Abhisit Calls On Govt To Tackle Adverse Effects Of 300-Baht Wage Policy

[Soi Sauce]

How is Abhisit still in a position of authority? He has been destroyed once already during an election from a position of power that he didn't earn and yet they're are still backing him? Madness. That party must really suck if he's the best they've got.

Not destroyed; Bought out!

[rubl]

K. Abhisit may not be a knight in shiny armour, but according to some here he's like a phoenix arising from the ashes. Now of course the question is if I should see this as positive or negative admiration :-)

[xkmasada]

To be fair, Abhisit had originally promised to increase the minimum wage by 25%, but then his financiers in Big Business claimed they couldn't afford it. So like a good poodle, Veggie forgot his promise. Until now, of course

http://nationmultimedia.com/2006/08/07/headlines/headlines_30010532.php

"The People's Agenda, Abhisit said, included solving poverty by increasing minimum wages, reducing oil, cooking gas and electricity prices as well as establishing the sufficiency economy fund, to give financial support to people who follow the sufficiency economy principles. Moreover, the policies would include free education, textbooks, milk and supplemental foods for kindergartens. It will promote a quality universal healthcare scheme with no charge."

[xkmasada]

This discussion is getting side-tracked. The important issue is not about Abhisit; its about the negative effects of the minimum wage increase. The increase was much too high; more than 50% in less than 3 years has a major impact on businesses who cannot afford to pay such high wages as well as the increasing rate of Social Insurance taxes, so companies have no choice but to lay off workers. Already there are already more than 50,000 Thai who are out of work because of this short-sighted policy.

Any business which does retain its workers will be forced to increase prices for their products and services, thereby increasing inflation and making everything more costly, such that the price of basic necessities like food, shelter, utilities will rise, so that even those who are still working will have to pay more, effectively negating the effect of their pay increase. Meanwhile, all the rest of the workers who were making more than the minimum wage now also have to pay more for everything, thus reducing the amount they previously had for disposable income. The net effect will be a nationwide reduction in retail spending, causing a reduction in profits, a reduction in GDP, and a reduction in government revenues. All around, this minimum wage increase is not at all healthy for Thailand; it ought to be carefully re-examined and if not repealed, then tax breaks put in place to compensate for the extra expenses incurred.

And those companies will consider moving their factories to Indonesia, where the government just increased the minimum wage by 44%, or Vietnam, where it just went up 18%, or Malaysia, where they just announced a minimum wage for the first time, causing a 40-90% increase in some regions, or even Singapore, which saw its first industrial strike in over 30 years. Think of all the unemployment that is already occuring, that will occur! We might even see unemployment hit 1%... imagine that!

[muttley]

The leader of the opposition is entitled to his opinion. It's a pity that some of the Thaksin supporting brigade can't accept that & have to attack him personally & not his opinion. Sad but does tend to show up those with a low-level of understanding of democracy.

"have to attack him personally & not his opinion. Sad but does tend to show up those with a low-level of understanding of democracy"

And what do you have to say about the majority on this forum with their hundreds of pages of posts belittling Yingluck in every, way, shape or form?

No, really, please explain, I'm dying to find out

[Insight]

Personally speaking I could never vote for a party that chooses as it's leader a "person" that set the troops on his own citizens, authorised the use of live ammunition on them, authorised the use of snipers and the setting up of live fire zones. A "person" who has lied to the country on numerous occasions and basically is morally bereft.

You forgot to mention the cat he was stroking and his evil laugh.

[rubl]

To be fair, Abhisit had originally promised to increase the minimum wage by 25%, but then his financiers in Big Business claimed they couldn't afford it. So like a good poodle, Veggie forgot his promise. Until now, of course

http://nationmultime...es_30010532.php

"The People's Agenda, Abhisit said, included solving poverty by increasing minimum wages, reducing oil, cooking gas and electricity prices as well as establishing the sufficiency economy fund, to give financial support to people who follow the sufficiency economy principles. Moreover, the policies would include free education, textbooks, milk and supplemental foods for kindergartens. It will promote a quality universal healthcare scheme with no charge."

Actually it was part of the election package. An election the Democrat party lost. Unfortunately that also meant they couldn't ensure their policy package. So yes, blame them for loosing

[rubl]

The leader of the opposition is entitled to his opinion. It's a pity that some of the Thaksin supporting brigade can't accept that & have to attack him personally & not his opinion. Sad but does tend to show up those with a low-level of understanding of democracy.

