Thai Protesters Target Bangkok's Tourist Centre

[Jingthing]

Yes the propagandists for the westerners try hard to deny that this is all about installing Thaksin as dictator, but most of us are not that stupid. They know we like the word democracy and think they can fool some of us with that BS, and they do fool SOME of us, but the reality is that UDD/red shirts/Thaksin represent the exact OPPOSITE of democracy.

Edited April 6, 2010 by Jingthing

[commons]

The Malls plead the red shirts to leave.

The TRA estimates that more than 1,000 retail shops at malls in the area were forced to close over the past three days. About 5,000 employees who are paid by the day have also suffered.

Now, that is somehow interesting how the elite bypasses the law and probably employ in a rotating manner their staff in order to avoid more payments and security for their staff. This is a very serious issue. Fortunately I never go shopping around there and never will.

They're lucky that they're getting paid by the day. Have you ever seen all those "trainees" who are working for weeks and months without even getting paid? In Europe or the US, you have to pay a minimum wage even to trainees. Not in Thailand. My wife was working part-time as a trainee in one of the top hotels in Bangkok while she was at university. She had to pay for her ride to the hotel, she had to paid for lunch and she wasn't being paid a single satang.

Of course, there's the promise that you will later get a job at this or that location, but the truth is that they will simply take the next trainees and therefor have free workers forever.

That is an insult to the poor and shows a lack of understanding. Working as a trainee for job experience while studying for a degree is one thing. Most people in Thailand dont get the opportunity to study for a degree and many rely on daily minimum wage which they are currently losing. These peopel will never ever have the opportunity to get a job anywhere near as well paid as a university graduate who oh myu god had to do 6 months or a year as a low or unpaid trainee before entering the middle class and all the nice things that go with it. Sometimes it actually helps to mix with and talk to the poor who dont have any of the opportunites to which your wife was privileged enough to get

You didn't even read what I wrote. Do you think the people working at hotels, serving food, the maids cleaning the rooms, the people taking out the garbage bins, etc. are "middle class"? You're out of touch with reality.

rainman, as usual you come up with some kind of statement. & if somebody counters it - _YOU_ suddenly leave arena of discourse _YOU_ set up initially & transgress.

1) if your wife goes to university - for sure she's middle-class. case settled.

2) i've setup IT-companies in europe. _no_ trainee _ever_ was paid. how comes? they do university & they need the qualifying experience for their cv (& hopefully bright future). i was (& i _am_) against this policy... - but that's capitalist market. if you wanna be a trainee with a "strong brand" - be glad they'll except you, but don't expect any money.

3) btw, i'm glad... sometimes i feel "out of touch with reality" of people like you. thanks na khrap.

[rainman]

It's one thing not to pay trainees and then later offer them a job. But what's happening in Thailand is that big companies, hotels and restaurants are using trainees as a free work force. When the trainee period is over and they would have to start paying them, they don't offer them a job, but instead simply grab the next trainees. And the process is repeated over and over. You can dodge my points if you want, no problem, but that's the truth.

[Netfan]

Levelhead

Abhisit already offered reelection in 9 month. Shouldn't the Reds be happy, go home, and celebrate victory?

No, because in 9 months the government will have made enough changes to the structure of the army, the law and the constitution to give them even more power.

Btw, Abhisit was rightfully elected by MPs who were elected by the people. It's called representative democracy.

He was, but only after enough MPs from TRT/PPP/Puea Thai were disqualified and removed from parliament in order for the Democrats to gain the majority.

But you keep saying PTP will win the election- so whats the problem? They can win now but not in 9 months? Exactly what changes are going to be made in law and constitution? If the people don't like what the current coalition has done they will be voted out. Simple. Its called democracy. Giving in to the threats of a quasi-political group with a guerilla branch is not democracy, no matter how you try to spin it.

[elcent]

how much I wish Thaksin came back. He'd be whisked right through to The Hague for Genocide. No place to hide Mr Thaksin.

[blaze]

Things going very well, nice peaceful protests.

The media seems in alarmist mode, but you have to expect that given its Yellow bias due to its owners.

The reds have taken control of a few fire engines, promising not to damage them but to not allow them to be used against protesters.

Some morons are now saying they are damaging state property and to call the troops in.....

