animatic Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 (edited) Well it seems the Red Villages movement is attempting upgrading to the Red City and Red Capital levels. Bangkok itself is going nowhere, floods or not. But to do an isolationist, Myanmar style move, to the heart of isolated redland begs for abuses. Can you for see the Dems not being able to campaign or give speeches in the towns around the New Capital, because the entrenched redshirts harass them too much? Not to mention the isolation of being there. How many kilos extra to the airport? Can you imagine the cat fight in NAMING a new capital? The only viable solution is directly Due East, but not on a flood plain. Unless they are so paranoid about Cambodia bombing or Laos invading, in which case Hua Hin area but high ground. East stays close to Swampy airport, a vital diplomatic and governmental link to the world. As well as to the many support structure activities that swarm around a government. All the way up to Issan? Same problems getting businesses up there, too far from transport, and regular droughts. How can the water table in the North East support 10 million more souls and their construction projects, when it can't do it with those who are local now???? Then, there is always the problem of the original locals being displaced as property values skyrocket and influential bastards move in and force them off their land for development schemes. And where will the go...Bangkok for 10 years of course, as it dies, it won't die, because the shift from Issan will be SOUTH where they can now afford to live. So many thinks this Nasa 'Rocket Scientist' did NOT consider. Edited February 5, 2012 by animatic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
folium Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Flooding aside, actually a brilliant idea, seat of govt having its own city. Govt can sell all its land and do something truly remarkable for the people. Land prices will drop making land more affordable for working and middle classes in BKK. Issan would benefit hugely as well. Something called "face" in Thailand.... Issan will NEVER be the Thai capital... Hua Hin is possibly the best option... A capital should be beside the sea .. in case of war.. Unless of course Thailand follows Australia, but look what a huge mistake that was.... All of the worlds most beautiful and comfortable Capitals are beside waterways of some sort... I vote Hua Hin... Why should a capital be beside the sea? And why is Canberra "a huge mistake"? The only reason that a lot of capitals are traditionally beside the sea is that they are usually the biggest cities because of the trade at seaside ports. These days, there is no reason for the government to be near the ports. When capitals do move it is always away from the sea as the trading function is replaced by a desire to have a more centrally located capital (Madrid, Brasilia, New Delhi, Washington, Canberra, Ankara, Moscow, Islamabad, Abuja, Dodoma)) or for defensive reasons (Nyapidaw & Belmopan, latter defence against hurricanes). For Thailand, historical precedent would suggest a return to Ayutthaya but that would be a classic case of frying pan to fire in terms of flooding. Isaan, the land of Lao & Khmer, hardly appeals to Thai national pride, so the Lanna Kingdom might be reborn and the Shinawatras return home with a capital city. Would certainly have more of an impact than the awful Night Safari and similar botched additions from the last reign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orac Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 snip.... Using simple maths, this should have been initiated 12 years ago - meaning that it is Thaksin fault as it was his government that was in power and it was on his watch. You just cannot trust anything he does (doesn't do) can you!!!! ....snip I think you will find that Chuan Leekpai was PM 12 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
folium Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 The move need no be all at once. A gradual transfer of government offices and financial incentives to Bangkok's key employers (financial and telecom service companies) would encourage other companies to follow. To be blunt, as long as the key infrastructure was relocated, Bangkok could remain where it was, but with a reduced population. As it is, Bangkok is bursting at the seams and is at risk, so something has to be done. The Northeast offers more available land, reduced costs and a lower risk of Typhoon related exposure. Bangkok could continue as a major city. Am I missing something??? as I thought that the floods eminated from the North East of Thailand!!! Check your geography and attached map. The Isaan drains into the Mekong, hence the lack of historical connection with central/northern Thailand. The Isaan is a separate part of Thailand in all ways and thus a very unlikely destination for a new capital unless land prices are the only stipulation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Om85 Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 I think that the capital should be move to another location , not only because of the flood but because Bangkok's infrastructure sucks, they need bigger roads, and i think they only way of getting that is constructing another city . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digitalbanana Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 (edited) Rediculous......... Perhaps he's a red shirt rocket scientist? Edited February 5, 2012 by Digitalbanana Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orac Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 This guy has been warning about this for some time: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TAWP Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 The capital should be in the center of the economical importance of the nation. So very much not in Issan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SICHONSTEVE Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 snip.... Using simple maths, this should have been initiated 12 years ago - meaning that it is Thaksin fault as it was his government that was in power and it was on his watch. You just cannot trust anything he does (doesn't do) can you!!!! ....snip I think you will find that Chuan Leekpai was PM 12 years ago. Give or take a year then!