"have to attack him personally & not his opinion. Sad but does tend to show up those with a low-level of understanding of democracy"

And what do you have to say about the majority on this forum with their hundreds of pages of posts belittling Yingluck in every, way, shape or form?

No, really, please explain, I'm dying to find out

That's simple. Obviously all those are Male Chauvinist Pigs. Makes you wonder how to call the anti-Abhisit lot though

Edited February 18, 2013 by rubl

[rubl]

Personally speaking I could never vote for a party that chooses as it's leader a "person" that set the troops on his own citizens, authorised the use of live ammunition on them, authorised the use of snipers and the setting up of live fire zones. A "person" who has lied to the country on numerous occasions and basically is morally bereft.

You forgot to mention the cat he was stroking and his evil laugh.

I'm probably really getting to be an old git by now. For a moment I thought you were referring to Ernst Stavro Blofeld. May be I should go more easy on the Spaceballs

[Chua]

This discussion is getting side-tracked. The important issue is not about Abhisit; its about the negative effects of the minimum wage increase. The increase was much too high; more than 50% in less than 3 years has a major impact on businesses who cannot afford to pay such high wages as well as the increasing rate of Social Insurance taxes, so companies have no choice but to lay off workers. Already there are already more than 50,000 Thai who are out of work because of this short-sighted policy.

Any business which does retain its workers will be forced to increase prices for their products and services, thereby increasing inflation and making everything more costly, such that the price of basic necessities like food, shelter, utilities will rise, so that even those who are still working will have to pay more, effectively negating the effect of their pay increase. Meanwhile, all the rest of the workers who were making more than the minimum wage now also have to pay more for everything, thus reducing the amount they previously had for disposable income. The net effect will be a nationwide reduction in retail spending, causing a reduction in profits, a reduction in GDP, and a reduction in government revenues. All around, this minimum wage increase is not at all healthy for Thailand; it ought to be carefully re-examined and if not repealed, then tax breaks put in place to compensate for the extra expenses incurred.

And those companies will consider moving their factories to Indonesia, where the government just increased the minimum wage by 44%, or Vietnam, where it just went up 18%, or Malaysia, where they just announced a minimum wage for the first time, causing a 40-90% increase in some regions, or even Singapore, which saw its first industrial strike in over 30 years. Think of all the unemployment that is already occuring, that will occur! We might even see unemployment hit 1%... imagine that!

Right; these governments are going to price their economies out of the growing global labor market, which will move to Africa or Eastern Europe where there are millions of works who will gladly work for a fraction of the price... bye bye Asia dominance...

[Chua]

This discussion is getting side-tracked. The important issue is not about Abhisit; its about the negative effects of the minimum wage increase. The increase was much too high; more than 50% in less than 3 years has a major impact on businesses who cannot afford to pay such high wages as well as the increasing rate of Social Insurance taxes, so companies have no choice but to lay off workers. Already there are already more than 50,000 Thai who are out of work because of this short-sighted policy.

Any business which does retain its workers will be forced to increase prices for their products and services, thereby increasing inflation and making everything more costly, such that the price of basic necessities like food, shelter, utilities will rise, so that even those who are still working will have to pay more, effectively negating the effect of their pay increase. Meanwhile, all the rest of the workers who were making more than the minimum wage now also have to pay more for everything, thus reducing the amount they previously had for disposable income. The net effect will be a nationwide reduction in retail spending, causing a reduction in profits, a reduction in GDP, and a reduction in government revenues. All around, this minimum wage increase is not at all healthy for Thailand; it ought to be carefully re-examined and if not repealed, then tax breaks put in place to compensate for the extra expenses incurred.

This discussion is getting side-tracked. The important issue is not about Abhisit; its about the negative effects of the minimum wage increase. The increase was much too high; more than 50% in less than 3 years has a major impact on businesses who cannot afford to pay such high wages as well as the increasing rate of Social Insurance taxes, so companies have no choice but to lay off workers. Already there are already more than 50,000 Thai who are out of work because of this short-sighted policy.

