Thai Govt Must Be Held Accountable For Ruinous Rice Scheme

[rubl]

The only flaw in your logic is that the rice subsidy scheme predates the Yingluck/Thaksin regime, but was brought in by the Samak regime and then heartily promoted by the following Somchai and Abhisit regimes. So, it would seem that every party in Thailand wants to bend over backwards to please the poor ol' rice farmers, unless I missed something?

You may well have.

>...............This scheme continued until 2006, when Thaksin was deposed. The new

military government reverted to the old price pledging scheme under

which the price remained below the market price. A new Thaksin-aligned

government under Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej re-instated the price

support component in 2008 and again offered a pledging price well above

the market price, even though rice prices were already at record high

levels.

In late 2008, the new Democrat-led government modified the policy to

what was called an ”income support” or ”income guarantee” policy. This

name was also misleading because it guaranteed prices, not incomes. If

the market price was below a pre-established reference price, the

government would pay the farmer the difference for up to a maximum 25

tonnes of rice per farmer. Because market prices for rice were high and

normally exceeded the reference prices, the scheme delivered very little

subsidy to farmers..............

http://www.globalasia.org/V6N3_Fall_2011/Peter_Warr.ht

ml

Thanks for leading me to this article by Warr. I'd agree with nearly everything he has to say, but would still maintain that Abhisit's govt was trying to be populist in its own way, with the rice price guarantee and removing the 30 B healthcare scheme to become free. However, the Democrats never went as far as the Shinawatra clan, especially over the present rice subsidies and minimum wage measures, which I agree will come back to haunt Pheua Thai in future, hurt taxpayers in the short term and punish all rice farmers in the medium to long term, when it becomes crystal clear that such measures are absolutely unsustainable and may indeed send millions of farmers to the wall (which is maybe what Thaksin and his co-plotters secretly want, so they can clear up on the remaining land that isn't yet theirs?)

The 30 Baht for Health Care was dropped by Minister of Health Mongkol Na Sonkhla in 2007 under the Junta appointed government of PM Gen. Surayud. It seemed that the administration of the 30 Baht cost more and maybe even double of the 30 Baht itself. Luckily the Pheu Thai government re-instated this 30 Baht payment for those who are willing to pay it. After all it was one of St. Thaksin the Just's brainchilds and election promise (of his party)

Edited March 18, 2013 by rubl

[hellodolly]

The only flaw in your logic is that the rice subsidy scheme predates the Yingluck/Thaksin regime, but was brought in by the Samak regime and then heartily promoted by the following Somchai and Abhisit regimes. So, it would seem that every party in Thailand wants to bend over backwards to please the poor ol' rice farmers, unless I missed something?

You may well have.

>...............This scheme continued until 2006, when Thaksin was deposed. The new

military government reverted to the old price pledging scheme under

which the price remained below the market price. A new Thaksin-aligned

government under Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej re-instated the price

support component in 2008 and again offered a pledging price well above

the market price, even though rice prices were already at record high

levels.

In late 2008, the new Democrat-led government modified the policy to

what was called an ”income support” or ”income guarantee” policy. This

name was also misleading because it guaranteed prices, not incomes. If

the market price was below a pre-established reference price, the

government would pay the farmer the difference for up to a maximum 25

tonnes of rice per farmer. Because market prices for rice were high and

normally exceeded the reference prices, the scheme delivered very little

subsidy to farmers..............

http://www.globalasia.org/V6N3_Fall_2011/Peter_Warr.ht

ml

Thanks for leading me to this article by Warr. I'd agree with nearly everything he has to say, but would still maintain that Abhisit's govt was trying to be populist in its own way, with the rice price guarantee and removing the 30 B healthcare scheme to become free. However, the Democrats never went as far as the Shinawatra clan, especially over the present rice subsidies and minimum wage measures, which I agree will come back to haunt Pheua Thai in future, hurt taxpayers in the short term and punish all rice farmers in the medium to long term, when it becomes crystal clear that such measures are absolutely unsustainable and may indeed send millions of farmers to the wall (which is maybe what Thaksin and his co-plotters secretly want, so they can clear up on the remaining land that isn't yet theirs?)

