Warning On Rice Policy A Wake-Up Call For Thai Govt

[OzMick]

"Millions of Thai rice is being bought and sold every day."

I can only assume you are referring to grains. What percentage broken?

[OzMick]

Yes there is mountains of rotting rice.....

No there are not mountains of rotting rice.....

..........there are just many many smaller amounts of rotting rice.

[Thai at Heart]

Thailand’s total rice exports in the first quarter (Q1) of 2013 (January – March) 796,304 tons.

In terms of value, total rice exports earned Thailand about 33.36 billion baht.

Average export prices of white rice in Q1 2013 stood at around $573 per ton, up around 1.5% from around $565 per ton in Q1 2012. Average prices of Pathumthani rice increased to around $989 per ton in Q1 2013, up around 8% from around $916 per ton in the same period last year, while average Hommali rice export prices in Q1 2013 stood at around $1,042 per ton, up around 10% from around $944 per ton recorded in the first quarter of 2012.

Ok so whats your point?

GJ wrote, "Just reading through some of the articles in world newspapers about the mountains of rotting rice, and I simply do not know how the Thai rice industry is going to recover. Who on earth would want to risk buying the stuff."

Millions of Thai rice is being bought and sold every day. The price of one kind of rice is up another is down. Nothing is changed. The market is a bit down. The above poster is talking about the sky falling and it's not. There are no mountains of rotting rice.

18 Million tons of rice in storage and 796 304 tons sold in the first quarter. That leaves 17 203 696 Tons. Now if i were to dump that in your Garden you would think it was a frakking mountain.

No one has suggested dumping rice in a garden. Do you really think your post is adult? Rice is stored in a rice warehouse or silo.

Well according to one poster ( who alas did not take pictures) there is indeed rice being stored in the open. Maybe it is the older rice from the 2003 pledging that they have taken out of the warehouses to make space for the newer stuff. I don't know maybe some one living closer to the areas mentioned can get some pictures.

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

I will get a picture next week when I drive past. Problem is that these types of storage would by normally be empty, awaiting delivery of new crop on an as needed basis. Today, they are full to busting with stock from the last crop, and with the rains coming, inevitably some of it gets damaged.

[NeverSure]

assuming the government is paying 40% higher than market price then the minimum annual loss will be about 800000*12*1000*0.4 as i have used the government target of 800,000 tons per month for exports and an average market price of USD 1000 per ton for thai jasmine rice. So that adds up to about USD 3.84 billion per year being the loss incurred by the government due to the rice pledging scheme.

but if the actual production has been higher, with the farmers incentive to have produced as much as they can or/and or/and if the rice in storage is rotting then the losses may be substantially higher.

you can all argue with yourselves and split hairs, but this looks like a fair ballpark minimum figure to me. the actual loss to thailand though is debateable, as this is more about redistribution of wealth than actual loss. the government needs to make up for the costs through tax revenue or/and debt issuance. the gdp of thailand is about usd 350 billion, so the rice pledging scheme is quite modest in % terms.

Judas Priest. Will people please quit using the GDP as if it's the government's money? The cost of the rice pledging scheme is the government's expense, but the GDP is the private sector's output.

The number needs to be a percentage of the government's income, not the GDP. The latest figures I can find show that the government's income is only about 16% of GDP. Link Now if we only knew the truth about what the rice scheme has cost the government over the past few years, we could figure out what percentage of the government's income goes to that scheme. But they don't release those numbers and if they did, they would be corrupt.

All we know from news reports posted on this forum is that the rice pledging scheme has cost the Thai government about 700 billion baht. If we could subtract from that the money the government might be able to recoup from rice sales, we'd know the loss. But there's so much corruption that who could know? I wouldn't be surprised to learn that what isn't rotten has been sold via theft.

[OzMick]

I realize you guys have only one point and that is to bash the current government and Thaksin. I'm trying to be polite and answer your questions but the thread is about Moodys warning to Thailand and not Thaksin coming back to town. Is Moodys warning a wake up call? If not it should be. Do you folks disagree?

I did ask you what you expect the result of the wake-up to be. Perhaps now that you are back on topic might be a good time to answer.

[waza]

assuming the government is paying 40% higher than market price then the minimum annual loss will be about 800000*12*1000*0.4 as i have used the government target of 800,000 tons per month for exports and an average market price of USD 1000 per ton for thai jasmine rice. So that adds up to about USD 3.84 billion per year being the loss incurred by the government due to the rice pledging scheme.

but if the actual production has been higher, with the farmers incentive to have produced as much as they can or/and or/and if the rice in storage is rotting then the losses may be substantially higher.

you can all argue with yourselves and split hairs, but this looks like a fair ballpark minimum figure to me. the actual loss to thailand though is debateable, as this is more about redistribution of wealth than actual loss. the government needs to make up for the costs through tax revenue or/and debt issuance. the gdp of thailand is about usd 350 billion, so the rice pledging scheme is quite modest in % terms.

Judas Priest. Will people please quit using the GDP as if it's the government's money? The cost of the rice pledging scheme is the government's expense, but the GDP is the private sector's output.