Some people are so emotionally involved in this "I hate Thaksin" game that they have lost their senses. The Reds are about returning Democracy, get over it.

Thaksin is a small part of the Reds as he was ousted by an coup and found guilty to charges laid by a coup appointed committee by a coup appointed judiciiary.

The Reds are bigger that Mr T. this is now about democracy and the return, finally, of the power to the people to have free elections to vote for their government, not the government the elite have put into place by using the courts and behind the scenes manipulation.

The protests are not about democracy. They are about Thaksin. They are only about Thaksin.

Sorry but that is totally wrong. Thaksin is a small part of this, as he too feels he has been done in by the coup leaders and what they did.

This is larger than him, as has been reported in the free press that is not biased.

Even posters on here have confirmed by talking with reds at the protest area that this is not all about Thaksin, its about the return of Democracy.

Why will Yellow shirts not accept this ? Its because people will rally behind the cause of Democracy.

So the Yellow's keep trying to say its all about Thaksin to try to weaken the Reds.

But, if you wish to beleive its all about him, thats your choice, but its not. Please go speak to the Reds at the protest area, many are there for Democracy, yes some are there for their support of Thaksin, but many others are not.

For many among the redshirts, this may be about Thaksin but not in the simplistic way that some might wish to frame it. He may be regarded as, first, the prime-minister who paid attention to them (and they could care less why- only that he did)- and second, as the most prominent victim of the very system that for centuries has systemically sought to keep the rural poor as a reliable source of cheap food and later, cheap labor. His removal was regarded as a slap in the face -not so much to him personally- as to those who had voted for him- leading them to understand that any leader that they chose and who threatened the status quo would be removed.

Kind of like -= he may have been an SOB- but he was OUR SOB.

Perhaps many in the reds understood that the system that the PAD wished to inaugerate was not far removed from the system of governance that existed prior to 1932. Under this system, the commoners were basically denied any access to upward mobility and no voice in governance. They regard, rightly or wrongly, Thaksin's removal as confirmation that elements within the royalist/military/blueblood/civil service alliance that would ideally see a slightly modernized version of this system be implemented. It may be that the animosity to Abhisit's government stems from a suspicion that this government, no matter how well intentioned, is a proxy for those elements.

It may be that if Abhisit and the Dems had not been so fervently anti-Thaksin- less apparently cozy with the military- this government, based solely on its policies, would be more than satisfactory. As it stands though, the current government may be regarded as a new face of the old CNS which itself was regarded as the political voice of the traditional establishment- the same establishment that the PAD sought to revive politically.

It's all in the perception.

[commons]

Levelhead

Abhisit already offered reelection in 9 month. Shouldn't the Reds be happy, go home, and celebrate victory?

No, because in 9 months the government will have made enough changes to the structure of the army, the law and the constitution to give them even more power.

Btw, Abhisit was rightfully elected by MPs who were elected by the people. It's called representative democracy.

He was, but only after enough MPs from TRT/PPP/Puea Thai were disqualified and removed from parliament in order for the Democrats to gain the majority.

1) you're delusional paranoid. this country is simply not ready for "free & fair" elections. even constitution is not firmly rooted. if _this_, the root self of a country, has not been agreed upon - how can you call for elections? Abhisit proposes a public referendum on constitutional amendments, & i'd say that's _best_ to do - instead of leaving these decisions simply to policy-makers eager to profit from any change.

1b) agreed, in 9 months government policies will start to come into fruitition - & _that's_ what UDD/you are afraid of. as far as i can tell from your comments you delude yourself to live in a totalitarian society. how can it become worse in 9 months? ok, to cut it short: _what is your point_?

-

2) yes. & what was the reason for court-rulings against TRT/PPP? you want to tell me massive vote-buying is a quality that is essential for democracy? so you claim, it was _not_ right to cut their manipulation of the game? so you claim, that's ok? so, you claim - let the biggest bully rule?

ooh yes... that's what you claim.

[rainman]

But you keep saying PTP will win the election- so whats the problem? They can win now but not in 9 months? Exactly what changes are going to be made in law and constitution? If the people don't like what the current coalition has done they will be voted out. Simple. Its called democracy. Giving in to the threats of a quasi-political group with a guerilla branch is not democracy, no matter how you try to spin it.

