Real Inequality In The Thai Society

[Deeral]

"The top 20% own 69% of the country's assets while the bottom 20% own only1%.-42% of bank savings money comes from only 70,000 bank accountsholding more than 10 million baht. They make up only 0.09% of allbank accounts in the country. In other words, less than 1% of thepeople own nearly half of the country's savings.

-Among the farming families, nearly 20% of them are landless, or about811,871 families, while 1-1.5 million farming families are tenants orstruggling with insufficient land.

-10% of land owners own more than 100 rai each, while the rest 90% ownone rai or less.

-On income distribution, the top 20% enjoy more than 50% of the grossdomestic product while the bottom 20% only 4%.

http://www.bangkokpo...tistics?blog=64

This article of November 2009 coincidentally also predicted more trouble and violence to follow..........

You quote a blog, that is an opinion article, with no source to back up the "facts" stated in the article. But that point aside; there are inequalities in all societies. So, what? It has been and will always be that way. The great social experiments of the communist socialistic countries haven't given equality to all, now have they? They seemed to have adopted capitalism in a more perverted way than the west. Look at what has happened in both China and Russia. Is there no social unrest and inequality there? Thailand is a capitalistic society as well, so of course there are the wealthy and poor, just as every other nation... How can there be any equality with an educational system that favors the rich. If you can't pay to learn at the best schools, you can't play on an equal level... As they say in the USA; "there's no free lunch." Someone has to pay.

OK - so the Bangkok post is now a blog and Pasuk Phongpaichit Professor, Faculty of Economics

Chulalongkorn University is not worth listening to?

Edited July 31, 2010 by Deeral

[Deeral]

Rather than stating the "bleedin' obvious" - why not for once in your life just ask a few questions as to why or even if this is an increase in dolphin deaths around Koh chang. furthermore the Dolphins appear to have been butchered - whether before or after death is not clear.

Anyone and everyone knows about dolphin deaths through fishing and just stating that it happens adds absolutely nothing to the thread.

[Jimi007]

"The top 20% own 69% of the country's assets while the bottom 20% own only1%.-42% of bank savings money comes from only 70,000 bank accountsholding more than 10 million baht. They make up only 0.09% of allbank accounts in the country. In other words, less than 1% of thepeople own nearly half of the country's savings.

-Among the farming families, nearly 20% of them are landless, or about811,871 families, while 1-1.5 million farming families are tenants orstruggling with insufficient land.

-10% of land owners own more than 100 rai each, while the rest 90% ownone rai or less.

-On income distribution, the top 20% enjoy more than 50% of the grossdomestic product while the bottom 20% only 4%.

http://www.bangkokpo...tistics?blog=64

This article of November 2009 coincidentally also predicted more trouble and violence to follow..........

You quote a blog, that is an opinion article, with no source to back up the "facts" stated in the article. But that point aside; there are inequalities in all societies. So, what? It has been and will always be that way. The great social experiments of the communist socialistic countries haven't given equality to all, now have they? They seemed to have adopted capitalism in a more perverted way than the west. Look at what has happened in both China and Russia. Is there no social unrest and inequality there? Thailand is a capitalistic society as well, so of course there are the wealthy and poor, just as every other nation... How can there be any equality with an educational system that favors the rich. If you can't pay to learn at the best schools, you can't play on an equal level... As they say in the USA; "there's no free lunch." Someone has to pay.

OK - so the Bangkok post is now a blog and Pasuk Phongpaichit Professor, Faculty of Economics

Chulalongkorn University is not worth listening to?

The page and article link you posted is an opinion. Posted by: Sanitsuda Ekachai in the "Bangkok Post>>post blogs" section. Is it not? She quotes from Prof Pasuk Phongpaichit, who doesn't state any study to back up her "facts" that you are taking about. So whatever value her quoted statement may have, you and her assume to be true... I really don't need a larger font to read, thanks. And yes, I question her assertions without any factual basis. Beyond that, who ever said life is or was fair or equal in any country?

Edited July 31, 2010 by Jimi007

[animatic]

<br />"<font color="#1C2837"><font size="2"> You can't become a member of parliament without a university degree" - I don't think this is true - although the idea was certainly recently mooted and the sheer fact that it was given consideration just goes to show how incredibly inegalitarian a society /Thailand is.</font></font><br />

<br /><br /><br />

Banharn is alleged to only finish Por 4 (grade 4).

