Thai Politicians Are Out To Exploit Farmers

[webfact]

EDITORIAL

Politicians are out to exploit farmers

By The Nation

Promises of rice price subsidies and credit cards do not offer any solution to the problems of the rural poor

In a bid to win the hearts of voters at the grass roots, all political parties are going to great lengths to project a promising future. Once they are elected, our paddy prices will go up to record heights that country folk have never seen before.

Suddenly in the run-up to the election, there is serious attention to the plight of farmers, the working classes and the poor. The issue of farmers comes to the fore because parties know they represent the largest group of voters. Once again we hear candidates boasting about lifting farmers out of chronic poverty.

Farmers in the Northeast seem pleased with the brighter prospects painted by some politicians. They are led to believe that their poverty is going to be a thing of the past.

The problem farmers are facing now is the skyrocketing cost of production, but their incomes are failing to cover the need for higher spending. As a result, they have heavier debt burdens arising from higher land-rental fees and prices for oil, fertiliser, seeds and pesticides.

Major parties are talking about increasing farmers' income or keeping rice prices high, among a string of short-term benefits and populist measures to gather support. The Democrats promise to raise farmers' income by 25 per cent through the income guarantee scheme. Pheu Thai promises a hefty Bt15,000 a tonne for paddy if it wins. That is 37-per-cent higher than the current Bt11,000 from the income-guarantee programme, a scheme that has been implemented for two years by the Democrat-led coalition. Pheu Thai also vows to replace the Democrats' income-guarantee scheme with the rice-pledging system.

While it's difficult to see the paddy price going beyond Bt10,000 a tonne in the near future, are we supposed to believe that a promise of Bt15,000 a tonne is real, that these candidates' moral compassion for farmers is genuine, and that the rhetoric is not just hot air? The price of paddy took a tumble this year to Bt8,500 a tonne. Only a few months ago farmers staged protests by closing a highway in Ayutthaya and demanding Bt14,000 per tonne to cover overhead costs. At that time, the government believed even Bt9,000 per tonne was too high, reasoning that rice-export prices could not be too high as prices from Vietnam and Cambodia (at Bt6,000 a tonne) are much lower. No matter, the same pattern of paddy pricing still continues as production costs rise.

It's easy to promise a guaranteed price without pointing out some of the adverse effects. Both the pledging and income-guarantee schemes have drawbacks, are susceptible to irregularities among authorities and rice millers and could burden the government with huge subsidies at the expense of the taxpayer.

When the pledging price is high, cheaper rice from neighbouring countries is smuggled across the border into Thailand. This happened in March 2009, when the Thai Rice Exporters Association reported 1,000 tonnes of paddy crossed the borders every day to benefit from the high pledging price.

At present, the government prefers the income-guarantee system. The insured price is Bt11,000 a tonne of white rice. The compensation is Bt2,800 a tonne. The government is expected to subsidise its price-guarantee project by up to Bt60 billion this year, compared with Bt43 billion last year, as the price gradually declines.

This scheme benefits small farmers directly, but subsidies tend to increase with changing market prices and farmers won't improve rice quality as their income is guaranteed.

Pheu Thai has also unveiled its proposed farmer credit-card scheme. Its chief economic strategist, Olarn Chaipravat, says that if farmers can sell rice at Bt15,000 per tonne, or earn Bt300 per day, they can afford to spend. With credit cards, farmers can buy fertilisers, pesticides and fuel in advance at fair prices.

The proposed rice bank will determine the credit amount each farmer is entitled to. The maximum is 70 per cent of potential income from their rice, based on the Bt15,000-per-tonne target.

Olarn needs to be told that farmers are poor, landless and suffer acute financial illiteracy. Encouraging them to spend more will simply create more problems. Even without credit cards, they reel under huge debt burdens. The point is, farmers have to rent land at a high cost and rely on costly imported fertiliser. Subject to rice price control, their produce emerges from the field cheaper than the production cost.

There's simply too much mendacity and rhetoric. If the wretched conditions of our farmers are easy to improve in four years, then why have been powerless, landless and poor for ages? And why do farm workers who are employed by these poor farmers and belong to the lowest of the low-income group continue to be ignored and sink deeper and deeper into poverty?