The current government was brought to power after a military coup. We all agree with that. In any true democracy, first of all, military coups don't happen. And if they do happen, there are normally elections held shortly after. In Thailand, we've had a military coup 4 years ago ..and still no elections have been held. After the military coup, the law has been changed, the courts have been changed, the police have been changed. Everything to favor the military-backed government. The Thai people are clearly fed up with this and that's what we're seeing on the streets. They want their vote counted and their voices heard. Saying "we will dissolve parliament in 9 months and hold elections by the end of 2011" doesn't work anymore. It might have worked 30 or 50 years ago, but no more.

For example, Honduras had a military coup in 2009. And less than 5 months after, they held free and fair elections.

Why can't Thailand hold elections? It's simple. The "ruling elite" know they will lose power again if they do.

[thepodest]

Rainman,

Alright. Let's just say you correct with you said. But you didn't quote the second part of what I said. Reds' actions are cannot be justified. Its leaders are leading the wrong direction, especially TASKIN. Like I said, the gov is not perfect and I completely understand that they way the gov came power may not make some people happy. But really the Reds need to take a step back right now and come back with a plan. Right now I only see them running around Bangkok ruining everyone's days.

You agree?

Edited April 6, 2010 by thepodest

[rainman]

2) yes. & what was the reason for court-rulings against TRT/PPP? you want to tell me massive vote-buying is a quality that is essential for democracy? so you claim, it was _not_ right to cut their manipulation of the game? so you claim, that's ok? so, you claim - let the biggest bully rule?

ooh yes... that's what you claim.

Every party in Thailand buys votes. Period. If you haven't noticed, the Democrats have also been convicted of vote buying. The difference is that the military-installed election commission only disqualified the TRT/PPP with a "red card" and let the Democrats slip away with a "yellow card". Funny coincidence, though ...red shirts, red card, yellow shirts, yellow card. Anyways, their coalition partner, Newin, has been banned from politics with a red card. Yet his party is in a coalition government with the Democrats.

What does that tell you? Yes, you're free to look it up. The Democrats have bought votes in the past election.

[rainman]

Rainman,

Alright. Let's just say you correct with you said. But you didn't quote the second part of what I said. Reds' actions are cannot be justified. Its leaders are leading the wrong direction, especially TASKIN. Like I said, the gov is not perfect and I completely understand that they way the gov came power may not make some people happy. But really the Reds need to take a step back right now and come back with a plan. Right now I only see them running around Bangkok ruining everyone's days.

You agree?

I don't agree with all the actions of the red shirts, I never said I did. But what I believe is that Abhisit also doesn't give a poop about the country, otherwise he would hold elections and show that he's really supported by the majority of Thais. The red shirts aren't demanding that Abhisit step down and make Thaksin the new Prime Minister. They're simply demanding an election.

While I don't agree with blocking the city, I do understand that desperate people have to take desperate actions to have their voices heard. Thaksin wants to come back and get TRT/PPP/PT back into power, we all know that. But if the majority of poor Thais support that, who are we to deny them their right?

[RegularReader]

It's one thing not to pay trainees and then later offer them a job. But what's happening in Thailand is that big companies, hotels and restaurants are using trainees as a free work force. When the trainee period is over and they would have to start paying them, they don't offer them a job, but instead simply grab the next trainees. And the process is repeated over and over. You can dodge my points if you want, no problem, but that's the truth.

Time you learnt Rainman, as Commons says, he might not personally agree with the policy of doing this (I think people should be paid something for their efforts) but it's waht happens the world over.

In the old days we use to call this an "apprenticeship". And, I can tell you in my home country the same thing about not being gauranteed a job at the end was part of the rub - still is and always will be.

You've got to understand in many countries - and I am not talking thrid world, developing etc - small businesses such as plumbers, electricians, IT start ups and so on would never be able to employ these newly educated "interns" (as they are now called), if they had to do things such as pay a full (or in some cases no wages) and guarantee a full pay job at the end of the line.

I ahve a son about to finish a tertiary course here in Thailand, in hotel and tourism. At the end of the year he'll have to go a scrib floors, clean toilets etc., for no or little renumeration. He knows this is not a passport to a job where he does this internship. But he also knows, that it could lead to a job - if he performs.

