Thaksin Says Sister May Not Become PM Even If Pheu Thai Wins

[samurai]

Thaksin's 30 Baht system (which was not his, but was his, depends what you want to prove and which side you're on) was a very bad thing because according to the democrat, it will bankrupt the health system, and in this case, and this case only, it was a Thaksin idea, because if it's a good thing, it can't be a Thaksin idea but somehow a democrat idea but if eventually it turns out to be a very bad thing then it will definitely be a Thaksin idea ...

Then, because at 30 bahts it's going to bankrupt the health system, Abhisit improved it and made it a "zero baht" system so it will be more profitable ????

I'm completely lost, can someone please help ?

No, that is how the song goes. Not just for the *30 baht health care system*

every success during the Thaksin days was rooted in the politics of the previous Democrats government.

Every fail and problem of the Abhisit government is rooted in the bad decisions ones made under Thaksin.

Thaksin with his populist policies and micro credits wasted millions of taxpayers money.

Abhisit with his welfare state policies and free handout lowers the living cost for all Thai citizens.

[jdinasia]

So am I and also qualify but being reasonably well off and a foreigner don't make use of it, believing this is a resource for less well off Thai people.Most of my Thai friends, mostly professionals, take the same view.

A noble gesture indeed.

And like all noble gestures, probably better left unspoken.

A huge difference in the universal plan --- and the taxpayer plan .... For the universal plan the hospital gets 2k/yr/citizen in the cachement area .... the other is funded through monthly payments made by taxpayers. (In other words ---- a taxpayer funds themselves .... (I think the max deduction is 750 Baht/month from income) and picks 2 hospitals that they can go to. (I think --- I remember my employer asking and I chose CMU and Lanna -- CMU because it is minutes away and Lanna because I have friends that run the place

My BF and I are similar in our outlook on this ... we go private and self-fund almost all the time. However, if you are sick and end up needing the ER of your closest hospital (and the follow-up care from that treatment) you go. It isn't sponging off the system .. it is utilizing the insurance mandated by labor law .... Like i said in this thread this is the first time I have used the system and found it to be efficient and decent ... in the future I'll be using SriPat still ... but this time the records of the event and the remarks of the treating physician required that follow-up be in the same place as the ER treatment

but hey .... never pass up the chance to try and knock another poster I am sure the noblest people don't cash their tax-return checks either

[rubl]

Agree with you, subsidized healthcare is the way to go, even the democrats eventually understood that. They just tried to improve it, but as the second part of "letitbe" post shows, and I agree with it, without fully understanding the point of charging such a small amount as 30 Bahts. (The only argument for charging when it costs more to collect charge than you get is to maybe make people think twice before using service on constant visits for the most trivial complaints)

Yes, that is one of the reason for the *30 Baht system*

It wasn't cancelled by the Junta or Abhisit&Korn because of it's high administration cost. don't be a fool and believe that nonsense explanation.

The reason for it is that just a *zero Baht health care* promise was a way to topple Thaksin populist policies.

different views:

""The income from the Bt30 service charge is relatively so little and it's not worth it given that medical-service providers have to hire staff to register the money collection in three account books," said Dr Kriangsak Watcharanukolkiat, head of Phu Kradeung Hospital in Loei, which never collected the Bt30 fee.

Kriangsak believed it would be better for the government to increase subsidies for hospitals providing medical care."

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/10/13/national/national_30016065.php

[samurai]

Agree with you, subsidized healthcare is the way to go, even the democrats eventually understood that. They just tried to improve it, but as the second part of "letitbe" post shows, and I agree with it, without fully understanding the point of charging such a small amount as 30 Bahts. (The only argument for charging when it costs more to collect charge than you get is to maybe make people think twice before using service on constant visits for the most trivial complaints)

Yes, that is one of the reason for the *30 Baht system*

It wasn't cancelled by the Junta or Abhisit&Korn because of it's high administration cost. don't be a fool and believe that nonsense explanation.

The reason for it is that just a *zero Baht health care* promise was a way to topple Thaksin populist policies.

different views:

""The income from the Bt30 service charge is relatively so little and it's not worth it given that medical-service providers have to hire staff to register the money collection in three account books," said Dr Kriangsak Watcharanukolkiat, head of Phu Kradeung Hospital in Loei, which never collected the Bt30 fee.

Kriangsak believed it would be better for the government to increase subsidies for hospitals providing medical care."

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/10/13/national/national_30016065.php

... says the new Public Health Minister in October 2006.

[rubl]

Yes, that is one of the reason for the *30 Baht system*

It wasn't cancelled by the Junta or Abhisit&Korn because of it's high administration cost. don't be a fool and believe that nonsense explanation.

The reason for it is that just a *zero Baht health care* promise was a way to topple Thaksin populist policies.

different views:

""The income from the Bt30 service charge is relatively so little and it's not worth it given that medical-service providers have to hire staff to register the money collection in three account books," said Dr Kriangsak Watcharanukolkiat, head of Phu Kradeung Hospital in Loei, which never collected the Bt30 fee.

Kriangsak believed it would be better for the government to increase subsidies for hospitals providing medical care."

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/10/13/national/national_30016065.php

... says the new Public Health Minister in October 2006.

Apart from whistling you might try reading as well, dear samurai. The part I quoted is from a doctor, head of a hospital in Loei, somewhere that-away in the North where all those people live who like to topple k. Thaksin's policies

[samurai]

Yes, that is one of the reason for the *30 Baht system*

It wasn't cancelled by the Junta or Abhisit&Korn because of it's high administration cost. don't be a fool and believe that nonsense explanation.