They may be angry, uneducated and gullible, but poor farmers should not be exploited by self-serving charlatans in Bangkok just to win votes. Candidates need to be taught that they must serve the people, not exploit them. What we need is a long-term approach to developing rice farming that promotes sustainable growth. We need more sustainable farming methods, better water-resource management and irrigation, more land allocation, more empowerment of farmers, more R&D for the sector, better education for farmers and more schools for their children.

-- The Nation 2011-05-28

[JurgenG]

I really like to start the day with a good laugh. This article is so typical of the division Bangkok "elite" Vs rural poor. It doesn't take long to realize to which side the writer belongs : farmers suffer from "acute financial illiteracy", why would they be soo poor if they weren't so dumb ?

Furthermore, if the government try to help the poor farmers, it's going to be "a burden for the tax payers" (read Bangkok people) .

It is made really clear in the last paragraph : farmers are "uneducated and gullible". So typical of the democrats.

The only part I agree with is poor farmers should not be exploited by self-serving charlatans in Bangkok just to win votes

What for a start showing a little bit of respect ?

[whybother]

I really like to start the day with a good laugh. This article is so typical of the division Bangkok "elite" Vs rural poor. It doesn't take long to realize to which side the writer belongs : farmers suffer from "acute financial illiteracy", why would they be soo poor if they weren't so dumb ?

Furthermore, if the government try to help the poor farmers, it's going to be "a burden for the tax payers" (read Bangkok people) .

It is made really clear in the last paragraph : farmers are "uneducated and gullible". So typical of the democrats.

The only part I agree with is poor farmers should not be exploited by self-serving charlatans in Bangkok just to win votes

What for a start showing a little bit of respect ?

I think you're contradicting yourself a bit there.

It seems that you are suggesting that the writers belong to the "Bangkok 'elite' " ... so they are calling themselves "self-serving charlatans"?

[473geo]

In the past rice farming was labour intensive, people who had little or no land could work in the paddies. Back breaking work though it was, there was at least some money coming in. Now machinery has negated the need for hand planting, and hand reaping, where is the work and income for the labourers? Where do the untrained youth find work in the rural community?

This is the new issue confronting the rural communities.

[Ricardo]

I really like to start the day with a good laugh. This article is so typical of the division Bangkok "elite" Vs rural poor. It doesn't take long to realize to which side the writer belongs : farmers suffer from "acute financial illiteracy", why would they be soo poor if they weren't so dumb ?

Furthermore, if the government try to help the poor farmers, it's going to be "a burden for the tax payers" (read Bangkok people) .

It is made really clear in the last paragraph : farmers are "uneducated and gullible". So typical of the democrats.

The only part I agree with is poor farmers should not be exploited by self-serving charlatans in Bangkok just to win votes

What for a start showing a little bit of respect ?

Surely those are all results of the long-term failures of the Thai education-system, to give the poor the necessary skills, to better themselves ?

So not necessarily elitist clap-trap from city-slicker journalists at all.

Maybe the local grandees, co-incidentally also TRT/PPP/PTP/Thaksin's supporters, might work to educate the poor farmers in the financial-realities of life through their network of 'Red Schools', rather than 101-uses for petrol or why Abhisit is unelected but Samak & Somchai were ?

But then those rich middle-men might have to pay more for their rice, or charge lower-interest on their loans pre-season, so that would never do ! Gods, the farmers might even set-up self-owned co-operatives, and cut the middle-men out !

Who really benefits from holding-down the poor ? And why do they finance Pheu Thai ?

Edited May 28, 2011 by Ricardo

[REM]

I think this is a well written article, and it is targeted at the swing voters, not the elitists or the red shirts. While the wording is a bit harsh, i am not here to nit pick the syntax of the article, but rather to heed it's warning, which is a just warning. As I see it, the writer is correct. It is nothing but pandering the gullible, whether they are poor or not. The vast majority of people in this country are financially illiterate, and giving them more spending power is dangerous.

Do you really think a starving farmer is going to buy business necessities in advance, that he will know the prices are going to rise and purchase in advance, or that prices are going to drop and sell his rice in advance. NO WAY!!! He's going to buy a new TV, or some gold for his mia noi. Then who is going to bail out all of these people???

I think for the current generation, this is a horrible scheme. But as for giving education to the children and teenagers, then allowing them to have this kind of access after an education, that will help the country.

But until then, I don't think farmers or taxi drivers are competent enough. As the article says, will the quality of the rice be improved? Probably not. Will my taxi be nicer and get me from point A to point B faster, probably not. But hey, I'll see more farmers with gold jewelry and iMobile phones from 7-11, and I'll be able to watch Thai TV in my taxi!!!