I suggest you ret-think your perspective on entry level employment, to be more in line with the times we are in than some hi falutin' dream of a little red book from days gone by.

[animatic]

It's all about Thaksin,

every thing else is what he has harnessed to cause enough chaos to get back in power.

Level head, Square head, brain dead, makes no matter it's ALL about Thaksin.

All the rest is window dressing he has purchased to make it seem plausible this isn't about him.

Edited April 6, 2010 by animatic

[rainman]

The only "safe" way out for both sides is:

1. Abhisit calls for an election.

2. Red shirts to home.

3. The election winner sets up a government.

Another thing Thailand would probably be better off with is a "majority rules" government as some countries do, with a run-off election if nobody wins at least 50%. The coalition system will never really work in Thailand.

Say Puea Thai gets 40%, the Democrats get 40% and Newin gets 20% (as an example), the 2nd round run-off would be between Puea Thai and the Democrats. Nobody else on the ballot. That way it's also more clear as to who people support, rather than people voting for a small party and that party then switching sides.

[commons]

It's one thing not to pay trainees and then later offer them a job. But what's happening in Thailand is that big companies, hotels and restaurants are using trainees as a free work force. When the trainee period is over and they would have to start paying them, they don't offer them a job, but instead simply grab the next trainees. And the process is repeated over and over. You can dodge my points if you want, no problem, but that's the truth.

look, i stated i am _against_ this policy. but i can assure you that's the way it's done in german IT-companies (internet, graphics design, software-development, multimedia production). the whole point is, trainees want to be trainees with "strong brands" - as it's good for their cv.

i _am_ against this policy not only for the reasons of exploitation. but actually, many of these trainees are treated like s*** - so their latent skills are not developed, so they don't learn to contribute to workflow, so actually it's just a waste of time - as when the next trainee arrives, situation is still same same.

imho, it's really just naked capitalism, exploiting human creativity & workforce to generate profit.

but, you see, _my point_ is - that's _my_ experience in a high-skill-market, in a western european democracy.

just a reflection na khrap...

[Netfan]

But you keep saying PTP will win the election- so whats the problem? They can win now but not in 9 months? Exactly what changes are going to be made in law and constitution? If the people don't like what the current coalition has done they will be voted out. Simple. Its called democracy. Giving in to the threats of a quasi-political group with a guerilla branch is not democracy, no matter how you try to spin it.

The current government was brought to power after a military coup. We all agree with that. In any true democracy, first of all, military coups don't happen. And if they do happen, there are normally elections held shortly after. In Thailand, we've had a military coup 4 years ago ..and still no elections have been held. After the military coup, the law has been changed, the courts have been changed, the police have been changed. Everything to favor the military-backed government. The Thai people are clearly fed up with this and that's what we're seeing on the streets. They want their vote counted and their voices heard. Saying "we will dissolve parliament in 9 months and hold elections by the end of 2011" doesn't work anymore. It might have worked 30 or 50 years ago, but no more.

For example, Honduras had a military coup in 2009. And less than 5 months after, they held free and fair elections.

Why can't Thailand hold elections? It's simple. The "ruling elite" know they will lose power again if they do.

Look, you know Thailand held elections after the coup- if are really so lost as to not know - How do you think Samak got appointed PM? And Somchai? Here's the history- Coup October 2006. Elections December 2007. Look it up if you don't believe me. (the entry in wiki even sounds like you might have written it- google thai elections)

Edited April 6, 2010 by Netfan

[elcent]

For many among the redshirts, this may be about Thaksin but not in the simplistic way that some might wish to frame it. He may be regarded as, first, the prime-minister who paid attention to them (and they could care less why- only that he did)- and second, as the most prominent victim of the very system that for centuries has systemically sought to keep the rural poor as a reliable source of cheap food and later, cheap labor. His removal was regarded as a slap in the face -not so much to him personally- as to those who had voted for him- leading them to understand that any leader that they chose and who threatened the status quo would be removed.

Kind of like -= he may have been an SOB- but he was OUR SOB.

Perhaps many in the reds understood that the system that the PAD wished to inaugerate was not far removed from the system of governance that existed prior to 1932. Under this system, the commoners were basically denied any access to upward mobility and no voice in governance. They regard, rightly or wrongly, Thaksin's removal as confirmation that elements within the royalist/military/blueblood/civil service alliance that would ideally see a slightly modernized version of this system be implemented. It may be that the animosity to Abhisit's government stems from a suspicion that this government, no matter how well intentioned, is a proxy for those elements.