Bet he learned a pant load on the job though.

[jayjay0]

"I have to disagree the inequality is more than the distribution of wealth. It is about peoples rites. What ever made you think if every one had the same amount of money we would have equality? That is a pipe dream human nature would never allow it. "

no! wealth distribution and money are NIOT the same thing - and I assume you mean "rights" not "rites"?

right.

Thank you for pointing that out. I am a lousy speller and the spell check can't read my mind. I always thought there was some thing wrong with it. That is a serious thank you.

By the way I presume you meant NOT not NIOT Now that was a tounge in cheek chuckle.

[singa-traz]

<br />"<font color="#1C2837"><font size="2"> You can't become a member of parliament without a university degree" - I don't think this is true - although the idea was certainly recently mooted and the sheer fact that it was given consideration just goes to show how incredibly inegalitarian a society /Thailand is.</font></font><br />

<br /><br /><br />

Banharn is alleged to only finish Por 4 (grade 4).

Bet he learned a pant load on the job though.

Banharn has received a University Degree, however there are questions on how he got it.

What I was told is that, his thesis was in French ... but he can't speak the language.

"Banharn, parlez vous Francais?" was the question asked by the media.

[Rinrada]

Inequality? No way.

The rich and poor in Thailand both have equal rights. Both have only 1 vote.

and it was recently suggested that the "poor" were too stupid to VOTE and should ...err... not be permitted to....and look what happened.

Just like in England about 1000 years ago..what look up to you "betters"

[Deeral]

"I have to disagree the inequality is more than the distribution of wealth. It is about peoples rites. What ever made you think if every one had the same amount of money we would have equality? That is a pipe dream human nature would never allow it. "

no! wealth distribution and money are NIOT the same thing - and I assume you mean "rights" not "rites"?

right.

Thank you for pointing that out. I am a lousy speller and the spell check can't read my mind. I always thought there was some thing wrong with it. That is a serious thank you.

By the way I presume you meant NOT not NIOT Now that was a tounge in cheek chuckle.

sometimes you see a spelling mistake and then sometimes you see the wrong word used - this indicates it isn't a spelling mistake and underlines the persons lack of knowledge about a subject - so I asked what you meant - I see know harm in that.

[Deeral]

From the List of countries by income equality , it seems the best way to reduce 'inequality' is with a statist high-tax high-welfare system, so I wonder how valuable a measurement that is by itself. Some measure of social mobility might also be useful to consider.

As for the list of inventions made by people from different countries, this is an extension of the advice given out to US soldiers over American Forces Radio:

"Electricity was invented by an Italian; the telephone was invented in Scotland; the inventor of writing paper was Chinese. Remember that the next time you tell an ethnic joke."

Income equality is not what is being discussed here or art least it is only part of it.

[Deeral]

If you seriously think these people suddenly got the idea from nowhere in a social vacuum like switching on the proverbial lightbulb - you are seriously mistaken - and endowing them with certain personality traits will not stand up at all with even a cursory glance at the biographies of any of them.

Khun Deeral.

Do you have a problem to understand written text ??

Here I am talking about the need to build a culture that enables such personalities to emerge from the "poor" layers of Thai society.

And you respond by assuming I am talking about individuals emerging out of "nowhere"..

Look up the word "culture" in a dictionary.

Then, look up the word "create", alternatively the world "build"

Then - if you are able to - put the two together = "create/build (a) culture"

Then.. take a week or so to try to understand what that means. It is absolutely not the same as a "social vacuum", trust me

Regarding the biographies of those people I guess you are saying that none of them were stubborn, that they did not have to convince anyone

of their ideas, that they never were regarded as "odd".. ???

Well, Ernest Duchesne was refused by the French Academy of Science on his discovery of Penicillin, Da Vinci had to smuggle in corpses by night

risking serious trouble with the church/law, Tesla was seen as something of a "lunatic" by many, Edison had to work very hard to convince investors,

Volta was also seen with very dubious eyes by the church, John Gorrie never got any credits at all before he died etc. etc.