It's no knocking the people, it's knocking the failing system, and those who pander and lie to the people for their own gain. Which I agree with.

On a side note, i think Thaksin is a rice exporter, I have friends in the Saudi embassy, and they say he exports tons of rice from here to there. So do you think Thaksin, in all of his infinite glory (sarcasm for those who can't tell), will actually let the price go up 37%, or his profits decline by 37%? I highly doubt it. And it is his party doing this pandering.....

[rreddin]

In the past rice farming was labour intensive, people who had little or no land could work in the paddies. Back breaking work though it was, there was at least some money coming in. Now machinery has negated the need for hand planting, and hand reaping, where is the work and income for the labourers? Where do the untrained youth find work in the rural community?

This is the new issue confronting the rural communities.

There are many issues facing rice farmers. In the part of the country where I live, there is only one crop a year. Most of the farmers round here own their own land; it has been in the family for generations, and that is one of the problems. When the parents died, the land was divided between the children. Farms have got smaller and many are not suited for the use of mechanical planters or harvesters. That means at planting and harvesting times, labour has to be bought in, but the farmer also sells his labour to his neighbour. In this way, money is circulated around the community.

One of the issues the farmers' credit card proposal seeks to address is the problem of debt. It is clear that the writer of the OP has not got a clue about how poor farmers have to finance their farms. The farm is most likely mortgaged to the bank through a co-operative in which all members cross guarantee the debts of the other members. That means the farmer is mortgaging his crop, and when the loan is repaid (as it has to be each year), he has to borrow again against next year's crop. When it is needed, additional finance often can only be raised from private lenders (including monks!) who lend short-term and charge very high rates of interest. 5% per month is common. The idea of the credit card is to break the reliance on this type of financing, but it will not lift farmers out of debt on its own.

There is a crisis building in rice farming and in the rural areas. It will not happen for several years and it will come on gradually. It will affect different parts of the country to a greater or lesser degree. Two thirds of 14 year old's surveyed (source:Thai Visa sometime last year)said they would not follow their parents and go into farming. They intend to move to the towns and cities to find work - there are very few non-agricultural jobs in the rural areas. That means there will be a shortage of labour on the farms and a gradual depopulation of the countryside. Couple that with the small size of many farms and the burden of debt and it is easy to see farms becoming derelict and some villages becoming dependent on money sent home by family members working in factories or abroad. So far, these potential social and economic problems have not registered on the political radar.

[473geo]

Are all rice exporters who sell and create demand for Thai rice not good for Thailand? Tell me who is actually setting the base price for Thai rice at the moment.......is the current government not in control of the rice price?

Maybe there is a reason why Thaksin is not in jail........he is disposing of the Government rice surplus for them.....

[sirchai]

Are all rice exporters who sell and create demand for Thai rice not good for Thailand? Tell me who is actually setting the base price for Thai rice at the moment.......is the current government not in control of the rice price?

Maybe there is a reason why Thaksin is not in jail........he is disposing of the Government rice surplus for them.....

Farmers in the Northeast seem pleased with the brighter prospects painted by some politicians. They are led to believe that their poverty is going to be a thing of the past.

I just came back from Bangkok to the lower northeast this morning. The fact that most of cab drivers in the capital are from the Isan made me ask a few of them a question.

The fact living in the same area, even speaking a similar slang made it easy to get their full attention.

All said Yingluck would be much better, because Abhisit had two years time and nothing had changed to the better.

They truly believe that a credit card will be issued for Taxi drivers and farmers and the quality of life will increase dramatically.

Not mentioning the fact that they'll receive money to vote for the wrong person.

Considering the fact that the educational system's still decades behind others will not create 'smarter' farmers, or Taxi drivers in the future.

Lao Kao Free For All.....................:jap:

[scorecard]

In the past rice farming was labour intensive, people who had little or no land could work in the paddies. Back breaking work though it was, there was at least some money coming in. Now machinery has negated the need for hand planting, and hand reaping, where is the work and income for the labourers? Where do the untrained youth find work in the rural community?

This is the new issue confronting the rural communities.