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SICHONSTEVE Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 (edited) The move need no be all at once. A gradual transfer of government offices and financial incentives to Bangkok's key employers (financial and telecom service companies) would encourage other companies to follow. To be blunt, as long as the key infrastructure was relocated, Bangkok could remain where it was, but with a reduced population. As it is, Bangkok is bursting at the seams and is at risk, so something has to be done. The Northeast offers more available land, reduced costs and a lower risk of Typhoon related exposure. Bangkok could continue as a major city. Am I missing something??? as I thought that the floods eminated from the North East of Thailand!!! Check your geography and attached map. The Isaan drains into the Mekong, hence the lack of historical connection with central/northern Thailand. The Isaan is a separate part of Thailand in all ways and thus a very unlikely destination for a new capital unless land prices are the only stipulation. Check the facts first!!! Quote from Wikipedia: Severe flooding occurred during the 2011 monsoon season in Thailand. Beginning at the end of July triggered by the landfall of Tropical Storm Nock-ten, flooding soon spread through the provinces of Northern, Northeastern and Central Thailand along the Mekong and Chao Phraya river basins. In October floodwaters reached the mouth of the Chao Phraya and inundated parts of the capital city of Bangkok. Edited February 5, 2012 by SICHONSTEVE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macmundi Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Moving the capital would be ideal. If we disregard the millions of billions invested in property development and the number of lives and families that are bound to their birthland and their ancestor's ancestor's birthland, and the history this capital holds. Yet, it still does not compare to the millions of lives and their livelihood that will be affected in the process, whether it takes 20 years, or 200 years. Building a dyke around the whole city is cheaper. (excluding the bits and pieces of the pie that some officials expect to get for their authorisation autograph..) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
folium Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 The capital should be in the center of the economical importance of the nation. So very much not in Issan. Quite often it is deliberately not in the centre of economic activity. Berlin, Washington DC, Brasilia, Madrid, Canberra, New Delhi etc Thus splitting up the functions of economic "hub" and political "hub", to prevent overconcentration in a single site. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PoorSucker Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 I thought it was moved to Dubai already.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skorchio Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 So if they move the capital northeast, will the Isaaners become taller paler skinned more elegant creatures? Will that filter down to the bars around the country after a generation or 2? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bagwan Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 How long did it take for a new road to be constructed to connect Pattaya and Jomtien, and it is suggested that a new capital city is built in Esan? How many years did it take to build a new airport after the idea was first mooted? OMG In much of Esan there is only enough rainfall to grow one crop of rice. Has anybody thought where the water comes from that a new city would consume in one way or another? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkCyr Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 They've been saying the same thing to us here in Tokyo as well -- only citing the massive earthquakes that are on the way at some point in the not-so-distant future. Will it happen? I doubt it. Too expensive to move, as it would be in Thailand, I reckon. Much less expensive than rebuilding...but rare is the politician who can see beyond their current fiscal budget. lol Still, just to be safe...it might be an idea to avoid buying a condo in BKK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MengWan Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 (edited) As this "scientist" is working for the NASA, the capital should ne moved to Washington ? Anyway, it is a good thing that rocket scientists are NEVER used to choose the location of countries' capitals ! Edited February 5, 2012 by MengWan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donkeykong Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 The problem has been solved! Yingluck has consulted her resident iChing wizard and feng shui grand master. The previous Laws of Gravity have now been abolished. Water will no longer flow downhill. A new law 'Gravity 2.0' allows the government to choose the days when Gravity 2.0 will apply. Farmers and landowners can apply to the government for a licence to operate Gravity 2.0. Thankfully, airports are to be considered exempt from Gravity 2.0 and the old laws will still apply. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SICHONSTEVE Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 (edited) The capital should be in the center of the economical importance of the nation. So very much not in Issan. Quite often it is deliberately not in the centre of economic activity. Berlin, Washington DC, Brasilia, Madrid, Canberra, New Delhi etc Thus splitting up the functions of economic "hub" and political "hub", to prevent overconcentration in a single site. Agreed, I think they should move the capital from London to Rutland. The capital should be in the center of the economical importance of the nation. So very much not in Issan. Quite often it is deliberately not in the centre of economic activity. Berlin, Washington DC, Brasilia, Madrid, Canberra, New Delhi etc Thus splitting up the functions of economic "hub" and political "hub", to prevent overconcentration in a single site. "Quite often it is deliberately not in the centre of economic activity". Agreed, I think they should move the capital from London to that hive of inactivity (apart from brewing Ruddles that is) - Rutland, 'lock stock and barrel'!!! Edited February 5, 2012 by SICHONSTEVE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ratcatcher Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 So if they move the capital northeast, will the Isaaners become taller paler skinned more elegant creatures? Will that filter down to the bars around the country after a generation or 2? GOD forbid! