All Bangkok Districts To Be Flooded If Klong Sam Wa's Sluice Gate Further Opened: Deputy Governor

[robblok]

I saw a clip on the television where Wat Arun was being successfully protected by a big wall of sandbags and metal sheets. But of course all the surrounding neighborhood was flooded.

Do readers here think that if that community broke down those walls and flooded Wat Arun, the water levels in their surrounding neighborhoods would go down?

I doubt it because a temple is not that big and water can go around it. However if you block the water flow for a wide area then yes it would help. Dams are not bad as long as water can flow.

[Kvwielink]

Yes simple economics.. the economy will still have grown in 2011 and 2012 but less. In the period of flooding the economy would have contracted but on a whole its not that bad. There is still growth. Simple economics. But you focus on the negative (a bit less growth)

Who says there will still be growth in 2012? They haven't even begun to fully grasp the economic impact of this disaster. Many factories will be closed for months. One of the residents in our building works in Nava Nakhon. He said that although their company was one of the few who managed to keep the water out, most of their competitors got massively flooded and will not be operational for about half a year. Don't forget a lot of these high tech companies operate in very sterile environments, and it will take them months to get everything back to standard.

We also don't yet know if the flooding of these industrial estates, compounded by the poor handling and communication of the government will prompt any of these companies to cut their losses and relocate their operations elsewhere.

Also, foreign investment is a big driver of the Thai economy, and if the way this has been handled scares off enough investors from putting their money in Thailand this will be yet another blow to the economy.

If the government would throw in the towel, and let Bangkok flood, that could just be the final nail in the coffin that has foreign investors run with their money to Vietnam, China, Malaysia, etc.

Finally, this current government is counting on the forecast growth percentages to balance their budgets. This was already an impossible task with all the promises they made to the electorate, without having a clue where the money needed to come from. If the economy in this year as well as next year grows less, or God forbid, shrinks, this will mean either slashing more in government spending (read: job losses, because they won't cut their promised waste of money programs of course) or even more borrowing. I'm not sure of the current figures, but I do believe that Thailand already has a sizable debt and would not do wisely to make it grow further.

[DocN]

I wonder how long it will be before one of the Shinawatras takes credit for ending the rainy season.

And I wonder, who on earth needs comments like this?

[BlueTerrace]

The short sightedness of many on this forum amazes me. If Bangkok floods, the situation will only get worse. Right now they're already slashing the economic growth of the country by several percentage points. With Bangkok making up almost half of the countries GDP, guess what will happen to the economy if the city floods for several weeks? Companies shut down, economy will shrink, more people will lose their jobs (lots of them not living in Bangkok, only working there...). And why? Because others want another "quick fix" to their own problems.

I say again, I feel incredibly sorry for those who have lost their homes, everything they had, and are now desperately waiting for the water to drain, but just putting that same water on your neighbor's porch is not going to fix this problem for the country as a whole. The individual needs will have to be set aside for the good of the country, difficult as that may be.

Just to clarify, I am not trying to choose sides here on a political basis. This is just common sense, try to limit the damage to those areas already hit. Using this disaster for political gain is a very sad state of affairs, which just goes to show how low the political climate in this country has sunk.

Well said.

[Kilgore Trout]

If anyone is to blame for this situation it is EVERY member of EVERY government for the past 50+ years since the last flood for not doing what was necessary to prevent it from happening again.

Not to mention the people who sold their votes to put them in office. It all goes back to forward thinking and asking "why."

Not the Thai's strongest points.

[otherstuff1957]

So, is there a valid reason to save Bangkok? Aside from wanting my job to still exist when I head back there, I have no personal ax to grind. I am neither waist deep in stinking floodwater nor am I nervously awaiting the flood to arrive.

The total population of the flooded provinces on the Chao Phraya above Bankok is about 8 million. Now, these provinces are not entirely flooded, I drove through most of them a few days ago and large areas have either drained already or escaped flooding entirely. So, let's estimate that 50% of these people are currently flooded (a very high estimate IMHO). That's 4 million people. Now, does anyone think that the government is doing a good job helping these people? Does anyone honestly think that the government will do a good job helping these people recover?