There are many issues facing rice farmers. In the part of the country where I live, there is only one crop a year. Most of the farmers round here own their own land; it has been in the family for generations, and that is one of the problems. When the parents died, the land was divided between the children. Farms have got smaller and many are not suited for the use of mechanical planters or harvesters. That means at planting and harvesting times, labour has to be bought in, but the farmer also sells his labour to his neighbour. In this way, money is circulated around the community.

One of the issues the farmers' credit card proposal seeks to address is the problem of debt. It is clear that the writer of the OP has not got a clue about how poor farmers have to finance their farms. The farm is most likely mortgaged to the bank through a co-operative in which all members cross guarantee the debts of the other members. That means the farmer is mortgaging his crop, and when the loan is repaid (as it has to be each year), he has to borrow again against next year's crop. When it is needed, additional finance often can only be raised from private lenders (including monks!) who lend short-term and charge very high rates of interest. 5% per month is common. The idea of the credit card is to break the reliance on this type of financing, but it will not lift farmers out of debt on its own.

There is a crisis building in rice farming and in the rural areas. It will not happen for several years and it will come on gradually. It will affect different parts of the country to a greater or lesser degree. Two thirds of 14 year old's surveyed (source:Thai Visa sometime last year)said they would not follow their parents and go into farming. They intend to move to the towns and cities to find work - there are very few non-agricultural jobs in the rural areas. That means there will be a shortage of labour on the farms and a gradual depopulation of the countryside. Couple that with the small size of many farms and the burden of debt and it is easy to see farms becoming derelict and some villages becoming dependent on money sent home by family members working in factories or abroad. So far, these potential social and economic problems have not registered on the political radar.

A couple of years back a lecturer from Kasetsart uni gave a presentation on this theme. If I can remember, his main points were:

- Vietnam and other countries will become more and more price competitive (already are) and Vietnam and other countries are producing very good quality rice in large quantities.

- For Thailand, there will be more and more pressure for cost efficiencies:

-- Using more and better technology (machinery: for planting, harvesting, milling, and more hi-tech for monitoring growth, disease, etc etc) )

-- Much more Efficiency in labor costs, fertilizer costs, irrigation equipment costs, etc etc.

- He also predicted that ultimately small scale farmers will not be able to make enough income to survive purely on rice farming and many don't have the means or the right locations to change to other crops, and regardless of crops, doubtful that small scale farmers can survive. Therefore the unfortunate reality that many will simple be pushed completely out of farming by the prevailing circumstances.

- Also probably means that, unfortunately, large scale farming will become much more prevalent. In Thailand that of course brings up lots of other issues of ruthless land buy-out etc., of small farms.

- Also means that the government ( whatever government) need to have decentralization policies, including policies which 'force' the distribution of industrialization and other work opportunities across a lot more of Thailand. In fact if this does not happen (along with better education) and therefore create a scenario whereby a large percentage of the population can gain a good quality of life through their own productivity, then the hand outs will just chnage from farmers and the rural poor to the rural non-farm related unemployed.

Food for though.

[FarangBuddha]

Why, in general, is the lot of Thai farmers so precarious when the prices for most agricultural commodities have been strong for years? Where does all the money go from Thailand massive ag. exports?

[jimbeam1]

In the past rice farming was labour intensive, people who had little or no land could work in the paddies. Back breaking work though it was, there was at least some money coming in. Now machinery has negated the need for hand planting, and hand reaping, where is the work and income for the labourers? Where do the untrained youth find work in the rural community?

This is the new issue confronting the rural communities.

Where I used to live, near Buriam, the only part of the rice crop that was mechanised was the ploughing. The guy who owened the planter/harvester wanted to much money.So the farmers helped each other to sow (scatter) the seed. At harvest time, if you needed help you either paid by quantity, or again you helped each other.

My first year there, we had finished our last field by midday, I thought great early day. No went over to an ajoining field, to help a lady who's husband was ill.

jb1

[473geo]

In the past rice farming was labour intensive, people who had little or no land could work in the paddies. Back breaking work though it was, there was at least some money coming in. Now machinery has negated the need for hand planting, and hand reaping, where is the work and income for the labourers? Where do the untrained youth find work in the rural community?

This is the new issue confronting the rural communities.

Where I used to live, near Buriam, the only part of the rice crop that was mechanised was the ploughing. The guy who owened the planter/harvester wanted to much money.So the farmers helped each other to sow (scatter) the seed. At harvest time, if you needed help you either paid by quantity, or again you helped each other.