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wxyz Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 (edited) Well it seems the Red Villages movement is attempting upgrading to the Red City and Red Capital levels. Bangkok itself is going nowhere, floods or not. But to do an isolationist, Myanmar style move, to the heart of isolated redland begs for abuses. Can you for see the Dems not being able to campaign or give speeches in the towns around the New Capital, because the entrenched redshirts harass them too much? Not to mention the isolation of being there. How many kilos extra to the airport? Can you imagine the cat fight in NAMING a new capital? The only viable solution is directly Due East, but not on a flood plain. Unless they are so paranoid about Cambodia bombing or Laos invading, in which case Hua Hin area but high ground. East stays close to Swampy airport, a vital diplomatic and governmental link to the world. As well as to the many support structure activities that swarm around a government. All the way up to Issan? Same problems getting businesses up there, too far from transport, and regular droughts. How can the water table in the North East support 10 million more souls and their construction projects, when it can't do it with those who are local now???? Then, there is always the problem of the original locals being displaced as property values skyrocket and influential bastards move in and force them off their land for development schemes. And where will the go...Bangkok for 10 years of course, as it dies, it won't die, because the shift from Issan will be SOUTH where they can now afford to live. So many thinks this Nasa 'Rocket Scientist' did NOT consider. I think the new name should be CLONE capital after the current PM clone. Are there enough Thai elephants to move the capital? Wouldn't it be better to move the capital to the southern provinces? They will be ruling Thailand soon anyway. Edited February 5, 2012 by wxyz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TackyToo Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Can we drag it upriver using thousands of boats? Wrap it up and go! The city of angles could easily be transformed in the so much sought after prison for the drug dealers and addicts. 555 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skywalker69 Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Can we drag it upriver using thousands of boats? Why not realocate Bangkok to Dubai. where the man in controll is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wxyz Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 (edited) Would it not be cheaper to build a sea wall with lots of pumps? Like Venice just did and Amsterdam always has done. Edited February 5, 2012 by wxyz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbamboo Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Wasn't there something along these lines talked about a while back with rumours of a Napiyadaw style shift to the north and coincidentally several influential individuals buying up swathes of land in a remote area at the same time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Time Traveller Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 For a doctor, he doesn't sound very smart. Governments don't listen to scientists, they listen to money. What is going to happen to their real estate investments in bangkok if a couple of million people move elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbamboo Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 Would it not be cheaper to build a sea wall with lots of pumps? Like Venice just did and Amsterdam always has done. You haven't been in Thailand long, have you! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nong38 Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 What about moving it to the middle of flood plain, see if the new water management works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
animatic Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 (edited) Widen the river to the east. Add one or two large scale sluice ways north south through Bangkok using existing road right of ways and putting the traffic up above, during wet season and through and above during dry. The main problem is not specifically the rains and subsidence, but the reduced through-put that over building has caused. Chao praya and 3 major water ways should handle the load. Then with with reclaimed or re-placed catchments up north, AND some water walls around critical resources that send the water the right place at the right speed, then it becomes manageable. And more likely to get done than moving Bangkok lock stock and astronomical property values losses to Issarn. Edited February 5, 2012 by animatic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
folium Posted February 5, 2012 Share Posted February 5, 2012 The move need no be all at once. A gradual transfer of government offices and financial incentives to Bangkok's key employers (financial and telecom service companies) would encourage other companies to follow. To be blunt, as long as the key infrastructure was relocated, Bangkok could remain where it was, but with a reduced population. As it is, Bangkok is bursting at the seams and is at risk, so something has to be done. The Northeast offers more available land, reduced costs and a lower risk of Typhoon related exposure. Bangkok could continue as a major city. Am I missing something??? as I thought that the floods eminated from the North East of Thailand!!! Check your geography and attached map. The Isaan drains into the Mekong, hence the lack of historical connection with central/northern Thailand. The Isaan is a separate part of Thailand in all ways and thus a very unlikely destination for a new capital unless land prices are the only stipulation. Check the facts first!!! Quote from Wikipedia: Severe flooding occurred during the 2011 monsoon season in Thailand. Beginning at the end of July triggered by the landfall of Tropical Storm Nock-ten, flooding soon spread through the provinces of Northern, Northeastern and Central Thailand along the Mekong and Chao Phraya river basins. In October floodwaters reached the mouth of the Chao Phraya and inundated parts of the capital city of Bangkok. Do try reading the evidence you quote as it just further underlines my initial point The flooding in the northern and central parts of LOS were caused by the input and subsequent overload of the Chao Phraya system. The flooding in NE LOS exited via the Mekong. Different drainage basins. Rain falling in NE is one side of the watershed (line that separates 2 drainage basins). Thus Isaan rain ends up in the South China Sea via the Mekong. Rain falling in Chiang Mai works its way down the Chao Phraya system and into the Gulf of Siam. Rain cannot leap from one drainage basin to another (rather like the Continental Divide in the USA is the classic watershed) unless humans meddle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now