The official population of Bangkok is about 9 million. The eastern and western parts of Bangkok that are currently being flooded are much less densely populated than the central area, so let's say that 2 million people are currently flooded or will soon be flooded. That still leaves about 7 million people that the BMA is trying to save from flooding. If they are not successful the number of people who are unable to continue their daily lives will more than double. If the government is doing a poor job now, how do you think things will be with twice as many people needing assistance while the government is busy dealing with flood waters in their own buildings?

Saving Bangkok is undoubtedly worsening and prolonging the suffering of the people to the north, east and west of Bangkok, but the government seems to have made the decision that not saving Bangkok would lead to a situation that they simply could not cope with.

[DocN]

inner Bangkok dry, you get relief , food,

shelter and donation......inner Bangkok wet you get nothing because now people have to worry for themself, simple as that.

Donations?!!! You're dreaming. Thai people have no concept of charity! They could watch you die in the street.... Just look how wealth is distributed in a RICH country like Thailand. How many humanitarian THAI organizations do you know of?

Rubbish! The staff in my company organised a collection to help flood victims weeks ago as they did when the Tsunami hit in 2004. They are now organising work parties to clean staff members houses that have been flooded. Get over your prejudice and have a look around you. Or is your comment just a Freudian slip reflecting your own attitude and your like mInded friends?

Did your people pay special tax for the privilege of keeping themselves dry while others are submerged?

This clearly is double standard.

I support the poor to fight for their equal right.

Can it be, that some of those who are already flooded and/ or the poor you so bravely fight for, are paying no tax at all?

Just asking....

[webfact]

Floods will hit inner Bangkok in 1-2 days if floodgate problem at Klong Sam Wa is not resolved quickly /Nation

[whybother]

I saw a clip on the television where Wat Arun was being successfully protected by a big wall of sandbags and metal sheets. But of course all the surrounding neighborhood was flooded.

Do readers here think that if that community broke down those walls and flooded Wat Arun, the water levels in their surrounding neighborhoods would go down?

I doubt it because a temple is not that big and water can go around it. However if you block the water flow for a wide area then yes it would help. Dams are not bad as long as water can flow.

Compared to the amount of water flowing down from the north, Bangkok is not that big and water can go around it.

[webfact]

RT @seacorro: Repairs underway #samwa #ThaiFloodEng http://twitter.com/seacorro/status/131566519107850240/photo/1

RT @seacorro: Lots of police and reporters, no angry mob whatsoever #samwa #ThaiFloodEng

[Kvwielink]

Floods will hit inner Bangkok in 1-2 days if floodgate problem at Klong Sam Wa is not resolved quickly /Nation

Does anyone know the source of this claim? I can't find it...

[robblok]

I saw a clip on the television where Wat Arun was being successfully protected by a big wall of sandbags and metal sheets. But of course all the surrounding neighborhood was flooded.

Do readers here think that if that community broke down those walls and flooded Wat Arun, the water levels in their surrounding neighborhoods would go down?

I doubt it because a temple is not that big and water can go around it. However if you block the water flow for a wide area then yes it would help. Dams are not bad as long as water can flow.

Compared to the amount of water flowing down from the north, Bangkok is not that big and water can go around it.

Bangkok is seriously blocking the water, but i doubt that they can do much more. But i think its all power play of the governor. I think he is just scaring people. Some minor floods might happen but do you really think a 5m wide klong that has now 25% more water going through it will flood the entire inner city. I somehow doubt it.

Also when you hear that some pumps are not working at full capacity because there is not enough water in the klongs you start to wonder.

Anyway i want this to end as soon as possible. Here i see water levels slowly dropping (3cm in the last two days). Its not much but its progress.

[animatic]

I wonder how long it will be before one of the Shinawatras takes credit for ending the rainy season.

And I wonder, who on earth needs comments like this?

People needing black humor to laugh in the face of great pain.

[whybother]

Bangkok is seriously blocking the water, but i doubt that they can do much more. But i think its all power play of the governor. I think he is just scaring people. Some minor floods might happen but do you really think a 5m wide klong that has now 25% more water going through it will flood the entire inner city. I somehow doubt it.