If these people hadn't been stubborn individualists but instead had adapted to a "Gaeng Chai" / "I don't want to make any problems" attitude of classical

Thai peasant tradition and put "obedience" and "not asking any questions" before their curiosity they hadn't gotten very far, and no wealth had been created from their work. How in heavens name can you dispute that ?? And why would anyone want to ??

BTW, you didn't demonstate that I was wrong as you said you could, did you ?

To accuse me of thinking like a 14-year old doesn't demonstrate anything except a bad attitude on your side IMHO.

BTW - if you're waiting for my book - there is no need - many books have already been written on this and you might try and read a couple.

[otherstuff1957]

" You can't become a member of parliament without a university degree" - I don't think this is true - although the idea was certainly recently mooted and the sheer fact that it was given consideration just goes to show how incredibly inegalitarian a society /Thailand is.

You've got it backwards.. which somehow doesn't surprise me. In the past people needed University degrees in order to be eligible to sit in Parliament. This requirement was abolished in the most recent (2007) constitution. The only people talking about bringing this requirement back would be the PT/Reds who want to return to the '97 constitution.

[Deeral]

Seeing that a passing tourist can get a University degree in Kao San Rd, I can't see it would be too hard for a parliamentary candidate to furnish himself with some spectacular qualifications if the situation called for it....

[Heng]

A good start would be poor folks not willingly 'donating' X billions of Baht per year into the treasury via the government lottery and XX billions into the hands of the haves through the underground lottery. Something is wrong when you gamble away funds that could be used for food, housing, medicine, school tuition for your kids, etc. that could otherwise better your life and that of future generations of your family. Those 10 and 20 Baht notes add up to thousands and millions just like any other note.

Edited August 1, 2010 by Heng

[wayfarer108]

Thanks for the colourful map.

Right, don't confuse us with the facts

[wayfarer108]

"One must bear in mind that the last riots in Bangkok were not planned and run by the have nots. The have nots were merely used as tools by a certain portion of the haves to further enrich themselves."

Doesn't matter who "organised" it the fact that they were have nots available who were disenchanted enough to get involved is the point about a lop-sided society

You make the rather dubious presumption that the particpants were predominantly "have-nots." In fact, in my observation (I live in the neighbourhood that was occupied) most were not have-nots in any sense of how that term is usually understood. The truly poor did not have the money to travel here. Many were hired, and many were bussed in. By the end of the nearly three-month occupation, many of the 'sitters' were rented from the Klong Toey slums. The main participants buzzed the area day and night in relatively new cars, trucks and motorcycles.

There is a myth that the red movment somehow 'mobilised the masses' but that notion flies in the face of the fact that there were no 'masses.' Even on its biggest days the demos were rather small compared to kinds of serious 'people power' demos in other countries.

The riots were not spontaneous demonstrations of frustration but rather planned events with planned targets, led by rogue military, ex-military and ex-People's Liberation Army of Thailand cadres.

That is not to deny the wealth gap in Thailand. It is a real problem that needs to be addressed urgently. But I think most Thais deal with the inequality differently. Some have taken advantage of the situation to try to create an atmosphere of violence for political gain rather than for economic equality.

steveromagnino said it best, above.

"You make the rather dubious presumption that the particpants were predominantly "have-nots." - no i don't - I'm implying that the inequality of wealth distribution is leading to a situation where civil unrest and authoritarian govt. are almost inevitable.

I think you are being over simplistic in your view of Thai society - and making a lot of conclusions that are in fact non-seqiturs.

taking just one event in isolation and making a sweeping conclusion from it - e.g. the make-up or organisation of the unrest in Bkk - is not taking a look at the whole picture - so whether or not I would agree with your interpretation of the immediate reasons or who organised or took part in the demos, it is really only tangential to the central argument.

I believe you're the one guilty of non-sequiturs and sweeping conclusions in this case, having suggested that the riots were symptomatic of a greater unrest. Yet offering no persuasive argument to support the notion.

Edited August 1, 2010 by wayfarer108

[yoshiwara]

Inequality? No way.

The rich and poor in Thailand both have equal rights. Both have only 1 vote.

There is plenty of prattle about the inequalities of Thailand which after all is a capitalist society like any other.

However, the key point is that 'inequality' is used as a front for the Thaksin gang to regain political power.