My first year there, we had finished our last field by midday, I thought great early day. No went over to an ajoining field, to help a lady who's husband was ill.

jb1

On my family farm the same methods were used, a few years ago. Gradually the machinery for reaping and the broadcast 'planting' system has taken over. The young upcoming farmers do not want to reap by hand when there is an alternative, and the older generation are dying out. Things are changing. The effort is being more concentrated on screening the rice while drying because there are more alien seeds in the machine output, which of course can lower the price.

I have stated before, the China rail link will open new available markets. Thailand must be ready to take advantage, a good rail network linking into the new export supply line, education and investment to develop the eastern rural areas, and the fully utilise the excellent hard working labour force contained within.

[Ricardo]

Cannot this rice reach the Chinese market already, by ship rather than by rail ?

Just wondering why the line might "open new available markets", rather than just possibly cut transport-costs to a market which already exists.

[473geo]

Cannot this rice reach the Chinese market already, by ship rather than by rail ?

Just wondering why the line might "open new available markets", rather than just possibly cut transport-costs to a market which already exists.

Invest and develop......might suggest that other avenues may be explored to provide export opportunities other than rice, in recent years I understand the top imports into China have included machinery and transport equipment, also rubber and textiles,..........just to point out a couple of areas where Thailand may look to offset the Chinese exports into Thiland by investing in and utilising the rural workforce.

[Misterwhisper]

"They are led to believe that their poverty is going to be a thing of the past."

Led to believe... that is the key phrase.

But how could you prossibly NOT vote for a certain party if its absent de-facto leader so generously promises a credit card to every farmer. And a table computer for every schoolchild, and a debt moratorium, and making every Thai wealthy within a mind-boggling 6 months, and, and, and...

[Ricardo]

Cannot this rice reach the Chinese market already, by ship rather than by rail ?

Just wondering why the line might "open new available markets", rather than just possibly cut transport-costs to a market which already exists.

Invest and develop......might suggest that other avenues may be explored to provide export opportunities other than rice, in recent years I understand the top imports into China have included machinery and transport equipment, also rubber and textiles,..........just to point out a couple of areas where Thailand may look to offset the Chinese exports into Thiland by investing in and utilising the rural workforce.

Let's hope so ... perhaps also the high-ish speed line might bring more tourists down to Bangkok/Pattaya, invisible-exports are also good for creating more jobs for the ordinary Thais.

[473geo]

Cannot this rice reach the Chinese market already, by ship rather than by rail ?

Just wondering why the line might "open new available markets", rather than just possibly cut transport-costs to a market which already exists.

Invest and develop......might suggest that other avenues may be explored to provide export opportunities other than rice, in recent years I understand the top imports into China have included machinery and transport equipment, also rubber and textiles,..........just to point out a couple of areas where Thailand may look to offset the Chinese exports into Thiland by investing in and utilising the rural workforce.

Let's hope so ... perhaps also the high-ish speed line might bring more tourists down to Bangkok/Pattaya, invisible-exports are also good for creating more jobs for the ordinary Thais.

Agreed but Thailand again will have to step up to the mark, there are plenty of unspoiled beach vacation areas in Malaysia and beyond that may prove a major attraction, so Thailand must create something special to get the tourists off the train!

But we digress a little....apologies. I just hope the Thai politicians we are discussing absorb the potential but also appreciate the groundwork required.

Edited May 28, 2011 by 473geo

[Johpa]

Why, in general, is the lot of Thai farmers so precarious when the prices for most agricultural commodities have been strong for years? Where does all the money go from Thailand massive ag. exports?

Like most commodities in Thailand, the rice industry, especially the export industry, has long been monopolized by a few families who distribute, as is proper in a "democracy", political influence to all parties as the political parties in Thailand are not really based upon politics but upon influence. These families, along with the major bankers, often related by marriage, insure that the profits from the sale of commodities like rice, stay within the banking system and do not trickle downwards into the hands of the farmers.

The mechanization of rice farming benefits the large scale land owners, but is not affordable to the smaller padi owners. I remember driving through Phrae province last November and seeing a large rice field not broken up by shorts mud walls being mechanically harvested and directly across the highway were the more traditional padi lands being manually harvested by communal groups. The long term political goal is to have the local big agra slowly take over ownership of the land. And one only need to read this article or listen to the likes of Sondhi Limtongkul to hear the thinly veiled racism at play against the ethnic Tai farmer by the urban Sino-Thai elite.