Also when you hear that some pumps are not working at full capacity because there is not enough water in the klongs you start to wonder.

Anyway i want this to end as soon as possible. Here i see water levels slowly dropping (3cm in the last two days). Its not much but its progress.

Don Mueang is inside the flood protection zone and is now under 1-2 metres of water. That is something that could happen to large areas of Bangkok if too many gates are opened too much.

Areas down stream of the SamWa flood gates are being flooded, and there is a risk of more industrial estates being flooded too ... and then Suvarnabhumi. I doubt that all of Bangkok would be flooded because of this one gate, but a lot of areas south of the gate would be affected if it is opened too far.

Good to hear the levels are going down. Hopefully it will speed up with the lower tides.

[robblok]

Bangkok is seriously blocking the water, but i doubt that they can do much more. But i think its all power play of the governor. I think he is just scaring people. Some minor floods might happen but do you really think a 5m wide klong that has now 25% more water going through it will flood the entire inner city. I somehow doubt it.

Also when you hear that some pumps are not working at full capacity because there is not enough water in the klongs you start to wonder.

Anyway i want this to end as soon as possible. Here i see water levels slowly dropping (3cm in the last two days). Its not much but its progress.

Don Mueang is inside the flood protection zone and is now under 1-2 metres of water. That is something that could happen to large areas of Bangkok if too many gates are opened too much.

Areas down stream of the SamWa flood gates are being flooded, and there is a risk of more industrial estates being flooded too ... and then Suvarnabhumi. I doubt that all of Bangkok would be flooded because of this one gate, but a lot of areas south of the gate would be affected if it is opened too far.

Good to hear the levels are going down. Hopefully it will speed up with the lower tides.

I think this could take long, and i know that because im west nothing BKK does could help me. Anyway then the governor is playing a game.. scaring people. Its not the whole of BKK that is at risk. He just uses it to get his way.

If they are flooding other area's then they should close it a bit. One of my favorite places in BKK is at risk because of this gate. I still want them to go on taking water but they should not flood the whole city.

But i honestly think the governor has other motives. (and im a big democrat supporter)

[Kilgore Trout]

If the FROC allows the mobs to destroy the flood walls and flood central Bangkok they will once again have only themselves to blame

Do you really believe that? In all my years of living here I have never once seen a Thai say "this is my fault, I take responsibility for it and I will do my utmost to make sure it never happens again."

This is true on all levels, even domestic squabbles with my wife.

Whatever happens, no Thai will take responsibility, ever, full stop.

[volk666]

They are repairing the gate right now, no protesters, just plenty of journalists and the police.

Dr Seri on TPBS said yesterday that this one gate is a non-issue, they can open it to 1.5 m and it would still be okay. Or maybe it was another doctor, they are all very smart right now.

A BMA guy scared bejesus out of everybody yesterday that if they don't close this gate all Bangkok would be flooded because they have underground tunnels and what not. Another Dr said that they still have one gate in Minburi to protect San Saeb. All these dudes shout their mouths off without thinking it through, it's worse when the government does this itself, or BMA.

Now one day Yingluck orders to open the gate, next day Sukhumband orders to close it. BMA argues that if they defense system is broken in one place the effect could be unpredictable and many other places might collapse, too. I suspect the first place that would collapse is their desire to cooperate with FROC and central government. They'd just wash their hands off, put on their yellow boots and stomp home.

From their pov Yingluck blew it with red protesters, she shouldn't have agreed to their demands right away, she should have shown leadership and resolve but instead she dropped her dignity and gave herself to these "real red men". Even if they were right she should have stood her ground and took the side of BMA, her subordinates in the chain of command.

Anyway, it's water under the bridge now, people know who she is but they don't care one way or another, they love her that way and there will be no political repercussions so it's just watch and observe mode for everybody.

[whybother]

<snip>

But i honestly think the governor has other motives. (and im a big democrat supporter)

Sukhumband would have 3 motives: 1) Look good. 2) Make Yingluck / PT look bad. 3) Keep Bangkok dry and keep his constituents happy (which is part of 1, but it's the least important of the 3)

Regardless of what he does, he's going to look bad to the people outside Bangkok, ONLY because he is the face (not "Thai face") of Bangkok.