It may be that if Abhisit and the Dems had not been so fervently anti-Thaksin- less apparently cozy with the military- this government, based solely on its policies, would be more than satisfactory. As it stands though, the current government may be regarded as a new face of the old CNS which itself was regarded as the political voice of the traditional establishment- the same establishment that the PAD sought to revive politically.

It's all in the perception.

But you do realize that this country is slipping into a failed state. Is it that what the red want?

I think the red got and get considered but only without Thaksin. It's not possible with him.

Even today, the reds avoid the word of their sponsor.

The reds have valid issues, but to copy the way of the yellow makes things worse.

Both the yellow and the red leaders need to face justice, foremost Thaksin.

Unfortunately the gov failed to indict the yellow in a crystal clear case. It was watched and recorded all over the world, only the justice system seem to be blind, or did they refuse a recent induction because some within the gov are trying to interfere and to halt procedures against the yellows?

If that continues as it looks like at the moment then rural people will have enslaved themselves again with no more way out.

Better for them to withdraw now and follow up procedures against the yellows, red leaders and Thaksin.

Next month a new school term starts and most of the reds went broke to come up with the basics for the kids until the gov will have measures in place which may take a couple of months to implement. There is so much corruption in the education system which needs to be considered and which in fact, when it comes to free education, will resort more and more to their uniform and book scams.

[traderjm]

I don't agree with all the actions of the red shirts, I never said I did. But what I believe is that Abhisit also doesn't give a poop about the country, otherwise he would hold elections and show that he's really supported by the majority of Thais. The red shirts aren't demanding that Abhisit step down and make Thaksin the new Prime Minister. They're simply demanding an election.

While I don't agree with blocking the city, I do understand that desperate people have to take desperate actions to have their voices heard. Thaksin wants to come back and get TRT/PPP/PT back into power, we all know that. But if the majority of poor Thais support that, who are we to deny them their right?

Insane...

So Rainman please enlighten me and all the other idiots on this board not as bright as you and explain to us, HOW IF a snap election was called and the REDS got into power and then the YELLOWS decide they got in without a fair election as it was forced by the protests. What would stop the Yellows from doing exactly what the REDS are now? Then they get their gov't of choice so the REDS come back.. how can you possibly believe that by giving in to a minority of the Thai people and allowing them to dictate what does or does not happen with the gov't it will solve anything long term? It was just be a different color shirt with each new gov't.. you must see this.. I hope... you can't be that blind to the reality of things

[rainman]

Well, I always pay my trainees. My belief is that if they work for me, they should be paid. And I never hire someone unless I later intend to give them a job. Whether they work good or bad, whether they get a full job at the end or not, they're never working for nothing. If I make money it's because they are working, so it's only fair that they are paid. And I just find it disgusting what I see here, hotels and restaurants especially, hiring new trainees every few weeks or months and then swapping them out for new trainees later.

[elcent]

It's one thing not to pay trainees and then later offer them a job. But what's happening in Thailand is that big companies, hotels and restaurants are using trainees as a free work force. When the trainee period is over and they would have to start paying them, they don't offer them a job, but instead simply grab the next trainees. And the process is repeated over and over. You can dodge my points if you want, no problem, but that's the truth.

look, i stated i am _against_ this policy. but i can assure you that's the way it's done in german IT-companies (internet, graphics design, software-development, multimedia production). the whole point is, trainees want to be trainees with "strong brands" - as it's good for their cv.

i _am_ against this policy not only for the reasons of exploitation. but actually, many of these trainees are treated like s*** - so their latent skills are not developed, so they don't learn to contribute to workflow, so actually it's just a waste of time - as when the next trainee arrives, situation is still same same.

imho, it's really just naked capitalism, exploiting human creativity & workforce to generate profit.

but, you see, _my point_ is - that's _my_ experience in a high-skill-market, in a western european democracy.

just a reflection na khrap...

It's called internship and therefore they must be covered by labor law regardless in what country.

Here in Thailand I know of accounting companies who pay for interns, not much, about 7000, but still they pay.

It's the small and medium companies that suck in this case.