The reason for it is that just a *zero Baht health care* promise was a way to topple Thaksin populist policies.

different views:

""The income from the Bt30 service charge is relatively so little and it's not worth it given that medical-service providers have to hire staff to register the money collection in three account books," said Dr Kriangsak Watcharanukolkiat, head of Phu Kradeung Hospital in Loei, which never collected the Bt30 fee.

Kriangsak believed it would be better for the government to increase subsidies for hospitals providing medical care."

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/10/13/national/national_30016065.php

... says the new Public Health Minister in October 2006.

Apart from whistling you might try reading as well, dear samurai. The part I quoted is from a doctor, head of a hospital in Loei, somewhere that-away in the North where all those people live who like to topple k. Thaksin's policies

I followed the link provided by you. did you read the article?

[lanna2011]

Not at all, I said, "not much difference between 30 Baht and zero Baht" ..........Abhisit took Thaksin's 30 Baht charge and reduced it to zero Baht.

In simple English, he accepted and then extended further Thaksin's original initiative. Is that clear enough?

You are making some strange arguments. There are people arguing that the 40 baht not covered for a student uniform (brought into play by one of the red hecklers) is just too much ... but now you say there is not really a difference between 30 baht and zero baht.... The issue of altering a uniform once -- versus the family's regular 30 baht visits to the hospital/dr/OPD would seem to weigh out on the side of the free medicine. Anecdotal issues aside ... free healthcare even though it aint the BEST isn't bad at all. My bill this week from Suan Dok (CMU hospital) including 2 months of three different maintenance meds ----- 0 Baht. Same meds at Sri Pat (private hospital section of CMU) 2900 Baht .... So, yeah .. I'd say the free education system AND the universal free medical care still need some work but are, in practice, good and getting better.

If your partner was registered with social security she would be eligible to go to the hospital free (I am assuming she is as she is a dressmaker ...) That covers her locally AND elsewhere if the needed medical support is not available locally. It would not cover OPD treatment in other provinces.

Thaksin deserves the credit for sure - I think farangs using the system is pretty cheapskate

[whybother]

Thaksin deserves the credit for sure - I think farangs using the system is pretty cheapskate

We pay taxes. Why not use the services that those taxes provide?

[rubl]

From samurai:

Yes, that is one of the reason for the *30 Baht system*

It wasn't cancelled by the Junta or Abhisit&Korn because of it's high administration cost. don't be a fool and believe that nonsense explanation. The reason for it is that just a *zero Baht health care* promise was a way to topple Thaksin populist policies.

Me: "The income from the Bt30 service charge is relatively so little and it's not worth it given that medical-service providers have to hire staff to register the money collection in three account books," said Dr Kriangsak Watcharanukolkiat, head of Phu Kradeung Hospital in Loei, which never collected the Bt30 fee. Kriangsak believed it would be better for the government to increase subsidies for hospitals providing medical care."

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2006/10/13/national/national_30016065.php

From samurai:

... says the new Public Health Minister in October 2006.

Me:

Apart from whistling you might try reading as well, dear samurai. The part I quoted is from a doctor, head of a hospital in Loei, somewhere that-away in the North where all those people live who like to topple k. Thaksin's policies

From samurai:

I followed the link provided by you. did you read the article?

Me again:

IMHO a stupid question. Unlike you I not only followed the link, but read the article. Some is from the Public Health Minister at the time and the part I quoted from a doctor upcountry. The part about which you incorrectly wrote '... says the PHM".

[jdinasia]

Thaksin deserves the credit for sure - I think farangs using the system is pretty cheapskate

We pay taxes. Why not use the services that those taxes provide?

The Ministry of Health deserves the credit, the plan was already in the research stage. Thaksin took it and ran with it and did some damage to the hospital system in the process.

http://healthcare-economist.com/2009/07/13/universal-coverage-in-thailand/

an interesting (quite academic) article on how the various healthcare schemes have benefitted people in Thailand

http://www.equitap.org/publications/wps/EquitapWP16_2005.06.28.pdf

(note --- UC is free for Thais if you read the two links above you will see that the number of uninsured has dropped to about 4%, I assume ethnic minorities but I would have to do more research than I care to mess with to be sure --- the system used by foreigners is NOT free and is in fact an insurance that is being paid for)

[jayboy]

Thaksin deserves the credit for sure - I think farangs using the system is pretty cheapskate

We pay taxes. Why not use the services that those taxes provide?

The Ministry of Health deserves the credit, the plan was already in the research stage. Thaksin took it and ran with it and did some damage to the hospital system in the process.

http://healthcare-economist.com/2009/07/13/universal-coverage-in-thailand/

an interesting (quite academic) article on how the various healthcare schemes have benefitted people in Thailand

http://www.equitap.org/publications/wps/EquitapWP16_2005.06.28.pdf

(note --- UC is free for Thais if you read the two links above you will see that the number of uninsured has dropped to about 4%, I assume ethnic minorities but I would have to do more research than I care to mess with to be sure --- the system used by foreigners is NOT free and is in fact an insurance that is being paid for)

One has to laugh at this post, the writer being determined to deny Thaksin the major credit for the rural health initiative.Even the documents he attaches don't suggest that, and in fact one of them indicates major benefits accrued by rural people as a result of Thaksin's schemes.Of course there were issues and complications as there always are.One could say the same about Britain's NHS but few Brits deny the vision and the morality of the scheme.Equally of course civil servants come up with proposals - that's their job.But it requires politicians to implement and that what Thaksin did, followed by his successors who certainly improved the scheme.But the Thaksin haters can't bring themselves to admit Thaksin's major contribution in this area.Even Abhisit recognises this.