Thaksin's gofers have not presented one single economic demand as a part of their programme.

Nor can they as it would break up the regional class alliance established purely as a voting tool for Thaksin's aspirations.

Do not for one moment believe that Thaksin stands for a lesser inequality.

On the contrary he wishes to entrench inequality with himself dispensing gestures as his family loots the nation.

The assault on the working class of Bangkok was just another calling card.

[JohanV]

I believe you're the one guilty of non-sequiturs and sweeping conclusions in this case.... ...Yet offering no persuasive argument to support the notion.

Actually, in just about every case, I would say

Well said, wayfarer108

[JohanV]

A good start would be poor folks not willingly 'donating' X billions of Baht per year into the treasury via the government lottery and XX billions into the hands of the haves through the underground lottery. Something is wrong when you gamble away funds that could be used for food, housing, medicine, school tuition for your kids, etc. that could otherwise better your life and that of future generations of your family. Those 10 and 20 Baht notes add up to thousands and millions just like any other note.

I second that. The fundamental problem is in attitude ( which is a cultural/learned - not a genetical - problem).

Having said that, it would of course be helpful if the government used the X billion baht earned from said lottery

to help change this attitude - e.g. on improving education, instead of buying non-flying surveillance balloons

and scam bomb detectors...

Edited August 1, 2010 by JohanV

[animatic]

Inequality? No way.

The rich and poor in Thailand both have equal rights. Both have only 1 vote.

There is plenty of prattle about the inequalities of Thailand which after all is a capitalist society like any other.

However, the key point is that 'inequality' is used as a front for the Thaksin gang to regain political power.

Thaksin's gofers have not presented one single economic demand as a part of their programme.

Nor can they as it would break up the regional class alliance established purely as a voting tool for Thaksin's aspirations.

Do not for one moment believe that Thaksin stands for a lesser inequality.

On the contrary he wishes to entrench inequality with himself dispensing gestures as his family loots the nation.

The assault on the working class of Bangkok was just another calling card.

Yes this sums it up well into a neat little bundle of hypocracy which is the Red leaderships S.O.P and reason for being.

The same structures that enabled the rallys to fill up periodically, and fills their member's open hands with cash,

is the exact same structural social entities that also bleed the poor drier on a daily basis, with the other hand behind their backs.

Edited August 1, 2010 by animatic

[Heng]

A good start would be poor folks not willingly 'donating' X billions of Baht per year into the treasury via the government lottery and XX billions into the hands of the haves through the underground lottery. Something is wrong when you gamble away funds that could be used for food, housing, medicine, school tuition for your kids, etc. that could otherwise better your life and that of future generations of your family. Those 10 and 20 Baht notes add up to thousands and millions just like any other note.

Having said that, it would of course be helpful if the government used the X billion baht earned from said lottery

to help change this attitude...

That would be helpful. Though kind of like choosing to take yourself out of the game and hoping someone else will score and give you the credit. The good news is that not all of the poor behave like this. A very slight % does continue to pull itself up.

Edited August 1, 2010 by Heng

[JohanV]

A good start would be poor folks not willingly 'donating' X billions of Baht per year into the treasury via the government lottery and XX billions into the hands of the haves through the underground lottery. Something is wrong when you gamble away funds that could be used for food, housing, medicine, school tuition for your kids, etc. that could otherwise better your life and that of future generations of your family. Those 10 and 20 Baht notes add up to thousands and millions just like any other note.

Having said that, it would of course be helpful if the government used the X billion baht earned from said lottery

to help change this attitude...

That would be helpful. Though kind of like choosing to take yourself out of the game and hoping someone else will score and give you the credit. The good news is that not all of the poor behave like this. A very slight % does continue to pull itself up.

Yes. And those are the ones that will eventually change this country - step by step while the others just stand by and watch with gaping mouths.

Personally I also believe the "half-bloods" ( farang-thai kids ) can do a lot in the future,

as many of them will get a decent education / some knowledge of working democracy in their father's country, while still

keeping ties with their Thai culture - in a non-elitist way as their mother (most probably) is an Isaan farmer girl.

I hope to see some of them in a future Thai government, really.. ..that would be interesting, indeed

[jayjay0]

"I have to disagree the inequality is more than the distribution of wealth. It is about peoples rites. What ever made you think if every one had the same amount of money we would have equality? That is a pipe dream human nature would never allow it. "

no! wealth distribution and money are NIOT the same thing - and I assume you mean "rights" not "rites"?

right.