[commons]

2) yes. & what was the reason for court-rulings against TRT/PPP? you want to tell me massive vote-buying is a quality that is essential for democracy? so you claim, it was _not_ right to cut their manipulation of the game? so you claim, that's ok? so, you claim - let the biggest bully rule?

ooh yes... that's what you claim.

Every party in Thailand buys votes. Period. If you haven't noticed, the Democrats have also been convicted of vote buying. The difference is that the military-installed election commission only disqualified the TRT/PPP with a "red card" and let the Democrats slip away with a "yellow card". Funny coincidence, though ...red shirts, red card, yellow shirts, yellow card. Anyways, their coalition partner, Newin, has been banned from politics with a red card. Yet his party is in a coalition government with the Democrats.

What does that tell you? Yes, you're free to look it up. The Democrats have bought votes in the past election.

you just don't get it.

1) if other people steal, kill, maim - that's _not_ an invitation or opportunity to do same same. you've to work on _your very own_ ethics by yourself. no-one can do it for you. & if you want to contribute to the "greater good of humanity", well, i'd suggest - cultivate your own ethics & be a radiant example for the people in your life.

2) if you engage in activities against the law - you simply should be aware of the consequences. claiming everybody else is doing it too - will _not_ improve "rule of law". so, they got caught. so they got punished. that's all.

[TAWP]

The current government was brought to power after a military coup. We all agree with that.

No, since that is a lie.

The current government got into power when the at the time current coalition collapsed and the smaller parties changed [again] who to support. To their own benefit ofcourse.

[rainman]

But you keep saying PTP will win the election- so whats the problem? They can win now but not in 9 months? Exactly what changes are going to be made in law and constitution? If the people don't like what the current coalition has done they will be voted out. Simple. Its called democracy. Giving in to the threats of a quasi-political group with a guerilla branch is not democracy, no matter how you try to spin it.

The current government was brought to power after a military coup. We all agree with that. In any true democracy, first of all, military coups don't happen. And if they do happen, there are normally elections held shortly after. In Thailand, we've had a military coup 4 years ago ..and still no elections have been held. After the military coup, the law has been changed, the courts have been changed, the police have been changed. Everything to favor the military-backed government. The Thai people are clearly fed up with this and that's what we're seeing on the streets. They want their vote counted and their voices heard. Saying "we will dissolve parliament in 9 months and hold elections by the end of 2011" doesn't work anymore. It might have worked 30 or 50 years ago, but no more.

For example, Honduras had a military coup in 2009. And less than 5 months after, they held free and fair elections.

Why can't Thailand hold elections? It's simple. The "ruling elite" know they will lose power again if they do.

Look, you know Thailand held elections after the coup- if are really so lost as to not know - How do you think Samak got appointed PM? And Somchai? Here's the history- Coup October 2006. Elections December 2007. Look it up if you don't believe me. (the entry in wiki even sounds like you might have written it- google thai elections)

You're absolutely right, my bad. But what good are elections if the Election Commission, which was setup by the military, then disqualifies the winners (PPP) for vote buying, and simply "warns" the Democrats for vote buying? Both of them had bought votes. Only PPP were disqualified, the Democrats weren't.

[rainman]

2) yes. & what was the reason for court-rulings against TRT/PPP? you want to tell me massive vote-buying is a quality that is essential for democracy? so you claim, it was _not_ right to cut their manipulation of the game? so you claim, that's ok? so, you claim - let the biggest bully rule?

ooh yes... that's what you claim.

Every party in Thailand buys votes. Period. If you haven't noticed, the Democrats have also been convicted of vote buying. The difference is that the military-installed election commission only disqualified the TRT/PPP with a "red card" and let the Democrats slip away with a "yellow card". Funny coincidence, though ...red shirts, red card, yellow shirts, yellow card. Anyways, their coalition partner, Newin, has been banned from politics with a red card. Yet his party is in a coalition government with the Democrats.

What does that tell you? Yes, you're free to look it up. The Democrats have bought votes in the past election.

you just don't get it.

1) if other people steal, kill, maim - that's _not_ an invitation or opportunity to do same same. you've to work on _your very own_ ethics by yourself. no-one can do it for you. & if you want to contribute to the "greater good of humanity", well, i'd suggest - cultivate your own ethics & be a radiant example for the people in your life.