[tartempion]

In the past rice farming was labour intensive, people who had little or no land could work in the paddies. Back breaking work though it was, there was at least some money coming in. Now machinery has negated the need for hand planting, and hand reaping, where is the work and income for the labourers? Where do the untrained youth find work in the rural community?

This is the new issue confronting the rural communities.

Where I live, 40kms East of Udon Thani sowing, planting and reaping is still done by hand. Kubota tractors are used to plough, haven't seem one field ploughed by buffaloes in 2010.

The real problem is there is nothing to do the other 10 months of the year.

[MrChangers]

Renting land at high prices....... Feudal system designed to keep the poor, poor and the rich, rich. Call it bondsman or slavery the story is the same. 90% of the land is owned by a minimal percent of the population. They are getting screwed over. Seeing old people bent in the back and not walking with a straight back due to the fact they had to work the fields and being forced to bow to the so called superior is criminal.

[rubl]

This Nation article from the 23rd of May somehow didn't make it to the forum. Still I think it's related to the topic.

BUSINESS

Pheu Thai proposes new income distribution method

By The Nation

Bottom-up income distribution is the ultimate goal behind Pheu Thai Party's proposed farmer credit card scheme and related policies for farmers, said its chief economic strategist Olarn Chaipravat.

"Economists' general aim economic growth, but Pheu Thai's stragy will push growth from the bottom. We'll create opportunities, jobs and income of the grassroots people," he said in an interview to Krungthep Turakij. "If they can sell rice at Bt15,000 per tonne or earn Bt300 per day, they can afford spending. The economic growth will be fairly distributed."

The party sets the guaranteed price of paddy white rice at least Bt15,000 per tonne, jasmine rice at Bt20,000, and sticky rice at Bt18,000. With credit cards, farmers can buy fertilisers, pesticides and fuel in advance at fair price.

Olarn said the policies are necessary given higher fuel prices which would push up production cost in the next 10-20 years. Moreover, climate change is leading to food shortages. This will benefit Thai farmers, but the farmers now are in grave financial constraints.

He noted that policies in the past 40 years succeeded in building up infrastructure, but farmers are left in poverty, with intermediaries like rice millers and exporters benefiting from huge profits. Though a 5kg bagged rice costs Bt200, farmers could not earn as much as Bt20,000 per tonne for their rice due to the monopoly in rice trade by fewer than 10 private companies.

The credit card scheme will be materialised in 600-700 districts, where farmers must register to set up 50:50 joint rice banks with the Bank for Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperatives. Each rice bank will start with average capital of Bt20 million, including Bt15,000 investment from each farmer who can borrow from the Village Fund for this purpose.

The rice bank will determine the credit amount each farmer is entitled to. The maximum is 70 per cent of potential income from their rice, based on the Bt15,000 per tonne target. With this amount, they can use to buy raw materials in advance.

The debt can be suspended in the event of natural disasters. Supporting this plan would be the crop insurance scheme, shouldered by the government. The rice could be pledged with the rice banks if farmers expect market prices to exceed the minimum level of Bt15,000 per tonne. At the end, their debts will be deducted from the income.

"City dwellers may ask if the rice price would then climb up? From data, we produce 30 million tonnes of paddy rice per year, or 20 million tonnes of polished rice. Thais consume 10 million tonnes and the rest is exported. We will have a mechanism in place to ensure that domestic price is not too expensive while exports are carried out in a thorough way," he said.

The mechanism requires the Public Warehouse Organisation to sell 5kg bagged rice at Bt110, and it could gain more from the sale of rice husk and other byproducts. This in turn requires a professional leader at the organisation. Olarn personally believes that the chief should earn no less than what PTT or Thai Airways International chiefs are earning.

On exports, Thailand needs to forge a pact with Vietnam, a major rice producer, and formulate cooperation with neighbouring countries like the Philippines and Indonesia which are buying rice from Thailand.

He said the scheme should entail loans of no more than Bt250 billion per annum, but on January 1 every year, the loans would be deducted from farmers' accounts at the rice banks. Well-managed rice banks could turn into private enterprises and seek listing on the Market for Alternative Investment.

"The scheme barely needs no money and it also eradicates corruption," he said, adding that from rice, other commodities like tapioca, sugar cane, oil palm, corn, pork, eggs and shrimps could be managed in the same way.