Thank you for pointing that out. I am a lousy speller and the spell check can't read my mind. I always thought there was some thing wrong with it. That is a serious thank you.

By the way I presume you meant NOT not NIOT Now that was a tounge in cheek chuckle.

sometimes you see a spelling mistake and then sometimes you see the wrong word used - this indicates it isn't a spelling mistake and underlines the persons lack of knowledge about a subject - so I asked what you meant - I see know harm in that.

reread my post none taking on your correction It was appreciated. No need to be so defensive on your mistake it was tongue in cheek. That means no offense meant.

[chantorn]

Inequality? No way.

The rich and poor in Thailand both have equal rights. Both have only 1 vote.

There is plenty of prattle about the inequalities of Thailand which after all is a capitalist society like any other.

However, the key point is that 'inequality' is used as a front for the Thaksin gang to regain political power.

Thaksin's gofers have not presented one single economic demand as a part of their programme.

Nor can they as it would break up the regional class alliance established purely as a voting tool for Thaksin's aspirations.

Do not for one moment believe that Thaksin stands for a lesser inequality.

On the contrary he wishes to entrench inequality with himself dispensing gestures as his family loots the nation.

The assault on the working class of Bangkok was just another calling card.

Yes this sums it up well into a neat little bundle of hypocracy which is the Red leaderships S.O.P and reason for being.

The same structures that enabled the rallys to fill up periodically, and fills their member's open hands with cash,

is the exact same structural social entities that also bleed the poor drier on a daily basis, with the other hand behind their backs.

I am very confuse.

Some say 1 person should have 1 vote (just like Thailand).

Some say educated people should vote and uneducated should not, as educated people are more likely to make a better decision, and less likely to sell their vote.

So, which is better?

I am so confuse.

[Heng]

A good start would be poor folks not willingly 'donating' X billions of Baht per year into the treasury via the government lottery and XX billions into the hands of the haves through the underground lottery. Something is wrong when you gamble away funds that could be used for food, housing, medicine, school tuition for your kids, etc. that could otherwise better your life and that of future generations of your family. Those 10 and 20 Baht notes add up to thousands and millions just like any other note.

Having said that, it would of course be helpful if the government used the X billion baht earned from said lottery

to help change this attitude...

That would be helpful. Though kind of like choosing to take yourself out of the game and hoping someone else will score and give you the credit. The good news is that not all of the poor behave like this. A very slight % does continue to pull itself up.

Yes. And those are the ones that will eventually change this country - step by step while the others just stand by and watch with gaping mouths.

Personally I also believe the "half-bloods" ( farang-thai kids ) can do a lot in the future,

as many of them will get a decent education / some knowledge of working democracy in their father's country, while still

keeping ties with their Thai culture - in a non-elitist way as their mother (most probably) is an Isaan farmer girl.

I hope to see some of them in a future Thai government, really.. ..that would be interesting, indeed

It's good to have that hope, but the numbers of them in the upper ranks of industry and politics so far (compared to the number of luk krungs there are) aren't that promising. There are some though, so it's possible.

Without putting a label on all foreigners but let's say older retiree/tourist that just HAD to keep living here/TEFL'er as a last resort/etc. + poor Issanite isn't exactly the traditional eugenics formula of marrying children of intellectuals with athletes.

Edited August 2, 2010 by Heng

[whybother]

I am very confuse.

Some say 1 person should have 1 vote (just like Thailand).

Some say educated people should vote and uneducated should not, as educated people are more likely to make a better decision, and less likely to sell their vote.

So, which is better?

I am so confuse.

1 group says it's ok to vote for whoever pays the most. They are part of the group that says 1 person should have 1 vote.

IMO, if a person accepts payment to vote, they should lose their right to that vote. (That isn't saying that the "uneducated" should not get to vote.)

[yoshiwara]

Inequality? No way.

The rich and poor in Thailand both have equal rights. Both have only 1 vote.

There is plenty of prattle about the inequalities of Thailand which after all is a capitalist society like any other.

However, the key point is that 'inequality' is used as a front for the Thaksin gang to regain political power.