The 30 Baht for Health Care was dropped by Minister of Health Mongkol Na Sonkhla in 2007 under the Junta appointed government of PM Gen. Surayud. It seemed that the administration of the 30 Baht cost more and maybe even double of the 30 Baht itself. Luckily the Pheu Thai government re-instated this 30 Baht payment for those who are willing to pay it. After all it was one of St. Thaksin the Just's brainchilds and election promise (of his party)

I believe the administration cost of the 30 baht was 50 baht = a net loss to the government health care system of 20 baht every time some one paid 30 baht.

As if the health care system could afford it.

Sounds like the red schools were teaching economics in addition to democracy at the end of a gun and rocket launcher.

[Thai at Heart]

Well maintaining this scam is costing the government 4% of GDP per year, and Thaksin claims the initial coasts of 400 billion will be recouped when the rice is sold plus a 300 % profit. I believe when it all come crashing down Yingluck will fall or be pushed on her sword and the ugly sister will take over.

So everybody else better peddle 5% harder

[Thai at Heart]

The only flaw in your logic is that the rice subsidy scheme predates the Yingluck/Thaksin regime, but was brought in by the Samak regime and then heartily promoted by the following Somchai and Abhisit regimes. So, it would seem that every party in Thailand wants to bend over backwards to please the poor ol' rice farmers, unless I missed something?

You may well have.

>...............This scheme continued until 2006, when Thaksin was deposed. The new

military government reverted to the old price pledging scheme under

which the price remained below the market price. A new Thaksin-aligned

government under Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej re-instated the price

support component in 2008 and again offered a pledging price well above

the market price, even though rice prices were already at record high

levels.

In late 2008, the new Democrat-led government modified the policy to

what was called an income support or income guarantee policy. This

name was also misleading because it guaranteed prices, not incomes. If

the market price was below a pre-established reference price, the

government would pay the farmer the difference for up to a maximum 25

tonnes of rice per farmer. Because market prices for rice were high and

normally exceeded the reference prices, the scheme delivered very little

subsidy to farmers..............

http://www.globalasia.org/V6N3_Fall_2011/Peter_Warr.html

Thanks for leading me to this article by Warr. I'd agree with nearly everything he has to say, but would still maintain that Abhisit's govt was trying to be populist in its own way, with the rice price guarantee and removing the 30 B healthcare scheme to become free. However, the Democrats never went as far as the Shinawatra clan, especially over the present rice subsidies and minimum wage measures, which I agree will come back to haunt Pheua Thai in future, hurt taxpayers in the short term and punish all rice farmers in the medium to long term, when it becomes crystal clear that such measures are absolutely unsustainable and may indeed send millions of farmers to the wall (which is maybe what Thaksin and his co-plotters secretly want, so they can clear up on the remaining land that isn't yet theirs?)

The 30 Baht for Health Care was dropped by Minister of Health Mongkol Na Sonkhla in 2007 under the Junta appointed government of PM Gen. Surayud. It seemed that the administration of the 30 Baht cost more and maybe even double of the 30 Baht itself. Luckily the Pheu Thai government re-instated this 30 Baht payment for those who are willing to pay it. After all it was one of St. Thaksin the Just's brainchilds and election promise (of his party)

I believe the administration cost of the 30 baht was 50 baht = a net loss to the government health care system of 20 baht every time some one paid 30 baht.

As if the health care system could afford it.

Sounds like the red schools were teaching economics in addition to democracy at the end of a gun and rocket launcher.

How many people don't pitch because of paying 30baht

[rubl]

The only flaw in your logic is that the rice subsidy scheme predates the Yingluck/Thaksin regime, but was brought in by the Samak regime and then heartily promoted by the following Somchai and Abhisit regimes. So, it would seem that every party in Thailand wants to bend over backwards to please the poor ol' rice farmers, unless I missed something?

You may well have.

>...............This scheme continued until 2006, when Thaksin was deposed. The new

military government reverted to the old price pledging scheme under

which the price remained below the market price. A new Thaksin-aligned

government under Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej re-instated the price

support component in 2008 and again offered a pledging price well above

the market price, even though rice prices were already at record high

levels.