Not allowing water to flow through Bangkok in a controlled manner covers motive 3, but does nothing for motive 1 and 2. His motives in relation to this gate will be "I told you so" when more industrial estates get flooded or the airport comes under threat. That won't do much for motive 3, but will cover motive 1 and 2 quite well.

[chowder]

inner Bangkok dry......supplied(help) with water and food etc..deliver to your door step, we are not sitting around doing nothing.

Inner Bangkok wet....now we have to protect ourself, no time for other thing

starved for a few day to a week then you'll think twice about letting inner Bangkok flood.

[ballpoint]

<snip>

But i honestly think the governor has other motives. (and im a big democrat supporter)

Sukhumband would have 3 motives: 1) Look good. 2) Make Yingluck / PT look bad. 3) Keep Bangkok dry and keep his constituents happy (which is part of 1, but it's the least important of the 3)

Regardless of what he does, he's going to look bad to the people outside Bangkok, ONLY because he is the face (not "Thai face") of Bangkok.

Not allowing water to flow through Bangkok in a controlled manner covers motive 3, but does nothing for motive 1 and 2. His motives in relation to this gate will be "I told you so" when more industrial estates get flooded or the airport comes under threat. That won't do much for motive 3, but will cover motive 1 and 2 quite well.

Like it or not, the governor of Bangkok is elected by, and responsible to, the people of Bangkok. At the next election he is not going to want to be remembered as the man who could have kept the city (mostly) dry, but chose to flood it in order to help the non voting (in the Bangkok gubernatorial elections) residents of the surrounding areas. Especially as it has not been proven one way or another as to the effectiveness of such an action. I believe it would be his "job" to hold this position, no matter what party was in charge of the national government. In a time of national disaster it is that national government that must take charge of the entire system. If the government firmly believed that the benefits to the surrounding areas out weighed the drawbacks of having the country's major industrial, commercial, administrative, and population centre under water then they would be obliged to over rule the governor and open the gates. The very fact that both FROC - a government appointed organisation, and ministers of the government have, by their statements and actions, largely gone along with the governor's reasoning (except in a few cases of pandering to mob rule), would suggest that they see the drawbacks as far greater importance than the benefits. Should they change their opinion in the days to come, then they, and they alone, have the obligation to make the decision to over ride the BMA and take full control of the flood gates. People putting blame on the governor of Bangkok for doing the job he was elected to do would be well advised to consider this, and maybe ask if the national government is doing the job it was elected to do?

[volk666]

Sukhumband would have 3 motives: 1) Look good. 2) Make Yingluck / PT look bad. 3) Keep Bangkok dry and keep his constituents happy (which is part of 1, but it's the least important of the 3)

This is the kind of reasoning that guarantees there will be no political change after the flood and the division will be as deep as ever.

As for reasons themselves - by following number 3 Sukhumband satisfied his ambition number 1 many times over, his reelection is virtually guaranteed, image is the last thing on his mind, keeping Bangkok dry should be exhausting in itself. I don't think he cares much about PT or Yingluck either, she is nobody in Bangkok, the city voted against PT last time and they will surely vote against them again, and the rest of the country can make up their own minds, they want her they can keep her, they are flooded now, not Bangkok. If they want to blame Sukhumband for their flood it's their choice, too. They've been punished enough, let them sit and wait until donations from Bangkok or Japan or whatever with "courtesy of Phue Thai MP / Thaksin" stickers arrive to relieve them. If that's how they want to live their lives, so be it.

[whybother]

RT @Tulip_Oum: 11:38am after Klong Sanwa sluice gate opened for 1m-wide, water level in Klong Samwa community still hasn't go down.~@Neaw_NBC #thaifloodeng

[LivinLOS]

RT @Tulip_Oum: 11:38am after Klong Sanwa sluice gate opened for 1m-wide, water level in Klong Samwa community still hasn't go down.~@Neaw_NBC #thaifloodeng

So imagine how deep they would have been had it stayed more closed..