Any business which does retain its workers will be forced to increase prices for their products and services, thereby increasing inflation and making everything more costly, such that the price of basic necessities like food, shelter, utilities will rise, so that even those who are still working will have to pay more, effectively negating the effect of their pay increase. Meanwhile, all the rest of the workers who were making more than the minimum wage now also have to pay more for everything, thus reducing the amount they previously had for disposable income. The net effect will be a nationwide reduction in retail spending, causing a reduction in profits, a reduction in GDP, and a reduction in government revenues. All around, this minimum wage increase is not at all healthy for Thailand; it ought to be carefully re-examined and if not repealed, then tax breaks put in place to compensate for the extra expenses incurred.

Actually, it's very good for Thailand. State intervention, income driven growth, spreading wealth are the ways to go if they ever plan to arrive amongst the wealthy nations. Businesses going out of business that wasn't sustainable but by slave labour is a good thing as well. Ingenuity and constant improvement are better ways to sustain a business. What Thailand needs now is a comprehensive welfare program for the unemployed, best financed by tax hikes on the rich.

Is your name Obama?

Edited February 18, 2013 by Chua

[AleG]

This discussion is getting side-tracked. The important issue is not about Abhisit; its about the negative effects of the minimum wage increase. The increase was much too high; more than 50% in less than 3 years has a major impact on businesses who cannot afford to pay such high wages as well as the increasing rate of Social Insurance taxes, so companies have no choice but to lay off workers. Already there are already more than 50,000 Thai who are out of work because of this short-sighted policy.

Any business which does retain its workers will be forced to increase prices for their products and services, thereby increasing inflation and making everything more costly, such that the price of basic necessities like food, shelter, utilities will rise, so that even those who are still working will have to pay more, effectively negating the effect of their pay increase. Meanwhile, all the rest of the workers who were making more than the minimum wage now also have to pay more for everything, thus reducing the amount they previously had for disposable income. The net effect will be a nationwide reduction in retail spending, causing a reduction in profits, a reduction in GDP, and a reduction in government revenues. All around, this minimum wage increase is not at all healthy for Thailand; it ought to be carefully re-examined and if not repealed, then tax breaks put in place to compensate for the extra expenses incurred.

Actually, it's very good for Thailand. State intervention, income driven growth, spreading wealth are the ways to go if they ever plan to arrive amongst the wealthy nations. Businesses going out of business that wasn't sustainable but by slave labour is a good thing as well. Ingenuity and constant improvement are better ways to sustain a business. What Thailand needs now is a comprehensive welfare program for the unemployed, best financed by tax hikes on the rich.

Well, too bad that the very first thing the PTP government did was to slash corporate taxes by a third and since then enacted other schemes to favour the more affluent segments of the population.

Yay for wealth redistribution...

[Thaddeus]

The leader of the opposition is entitled to his opinion. It's a pity that some of the Thaksin supporting brigade can't accept that & have to attack him personally & not his opinion. Sad but does tend to show up those with a low-level of understanding of democracy.

"have to attack him personally & not his opinion. Sad but does tend to show up those with a low-level of understanding of democracy"

And what do you have to say about the majority on this forum with their hundreds of pages of posts belittling Yingluck in every, way, shape or form?

No, really, please explain, I'm dying to find out

Because we use our own minds and don't get told what to post.

[whybother]

Actually it was 11.4 million and they voted for the party not abhisit. Personally speaking, after the events of 2010, I would imagine he would be unelectable.

It seems quite a few people agreed with his actions in dealing with mob rule in 2010. Hence the 11.4 million votes his party got.

[angsta]

How is Abhisit still in a position of authority? He has been destroyed once already during an election from a position of power that he didn't earn and yet they're are still backing him? Madness. That party must really suck if he's the best they've got.

Because he is the only one with a half decent brain

The facts would suggest otherwise

[philw]

The leader of the opposition is entitled to his opinion. It's a pity that some of the Thaksin supporting brigade can't accept that & have to attack him personally & not his opinion. Sad but does tend to show up those with a low-level of understanding of democracy.

"have to attack him personally & not his opinion. Sad but does tend to show up those with a low-level of understanding of democracy"

And what do you have to say about the majority on this forum with their hundreds of pages of posts belittling Yingluck in every, way, shape or form?