In late 2008, the new Democrat-led government modified the policy to

what was called an income support or income guarantee policy. This

name was also misleading because it guaranteed prices, not incomes. If

the market price was below a pre-established reference price, the

government would pay the farmer the difference for up to a maximum 25

tonnes of rice per farmer. Because market prices for rice were high and

normally exceeded the reference prices, the scheme delivered very little

subsidy to farmers..............

http://www.globalasia.org/V6N3_Fall_2011/Peter_Warr.html

Thanks for leading me to this article by Warr. I'd agree with nearly everything he has to say, but would still maintain that Abhisit's govt was trying to be populist in its own way, with the rice price guarantee and removing the 30 B healthcare scheme to become free. However, the Democrats never went as far as the Shinawatra clan, especially over the present rice subsidies and minimum wage measures, which I agree will come back to haunt Pheua Thai in future, hurt taxpayers in the short term and punish all rice farmers in the medium to long term, when it becomes crystal clear that such measures are absolutely unsustainable and may indeed send millions of farmers to the wall (which is maybe what Thaksin and his co-plotters secretly want, so they can clear up on the remaining land that isn't yet theirs?)

The 30 Baht for Health Care was dropped by Minister of Health Mongkol Na Sonkhla in 2007 under the Junta appointed government of PM Gen. Surayud. It seemed that the administration of the 30 Baht cost more and maybe even double of the 30 Baht itself. Luckily the Pheu Thai government re-instated this 30 Baht payment for those who are willing to pay it. After all it was one of St. Thaksin the Just's brainchilds and election promise (of his party)

I believe the administration cost of the 30 baht was 50 baht = a net loss to the government health care system of 20 baht every time some one paid 30 baht.

As if the health care system could afford it.

Sounds like the red schools were teaching economics in addition to democracy at the end of a gun and rocket launcher.

How many people don't pitch because of paying 30baht

I forgot the new rules / restrictions around the 30 Baht scheme. The official idea of introducing it again (as in same scheme but with a price, to remind people of who introduced it in the first place) was that it would allow for institutes to offer higher levels of or even additional services apart from maybe keeping people from misusing the system.

The higher level of services seems to be coming real, real soon now although some say it's already here (if I am to believe CMK). Upcountry is too far away from Bangkok for me, but some of our members living in the boondocks may have up-to-date info on how health care is perceived there.

Mind you, the actual topic is not some misunderstanding on who did what in the past, but on the current government to be held accountable for the ruinous rice scheme. Allegedly ruinous and of course transparently

[meatboy]

anyone remember the potato shortage 1976 google potatoes hansard 28january when mr.sydney tierey called a commons debate on the crisis.read it and compare what is going to happen here with rice.

[NeverSure]

And the sad thing is, if it causes bankruptcy and a financial crisis, they will blame it on something else and the poor rural masses who are now all out of work will still vote for the same crowd.

The rural masses? Who are they? If they want a job go to town. It's not like one can build a factory in every village. Thailand does have less than one percent unemployment you know.

How is this 1% justified i see and here of lotts of people in Phetchaburi out of work and its a wealthy changwat.

The same way Thais use their imagination to value rice.

[apetley]

This rice pledging scam scheme is indeed a masterpiece of the diversion of money to Thaksin, his family and their brown nosing acolytes.

One is inclined to ask ( more from politeness than expecting a truthful response) if the aforementioned group have any idea of the long term damage that they are wreaking upon Thailand and its people?

Do they have any pangs of conscience when they are stretching out their grubby little palms and plunging them into the state coffers to line their own pockets?

Do they ever question what rights they have to have ever started let alone continue their grand theft ?

No.

That is not possible that such thoughts would cross their corrupted tainted minds, the continued rampant looting of the state coffers and the abuse of power is according to their perverted mindset their right.

The fruits of the tree of corruption are theirs and theirs alone for the plucking and to hell with the ordinary man and women and the country.

Total indifference to the problems they are creating for future generations of Thais all this is coupled with an insatiable desire for money, power and revenge at any price,

Sadly whatever the outcome will be in the future concerning the political stability of Thailand and its civil ordered society the only certainty is that the people of Thailand will be picking up the bill for many a year to come.

This current maladministration is indeed despotic, corrupt and serves but one person, its family and their brown nosing acolytes.

The election campaign and the current and no doubt future.policies of popular politics so beloved by the seekers of absolute power is indeed the road to ruin in more ways than one..