-- The Nation 2011-05-23

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/2011/05/23/business/Pheu-Thai-proposes-new-income-distribution-method-30155993.html

Edited May 28, 2011 by rubl

[OzMick]

I really like to start the day with a good laugh. This article is so typical of the division Bangkok "elite" Vs rural poor. It doesn't take long to realize to which side the writer belongs : farmers suffer from "acute financial illiteracy", why would they be soo poor if they weren't so dumb ?

Furthermore, if the government try to help the poor farmers, it's going to be "a burden for the tax payers" (read Bangkok people) .

It is made really clear in the last paragraph : farmers are "uneducated and gullible". So typical of the democrats.

The only part I agree with is poor farmers should not be exploited by self-serving charlatans in Bangkok just to win votes

What for a start showing a little bit of respect ?

While your concern for the "poor, uneducated farmers" is touching, it is more than a little misplaced. Farming is a job, and if it doesn't pay enough, they are free to change their employment, just as I did many times when I first started working. Rice farming at he moment is a labour intensive low-yield industry, with plenty of international competition; don't expect to get rich from it.

What is being promised them is more subsidies from the taxes of their fellow workers (many ex-farmers now working in 7-11s and factories), and they would have to be gullible indeed to believe that all these promises would ever eventuate.

The only reason they are being shown a bit of respect is because they have a vote. For that reason only, they are worthy of being told lies.

Edited May 28, 2011 by OzMick

[TAWP]

The problem at hand is that the local feudal lords -- often same or in cahoots with the local MPs -- are enforcing rice-prices and having a middle-man control that wouldn't be possible in a fair market place. It is a form of feudal corporatism.

The cure is of course that those that cannot regain their costs for the price given [not asked] should stop doing it. Eventually there will be a shortage and prices should rice -- but that is again in a fair market place. How to solve this issue we are seeing here is to set up real auction markets of pledges against the planned crops, working with removing the local middlemen that seemingly have way too much power.

[scotbeve]

In the past rice farming was labour intensive, people who had little or no land could work in the paddies. Back breaking work though it was, there was at least some money coming in. Now machinery has negated the need for hand planting, and hand reaping, where is the work and income for the labourers? Where do the untrained youth find work in the rural community?

This is the new issue confronting the rural communities.

During the rainy season there is no other way to plant or harvest but by hand. The machines, whether they are planters or harvesters, cannot work in the soft mud. AND when one goes out to the fields during these times one will not find any young people working - they've all left for greener pastures (no pun in tended)....

[newermonkey]

I really hope Thaksin's croud get into power, then the rural majority will be able to find out how much they are being lied to, it will be a hard lesson but necessary for democracy and real change "after" they have learned how wrong they were this time around. When they start to riot in a year or so against the Pheu Thai leaders what colour can they use? they are running out of choices!

[Arkady]

The policy of encouraging farming of inefficient small holdings was a cornerstone of Thailand's strategy to avoid becoming the next communist domino in the 60s and 70s. Now they can't remember why they have this system which is hopeless economically. PT wants to go back to having the govt buy rice at artificially high prices, including huge quantities smuggled from neighbouring countries. Of course this is a good way for PT politicians to make a huge amount of money from the govt but farmers usually get short changed on the rice pledging and are told they don't meet the conditions fully due to late delivery, excessive moisture etc, etc. Then the rice in the govt warehouses is not accounted for properly and much of it mysteriously disappears.

[jimbo38]

During the rainy season there is no other way to plant or harvest but by hand. The machines, whether they are planters or harvesters, cannot work in the soft mud.

They work the fields that are totally submerged under water all the time. That's ploughing, planting, harvesting etc. All done with machinery. Under water.

Have you ever been to Thailand??

[exbelg]

so farmers get 11.000 baht per 1000 kg = 11 baht per kilo gram

so why we pay 10 to 20x more in tesco ?

thanks to the middle person who wants to pay at least as possible to the farmer, thanks to the miller, thanks to the grosist, thanks to tesco or other middle persons who get rich while the famers keeps on getting near to nothing...

but what I always wonder: if rice farming does not support the overhead cost, why not start to grow something else ???

Edited May 29, 2011 by exbelg

[trisailer]

All politicians are out to win. They'll say anything to win. They know that they will not be held to delivering because humans have short memories.

Fear is a powerful motivator. George bush got reelected by raising the terrorist threat weekly, same, same.