't effect any other currency.

As far as being a smart business man, you might need to research some his businesses before he was PM.

[Jingthing]

The premise of this thread is twisted. You could do the same thing with many historic villainous leaders and it would be similarly pointless. When a leader has gone so far wrong as Thaksin has, the good things he had done in the past become moot points.

[bangon04]

The premise of this thread is twisted. You could do the same thing with many historic villainous leaders and it would be similarly pointless. When a leader has gone so far wrong as Thaksin has, the good things he had done in the past become moot points.

OTOP was a copy of another country's idea

The Safari Park was a copy of someone else's idea, as was eating exotic animals

Casino building is not really an original idea, given Thailand's neighbour.

Thaksin certainly travelled a lot outside Thailand, and brought back a lot of ideas to copy. I guess you can think of plenty of examples.

[rametindallas]

I suppose, when he first came to power he gave a lot of people hope

Hope is the most terrible thing to come out of Pandora's Box. It prevents action.

[cognos]

Thaksin was responsible for implementing and building the many RING ROADS around Chiang Mai, (his HOME TOWN) therefore he improved the driveability and liveability of Chiang Mai. Many in Chiang Mai who dislike him may consider this fact, as they cruise around the area...

signed: what politician doesn't put more money into their constituancy?

[Jingthing]

Did he make the trains run on time?

[andyww]

Winnie.

You have actually just listed a number of things where it could be said he was detrimental to the country and deep into corruption.

Suvarnabhumi, for example, was a laughing stock for so long.

Compared to many new airport openings, Suvarnabhumi was a success. Absolutely everything moved in one day from Don Muang and it opened on time and stayed open. The bugs were greatly exaggerated by the press.

Compare this to the opening of Chek lap Kok in HK, or, more recently the farcical opening of Heathrow T5, which didnt work at all for weeks.

Thaksin was one of the few Thai leaders ever to publicly state that Thailand is an inherently corrupt country and that he was going to do something about it. Very difficult to stay on the positives on that one

[Mosha]

My wife voted for TRT the 1st election. She thought he was bringing hope to the poor of Thailand. Now she realises it was just the North-East.