The only flaw in your logic is that the rice subsidy scheme predates the Yingluck/Thaksin regime, but was brought in by the Samak regime and then heartily promoted by the following Somchai and Abhisit regimes. So, it would seem that every party in Thailand wants to bend over backwards to please the poor ol' rice farmers, unless I missed something?

I think Abhisit's plan was to pay the farmers. I'm prepared to be proved wrong.

It was. Money to be paid directly which meant much less scope for corruption.

[chiangmaikelly]

I forgot the new rules / restrictions around the 30 Baht scheme. The official idea of introducing it again (as in same scheme but with a price, to remind people of who introduced it in the first place) was that it would allow for institutes to offer higher levels of or even additional services apart from maybe keeping people from misusing the system.

The higher level of services seems to be coming real, real soon now although some say it's already here (if I am to believe CMK). Upcountry is too far away from Bangkok for me, but some of our members living in the boondocks may have up-to-date info on how health care is perceived there.

Mind you, the actual topic is not some misunderstanding on who did what in the past, but on the current government to be held accountable for the ruinous rice scheme. Allegedly ruinous and of course transparently

What did I say? Quote me please or don't mention me at all.

[NeverSure]

I forgot the new rules / restrictions around the 30 Baht scheme. The official idea of introducing it again (as in same scheme but with a price, to remind people of who introduced it in the first place) was that it would allow for institutes to offer higher levels of or even additional services apart from maybe keeping people from misusing the system.

The higher level of services seems to be coming real, real soon now although some say it's already here (if I am to believe CMK). Upcountry is too far away from Bangkok for me, but some of our members living in the boondocks may have up-to-date info on how health care is perceived there.

Mind you, the actual topic is not some misunderstanding on who did what in the past, but on the current government to be held accountable for the ruinous rice scheme. Allegedly ruinous and of course transparently

What did I say? Quote me please or don't mention me at all.

I'll quote you. You said that Thailand has only 1% unemployment.

Sorry. Couldn't resist.

[NeverSure]

From the OP article:

"In the long term, the government could go bankrupt because of excessive spending via high subsidy costs. Rice farmers will also suffer when the programme does eventually come to an end. The scheme can be addictive. And it could erode their enthusiasm to improve their quality and productivity."

Emphasis mine.

I'm not the only one who thinks Thailand is in big trouble. For myself, I see it on several fronts and most of it due to corruption and a lack of transparency.

NO one knows where Thailand really stands financially, but bad news keeps coming.

[chiangmaikelly]

I forgot the new rules / restrictions around the 30 Baht scheme. The official idea of introducing it again (as in same scheme but with a price, to remind people of who introduced it in the first place) was that it would allow for institutes to offer higher levels of or even additional services apart from maybe keeping people from misusing the system.

The higher level of services seems to be coming real, real soon now although some say it's already here (if I am to believe CMK). Upcountry is too far away from Bangkok for me, but some of our members living in the boondocks may have up-to-date info on how health care is perceived there.

Mind you, the actual topic is not some misunderstanding on who did what in the past, but on the current government to be held accountable for the ruinous rice scheme. Allegedly ruinous and of course transparently

What did I say? Quote me please or don't mention me at all.

I'll quote you. You said that Thailand has only 1% unemployment.

Sorry. Couldn't resist.

The question was, "The higher level of services seems to be coming real, real soon now although some say it's already here (if I am to believe CMK)." What does that have to do with 1% unemployment?

[chiangmaikelly]

From the OP article:

"In the long term, the government could go bankrupt because of excessive spending via high subsidy costs. Rice farmers will also suffer when the programme does eventually come to an end. The scheme can be addictive. And it could erode their enthusiasm to improve their quality and productivity."

Emphasis mine.

I'm not the only one who thinks Thailand is in big trouble. For myself, I see it on several fronts and most of it due to corruption and a lack of transparency.

NO one knows where Thailand really stands financially, but bad news keeps coming.

Anyone who can read knows where Thailand stands financially. Anyone who lives in Thailand in an industrial area knows where Thailand stands financially. Anyone who has to go to immigration to report an address in an industrial area can see the lines of foreign workers doing the same thing because there is a shortage of Thai workers. Anyone who gets the Asian news feeds knows how Thailand stands financially. There are political columnists who have a vested interest in reporting falsely about the Thai economy as is done in any country. Those of us who are on the ground see the reality of the situation.