Thaksin's gofers have not presented one single economic demand as a part of their programme.

Nor can they as it would break up the regional class alliance established purely as a voting tool for Thaksin's aspirations.

Do not for one moment believe that Thaksin stands for a lesser inequality.

On the contrary he wishes to entrench inequality with himself dispensing gestures as his family loots the nation.

The assault on the working class of Bangkok was just another calling card.

Yes this sums it up well into a neat little bundle of hypocracy which is the Red leaderships S.O.P and reason for being.

The same structures that enabled the rallys to fill up periodically, and fills their member's open hands with cash,

is the exact same structural social entities that also bleed the poor drier on a daily basis, with the other hand behind their backs.

I am very confuse.

Some say 1 person should have 1 vote (just like Thailand).

Some say educated people should vote and uneducated should not, as educated people are more likely to make a better decision, and less likely to sell their vote.

So, which is better?

I am so confuse.

This red apologist is not confused, or rather if they are it is because the orders from Thaksin Central are in a bit of a mess nowadays. The last time anybody checked the going rate for 1 vote for Thaksin was 500 baht peacetime and an escalator for red and black guard bomb throwing. Is this what you had in mind?

Do keep up the fake Thai spelling. 'I am very confuse'. It helps the fake kawaii.

[jayboy]

[quote name='yoshiwara' timestamp='1280731808' post='3789952'

This red apologist is not confused, or rather if they are it is because the orders from Thaksin Central are in a bit of a mess nowadays. The last time anybody checked the going rate for 1 vote for Thaksin was 500 baht peacetime and an escalator for red and black guard bomb throwing. Is this what you had in mind?

Do keep up the fake Thai spelling. 'I am very confuse'. It helps the fake kawaii.

As a change from this abusive,barely literate garbage, some may be interested to see Reuter's Andrew Marshall's excellent report.

http://blogs.reuters.com/andrew-marshall/2010/08/01/uneducate-people/

[yoshiwara]

As a change from this abusive,barely literate garbage, some may be interested to see Reuter's Andrew Marshall's excellent report.

http://blogs.reuters.com/andrew-marshall/2010/08/01/uneducate-people/

Andrew Marshall may be conned as a number of correspondents have been, but the fundamental position remains that Thaksin's gang have zero economic policies and only a campaign of violence and intimidation to achieve their political aims which is that of returning Thaksin to power.

Many red apologists try to claim that it is not all about Thaksin, probably including the above, but the fundamental underlying logic of the absence of red economic policies is precisely to focus on Thaksin as the central saviour, have no independent class economics and rely exclusively on Thaksin's largesse to cement political support.

Neither a number of correspondents or red apologists understand the key underpinnings of the Thaksin gang.

For many of the forum red cheerleaders they don't care. Arguments are purely instrumental to their cause:

Thaksin Number 1.

[JohanV]

It's good to have that hope, but the numbers of them in the upper ranks of industry and politics so far (compared to the number of luk krungs there are) aren't that promising. There are some though, so it's possible.

Without putting a label on all foreigners but let's say older retiree/tourist that just HAD to keep living here/TEFL'er as a last resort/etc. + poor Issanite isn't exactly the traditional eugenics formula of marrying children of intellectuals with athletes.

True. I love how you put it

However I know personally several well-skilled professionals who are living here married to Isaan girls

who are giving their kids a very decent education, and quite a lot who has moved to Europe with their families,

but still keep their links to Thailand intact. I was rather referring to them. And, I guess that's some 15-20 years on from now.

The losers who downgrade their english to "same-same" and spend most time in a bar here are not much to hope for,

I certainly do agree on that..

Edited August 2, 2010 by JohanV

[JohanV]

I am very confuse.

Some say 1 person should have 1 vote (just like Thailand).

Some say educated people should vote and uneducated should not, as educated people are more likely to make a better decision, and less likely to sell their vote.

So, which is better?

I am so confuse.

Well,,,

A voter who asks for advice on how to think on an internet forum isn't much of a voter, really.

Neither is someone who votes as their neighbours do, or as they are paid to do.

Democracy is built by people who can make up their own minds and stand up for their opinions.

FYI:

Some say you should not troll

Some say you should get a life

Think about that while being "confuse"...