No, really, please explain, I'm dying to find out

Sorry to correct you but it's probably thousands of petty, insulting, derisory and belittling posts

[muttley]

The leader of the opposition is entitled to his opinion. It's a pity that some of the Thaksin supporting brigade can't accept that & have to attack him personally & not his opinion. Sad but does tend to show up those with a low-level of understanding of democracy.

"have to attack him personally & not his opinion. Sad but does tend to show up those with a low-level of understanding of democracy"

And what do you have to say about the majority on this forum with their hundreds of pages of posts belittling Yingluck in every, way, shape or form?

No, really, please explain, I'm dying to find out

Because we use our own minds and don't get told what to post.

"Use our own minds" Repeat after me, we are not sheeple, we are not sheeple...........

Edited February 19, 2013 by muttley

[muttley]

The leader of the opposition is entitled to his opinion. It's a pity that some of the Thaksin supporting brigade can't accept that & have to attack him personally & not his opinion. Sad but does tend to show up those with a low-level of understanding of democracy.

"have to attack him personally & not his opinion. Sad but does tend to show up those with a low-level of understanding of democracy"

And what do you have to say about the majority on this forum with their hundreds of pages of posts belittling Yingluck in every, way, shape or form?

No, really, please explain, I'm dying to find out

Sorry to correct you but it's probably thousands of petty, insulting, derisory and belittling posts

I'll accept that (cue silly remarks about red shirt apolgisers inflating numbers)

[muttley]

Actually it was 11.4 million and they voted for the party not abhisit. Personally speaking, after the events of 2010, I would imagine he would be unelectable.

It seems quite a few people agreed with his actions in dealing with mob rule in 2010. Hence the 11.4 million votes his party got.

Yes, quite unsettling that, I put it down to the Thai equivalent of Daily Mail readers votes.

[OzMick]

Actually it was 11.4 million and they voted for the party not abhisit. Personally speaking, after the events of 2010, I would imagine he would be unelectable.

It seems quite a few people agreed with his actions in dealing with mob rule in 2010. Hence the 11.4 million votes his party got.

Yes, quite unsettling that, I put it down to the Thai equivalent of Daily Mail readers votes.

As opposed to red shirt rocket scientists and brain surgeons?

[philw]

As opposed to red shirt rocket scientists and brain surgeons?

Nah, election winners...........

[Rich teacher]

What does opposition leader Abhisit Vejjajiva have to say about 6.4% GDP growth last year with most predicting a further improvement this year, along with impressive export growth?

Edited February 19, 2013 by metisdead
: Font

[OzMick]

What does opposition leader Abhisit Vejjajiva have to say about 6.4% GDP growth last year with most predicting a further improvement this year, along with impressive export growth?

One has to wonder how good the figures might be if they hadn't decided to stop selling rice.

[OzMick]

As opposed to red shirt rocket scientists and brain surgeons?

Nah, election winners...........

There is no question that they have the numbers, the statement I queried was that you have to be a "Daily Mail reader" to vote for the Democrats. How does a "Daily Mail reader" compare to those who read the red press, if they read at all?

[muttley]

As opposed to red shirt rocket scientists and brain surgeons?

Nah, election winners...........

There is no question that they have the numbers, the statement I queried was that you have to be a "Daily Mail reader" to vote for the Democrats. How does a "Daily Mail reader" compare to those who read the red press, if they read at all?

It's not a matter of education, more a matter of attitude as you have just amply demonstrated above, contemptuous to the point of not caring about the fate of anyone but you and your "peers" aka "conservative" politically in the UK. But even the conservative voters would (hopefully) draw the line against turning the armies guns on their fellow citizens. (Cameron and Abhisit - what a pair).

[jayboy]

What does opposition leader Abhisit Vejjajiva have to say about 6.4% GDP growth last year with most predicting a further improvement this year, along with impressive export growth?

One has to wonder how good the figures might be if they hadn't decided to stop selling rice.

Tough isn't it? - for those who dislike the current government intensely but have to take into account that Thailand's economy is performing very strongly.The more intelligent keep their counsel but inevitably there are one or two who make a ludicrous observation - partly because they are blinded by prejudice and in this instance apparently ignorant of the factors that have contributed to Thailand's enviably strong position (not all of which are connected to which set of politicians are in charge)

[OzMick]

What does opposition leader Abhisit Vejjajiva have to say about 6.4% GDP growth last year with most predicting a further improvement this year, along with impressive export growth?