[theanimaster]

I say open all the gates and let the waters flow freely. F-ck it. Let the whales go as fast as they can, even though it means saving just 10 days. Hell.. I'm already in Pattaya anyways.

But seriously... in the end the only thing that matters is: WILL THAIS EVER REALISE THEIR GOV'T IS SCREWING THEM UP THE @SS? I'll bet mine they won't. But oh, don't blame them -- the government isn't stupid -- they CREATED this society to serve THEM.

I think the Thais took Kennedy's words the wrong way : "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country" Sorry... the Thai people need to wake up.

[HardenedSoul]

Not wishing to sound callous but the answer to your question is simple; you should have a few more days of inconvenience because you, directly or otherwise, made the decision to live in a part of the country the government considers to be less economically important to Thailand than certain parts of Bangkok. Like those who choose to live in places that are prone to, say, earthquakes or hurricanes - you've chosen to live with the inherent risk of things going pear-shaped. In some countries, the authorities offer effective assistance and relief in the event of disaster but, as you should be painfully aware by now, Thailand is not one of them. We've all made the decision to live in a country that has a history of political instability and, of course, flooding - if things go Pete Tong and we suffer as a result, we have only ourselves to blame.

I appreciate that your anger has its roots in the immediate effect the situation's had on your life but if it were reversed, with, say, you living in a dry area of BKK threatened by flood water, would you be so keen to have the sluice gate opened?

Edit: Decided not to bring myself down the same level and deleted my post.

Nothing else I can say to this post which would somehow not be insulting.

Well this is what your post said before you deleted it. "I truly hope that the bigot's in Bangkok will have an opportunity to eat the huge lake they have baked.

Yes we will all suffer but it will be over just that much quicker."

I didn't expect my post to be popular but that doesn't make it untrue; perhaps that's why you deleted it.

I'm hardly a bigot and nothing the residents - myself included - of dry parts of Bangkok did helped to exacerbate this situation; I sympathize with the guy whose home is underwater; it's got to be immensely frustrating but, as someone else said, he did have weeks to move his possessions to an uncompromised area before the flood waters came. It's just bad luck and it's not nice to wish it on others.

[farang000999]

Remember, the people who live in Central Bangkok are the ones who subsidize much of the country via tax receipts.

[sparebox2]

Can it be, that some of those who are already flooded and/ or the poor you so bravely fight for, are paying no tax at all?

Just asking....

Even the poorest of the poorest pay tax. Even children not having income pay tax. Tax is not only paid by the rich. tax is universal. Even a farang pay tax. The tax is cal VAT. My kids pay tax everyday when they buy ice-cream.

Please do not go into believing that your tax money is better than the poor's tax money.

[Gippy]

1320212394[/url]' post='4815672']

Remember, the people who live in Central Bangkok are the ones who subsidize much of the country via tax receipts.

What is this obsession with there only being 'rich' tax payers in the centre of Bangkok? For a start, seriously rich people probably find a way to avoid paying tax anyway! My flooded moo ban in the northern burbs is home to heads of government departments, owners of large companies and SME's exporting goods all over the world. We live in a 5 million baht house and it's a fishing shack compared to 75% of the houses in our area. We pay our share of taxes thank you.

[supaprik]

FASHION ISLAND CLOSED>>>>liebklong song road starts to flood, most people on the east side are now affected....water going down? NOT LIKELY!! it's risen here at least 50 cm in the last 3 hours....

[DocN]

Can it be, that some of those who are already flooded and/ or the poor you so bravely fight for, are paying no tax at all?

Just asking....

Even the poorest of the poorest pay tax. Even children not having income pay tax. Tax is not only paid by the rich. tax is universal. Even a farang pay tax. The tax is cal VAT. My kids pay tax everyday when they buy ice-cream.

Please do not go into believing that your tax money is better than the poor's tax money.

Sorry, let me rephrase: Can it be, that some of those who are already flooded and/ or the poor you so bravely fight for, are paying no incometax at all?

I don't go into any believing it's better money- but I strongly believe the "rich" are paying more money!

Edited November 2, 2011 by DocN