[Thaddeus]

From the OP article:

"In the long term, the government could go bankrupt because of excessive spending via high subsidy costs. Rice farmers will also suffer when the programme does eventually come to an end. The scheme can be addictive. And it could erode their enthusiasm to improve their quality and productivity."

Emphasis mine.

I'm not the only one who thinks Thailand is in big trouble. For myself, I see it on several fronts and most of it due to corruption and a lack of transparency.

NO one knows where Thailand really stands financially, but bad news keeps coming.

Anyone who can read knows where Thailand stands financially.

You could have said the same thing about the Royal Bank of Scotland not so long ago.

[rubl]

Let's try again

Mind you, the actual topic is not some misunderstanding on who did what in the past, but on the current government to be held accountable for the ruinous rice scheme. Allegedly ruinous and of course transparently

[hellodolly]

The only flaw in your logic is that the rice subsidy scheme predates the Yingluck/Thaksin regime, but was brought in by the Samak regime and then heartily promoted by the following Somchai and Abhisit regimes. So, it would seem that every party in Thailand wants to bend over backwards to please the poor ol' rice farmers, unless I missed something?

You may well have.

>...............This scheme continued until 2006, when Thaksin was deposed. The new

military government reverted to the old price pledging scheme under

which the price remained below the market price. A new Thaksin-aligned

government under Prime Minister Samak Sundaravej re-instated the price

support component in 2008 and again offered a pledging price well above

the market price, even though rice prices were already at record high

levels.

In late 2008, the new Democrat-led government modified the policy to

what was called an income support or income guarantee policy. This

name was also misleading because it guaranteed prices, not incomes. If

the market price was below a pre-established reference price, the

government would pay the farmer the difference for up to a maximum 25

tonnes of rice per farmer. Because market prices for rice were high and

normally exceeded the reference prices, the scheme delivered very little

subsidy to farmers..............

http://www.globalasia.org/V6N3_Fall_2011/Peter_Warr.html

Thanks for leading me to this article by Warr. I'd agree with nearly everything he has to say, but would still maintain that Abhisit's govt was trying to be populist in its own way, with the rice price guarantee and removing the 30 B healthcare scheme to become free. However, the Democrats never went as far as the Shinawatra clan, especially over the present rice subsidies and minimum wage measures, which I agree will come back to haunt Pheua Thai in future, hurt taxpayers in the short term and punish all rice farmers in the medium to long term, when it becomes crystal clear that such measures are absolutely unsustainable and may indeed send millions of farmers to the wall (which is maybe what Thaksin and his co-plotters secretly want, so they can clear up on the remaining land that isn't yet theirs?)

The 30 Baht for Health Care was dropped by Minister of Health Mongkol Na Sonkhla in 2007 under the Junta appointed government of PM Gen. Surayud. It seemed that the administration of the 30 Baht cost more and maybe even double of the 30 Baht itself. Luckily the Pheu Thai government re-instated this 30 Baht payment for those who are willing to pay it. After all it was one of St. Thaksin the Just's brainchilds and election promise (of his party)

I believe the administration cost of the 30 baht was 50 baht = a net loss to the government health care system of 20 baht every time some one paid 30 baht.

As if the health care system could afford it.

Sounds like the red schools were teaching economics in addition to democracy at the end of a gun and rocket launcher.

How many people don't pitch because of paying 30baht

I have no idea of what you are talking about.

What ever it is what has it got to do with increasing the administrative cost using funds taken from the medical costs. You know doctors Nurses equipment.

That type of thinking goes hand in hand with paying far more than rice is worth and just stockpiling it rather thaan let the free market dictate the price and have money in operation.

[chiangmaikelly]

From the OP article:

"In the long term, the government could go bankrupt because of excessive spending via high subsidy costs. Rice farmers will also suffer when the programme does eventually come to an end. The scheme can be addictive. And it could erode their enthusiasm to improve their quality and productivity."

Emphasis mine.

I'm not the only one who thinks Thailand is in big trouble. For myself, I see it on several fronts and most of it due to corruption and a lack of transparency.

NO one knows where Thailand really stands financially, but bad news keeps coming.

Anyone who can read knows where Thailand stands financially.

You could have said the same thing about the Royal Bank of Scotland not so long ago.

Good question. Is it on topic for this thread?