One has to wonder how good the figures might be if they hadn't decided to stop selling rice.

Tough isn't it? - for those who dislike the current government intensely but have to take into account that Thailand's economy is performing very strongly.The more intelligent keep their counsel but inevitably there are one or two who make a ludicrous observation - partly because they are blinded by prejudice and in this instance apparently ignorant of the factors that have contributed to Thailand's enviably strong position (not all of which are connected to which set of politicians are in charge)

So you think the rice scam has been a bonus for productivity and export figures. What a strange phenomenon. I think it has been detrimental to otherwise good numbers, and that detriment is directly attributable to the current administration. The question is how long will the figures remain good as they borrow heavily to continue this corrupt idiocy and to finance other uneconomic white elephants?

Is your advocacy so one-sided that you can't see there are negatives as well as positives?

[jayboy]

What does opposition leader Abhisit Vejjajiva have to say about 6.4% GDP growth last year with most predicting a further improvement this year, along with impressive export growth?

One has to wonder how good the figures might be if they hadn't decided to stop selling rice.

Tough isn't it? - for those who dislike the current government intensely but have to take into account that Thailand's economy is performing very strongly.The more intelligent keep their counsel but inevitably there are one or two who make a ludicrous observation - partly because they are blinded by prejudice and in this instance apparently ignorant of the factors that have contributed to Thailand's enviably strong position (not all of which are connected to which set of politicians are in charge)

So you think the rice scam has been a bonus for productivity and export figures. What a strange phenomenon. I think it has been detrimental to otherwise good numbers, and that detriment is directly attributable to the current administration. The question is how long will the figures remain good as they borrow heavily to continue this corrupt idiocy and to finance other uneconomic white elephants?

Is your advocacy so one-sided that you can't see there are negatives as well as positives?

Of course there are negatives and postives, and I am on record as querying the economic benefits of the rice price support scheme.(The rationale is mainly political, as in Japan, though farmers have also benefited).

However your retort simply underlines your poor grasp of the facts.The Thai economy is doing extremely well and there is no suggestion it is being undermined by any of your unnamed "white elephants" - there are other more significant factors in play.As to economic and financial management politicians in any case have surprisingly limited influence.More critical are the excellence of high level officials in the Bank of Thailand and Ministry of Finance, the dynamic private sector, the strong banking system and of course global/regional trends.

[OzMick]

One has to wonder how good the figures might be if they hadn't decided to stop selling rice.

Tough isn't it? - for those who dislike the current government intensely but have to take into account that Thailand's economy is performing very strongly.The more intelligent keep their counsel but inevitably there are one or two who make a ludicrous observation - partly because they are blinded by prejudice and in this instance apparently ignorant of the factors that have contributed to Thailand's enviably strong position (not all of which are connected to which set of politicians are in charge)

So you think the rice scam has been a bonus for productivity and export figures. What a strange phenomenon. I think it has been detrimental to otherwise good numbers, and that detriment is directly attributable to the current administration. The question is how long will the figures remain good as they borrow heavily to continue this corrupt idiocy and to finance other uneconomic white elephants?

Is your advocacy so one-sided that you can't see there are negatives as well as positives?

Of course there are negatives and postives, and I am on record as querying the economic benefits of the rice price support scheme.(The rationale is mainly political, as in Japan, though farmers have also benefited).

However your retort simply underlines your poor grasp of the facts.The Thai economy is doing extremely well and there is no suggestion it is being undermined by any of your unnamed "white elephants" - there are other more significant factors in play.As to economic and financial management politicians in any case have surprisingly limited influence.More critical are the excellence of high level officials in the Bank of Thailand and Ministry of Finance, the dynamic private sector, the strong banking system and of course global/regional trends.

So you "on record as querying the economic benefits of the rice price support scheme" but saying the figures might have been better without its huge losses is ludicrous?

How could the current figures be " undermined by any of your unnamed "white elephants" when the borrowing is only proposed?

Do try to answer questions without throwing in rambling strawman side issues.

[indyuk]

How is Abhisit still in a position of authority? He has been destroyed once already during an election from a position of power that he didn't earn and yet they're are still backing him? Madness. That party must really suck if he's the best they've got.

Because he is the only one with a half decent brain

That is the most damning remark I've heard todate in respect to both AV and the Democrats'