2) if you engage in activities against the law - you simply should be aware of the consequences. claiming everybody else is doing it too - will _not_ improve "rule of law". so, they got caught. so they got punished. that's all.

I get it. But tell me why are the Democrats allowed to lead a coalition government when the Election Commission found them guilty of vote buying? They were found guilty, but simply were not disbanded and disqualified like the PPP were.

[traderjm]

Well, I always pay my trainees. My belief is that if they work for me, they should be paid. And I never hire someone unless I later intend to give them a job. Whether they work good or bad, whether they get a full job at the end or not, they're never working for nothing. If I make money it's because they are working, so it's only fair that they are paid. And I just find it disgusting what I see here, hotels and restaurants especially, hiring new trainees every few weeks or months and then swapping them out for new trainees later.

Wow so if you hire someone that turns out to be the worst employee on the planet, once their trainee period is over you still fully intend to give them a job regardless of all their shortcomings? WOW how are you still in business?

[rainman]

Well, I always pay my trainees. My belief is that if they work for me, they should be paid. And I never hire someone unless I later intend to give them a job. Whether they work good or bad, whether they get a full job at the end or not, they're never working for nothing. If I make money it's because they are working, so it's only fair that they are paid. And I just find it disgusting what I see here, hotels and restaurants especially, hiring new trainees every few weeks or months and then swapping them out for new trainees later.

Wow so if you hire someone that turns out to be the worst employee on the planet, once their trainee period is over you still fully intend to give them a job regardless of all their shortcomings? WOW how are you still in business?

I said intend. I hire them with the intention of giving them a job. If they work bad, obviously they don't get the job. But they still get paid for the time they worked for me.

The difference with the hotels and restaurants that I mentioned is that they hire trainees, don't pay them for the time they work and then don't give them a job either, but simply hire the next free trainee.

Edited April 6, 2010 by rainman

[TAWP]

He was, but only after enough MPs from TRT/PPP/Puea Thai were disqualified and removed from parliament in order for the Democrats to gain the majority.

Incorrect on all points.

The PPP didn't have a majority nor did they lose a majority by some of the MPs being banned.

All regional MPs banned left positions that went into by-elections, and those places where filled. PPP here started showing how they started to lose support from the nation by losing several seats to other parties.

The democrats did not gain a majority (even if the by-elections saw them gain a few seats). They former a coalition with most other smaller parties to form a majority government.

[Netfan]

I get it. But tell me why are the Democrats allowed to lead a coalition government when the Election Commission found them guilty of vote buying? They were found guilty, but simply were not disbanded and disqualified like the PPP were.

Because the leaders of PPP were dumb enough to be caught on tape- not a doctored one either. Individuals within the Dems were banned, but because it wasn't the leaders of the party only individuals got the boot. That's the law.

[traderjm]

I get it. But tell me why are the Democrats allowed to lead a coalition government when the Election Commission found them guilty of vote buying? They were found guilty, but simply were not disbanded and disqualified like the PPP were.

Are you serious you do not know this? You really should not be posting if you do not know something as simple as this.

The PPP party executives were captured on camera voted buying that is why the PARTY was disbanded.

For the DEMS the executive was not found to be buying votes only actual canidates and they were in fact banned...

You really should make sure you know what the facts are about a subject before you rave on as you have been

[traderjm]

Well, I always pay my trainees. My belief is that if they work for me, they should be paid. And I never hire someone unless I later intend to give them a job. Whether they work good or bad, whether they get a full job at the end or not, they're never working for nothing. If I make money it's because they are working, so it's only fair that they are paid. And I just find it disgusting what I see here, hotels and restaurants especially, hiring new trainees every few weeks or months and then swapping them out for new trainees later.

Wow so if you hire someone that turns out to be the worst employee on the planet, once their trainee period is over you still fully intend to give them a job regardless of all their shortcomings? WOW how are you still in business?

I said intend. I hire them with the intention of giving them a job. If they work bad, obviously they don't get the job. But they still get paid for the time they worked for me.

The difference with the hotels and restaurants that I mentioned is that they hire trainees, don't pay them for the time they work and then don't give them a job either, but simply hire the next free trainee.

So then how do you know that the firms you are speaking about did NOT "fully intend to hire them" tsk tsk..