The number needs to be a percentage of the government's income, not the GDP. The latest figures I can find show that the government's income is only about 16% of GDP. Link Now if we only knew the truth about what the rice scheme has cost the government over the past few years, we could figure out what percentage of the government's income goes to that scheme. But they don't release those numbers and if they did, they would be corrupt.

All we know from news reports posted on this forum is that the rice pledging scheme has cost the Thai government about 700 billion baht. If we could subtract from that the money the government might be able to recoup from rice sales, we'd know the loss. But there's so much corruption that who could know? I wouldn't be surprised to learn that what isn't rotten has been sold via theft.

The total budget for 2013 is 2,4 trillion Baht (2,400,000,000,000) [$77 billion]

The Government has set a deficit of 300 billion baht, while it is expected to collect revenues of 2.1 trillion baht.

The cost of the rice scam is 600 billion baht so far or 25% of the yearly budget

The Tax revenue (% of GDP) in Thailand was last reported at 15.97(%) in 2010, according to a World Bank report published in 2012.

Edited June 7, 2013 by waza

[Thai at Heart]

I realize you guys have only one point and that is to bash the current government and Thaksin. I'm trying to be polite and answer your questions but the thread is about Moodys warning to Thailand and not Thaksin coming back to town. Is Moodys warning a wake up call? If not it should be. Do you folks disagree?

It's a wake up call, that if you want to go into the international markets and borrow money, people are more than willing to lend it, but they would like very much to know what you are doing with it. Kittirat with his "white lies" and the commerce industry with their secretly priced existant or non existant GtoG sales show that the market will hold you to account eventually.

I think this is quite fortuitous actually. At a time when Thailand's economy might be heading for a little bit of a slowdown, and the baht may be about to weaken a bit, this might give the government a little dose of reality that they aren't immune to criticism. They manage to flick off anything domestic with threats and bellicose statements, but Moody's seem to have got their attention quickly enough. Good.

[thaicbr]

I realize you guys have only one point and that is to bash the current government and Thaksin.  I'm trying to be polite and answer your questions but the thread is about Moodys warning to Thailand and not Thaksin coming back to town.  Is Moodys warning a wake up call?  If not it should be.  Do you folks disagree? 

That is not the point of this thread and yes Moodys warning should be a wake up call. As the other warnings from institutions inside Thailand should have been last year and the year before.

We will have to wait and see what happens.

Sent from my i-mobile i-STYLE Q6

[chiangmaikelly]

I realize you guys have only one point and that is to bash the current government and Thaksin. I'm trying to be polite and answer your questions but the thread is about Moodys warning to Thailand and not Thaksin coming back to town. Is Moodys warning a wake up call? If not it should be. Do you folks disagree?

I did ask you what you expect the result of the wake-up to be. Perhaps now that you are back on topic might be a good time to answer.

I answered before. Nothing. The government will not do anything.

[waza]

I realize you guys have only one point and that is to bash the current government and Thaksin. I'm trying to be polite and answer your questions but the thread is about Moodys warning to Thailand and not Thaksin coming back to town. Is Moodys warning a wake up call? If not it should be. Do you folks disagree?

We realise that you have only one point and that is to defend the current government and Thaksin. But you polite answers in no way is a defensible excuse for the massive haemorrhage of funds lost to corruption that Moodys is warning Thailand about. The buck stops at the top, so in reality your hero Thaksin and his puppet Yingluck have sown the seeds of Thailands economic disaster. Do you agree?

[longway]

Ok so whats your point?

GJ wrote, "Just reading through some of the articles in world newspapers about the mountains of rotting rice, and I simply do not know how the Thai rice industry is going to recover. Who on earth would want to risk buying the stuff."

Millions of Thai rice is being bought and sold every day. The price of one kind of rice is up another is down. Nothing is changed. The market is a bit down. The above poster is talking about the sky falling and it's not. There are no mountains of rotting rice.

18 Million tons of rice in storage and 796 304 tons sold in the first quarter. That leaves 17 203 696 Tons. Now if i were to dump that in your Garden you would think it was a frakking mountain.

No one has suggested dumping rice in a garden. Do you really think your post is adult? Rice is stored in a rice warehouse or silo.

I have an idea. Thailand could make a new tourist attraction from all this unsold pristine non-rotting rice.

They could make a giant replica of the Great pyramid of Giza, and a ski slope made out of rice and a huge rice skating rink and the centre peice would be a gigantic statue of Thaksin made out of rice. Afterall 40% of thais want hime back and this would bring them flocking to catch a glimpse of their beloved leader.

They can call it The Hub of Denial

Edited June 7, 2013 by longway

[longway]

I realize you guys have only one point and that is to bash the current government and Thaksin. I'm trying to be polite and answer your questions but the thread is about Moodys warning to Thailand and not Thaksin coming back to town. Is Moodys warning a wake up call? If not it should be. Do you folks disagree?

You are the one who brought him up.

[metisdead]

Off topic posts and replies have been removed. Stay on the topic:

Warning on rice policy a wake-up call for govt
The Nation

TDRI says losses from rice-pledging scheme may exceed estimates

BANGKOK: -- A warning by credit-rating agency Moody's about the government's controversial rice-pledging scheme is "worth listening to", and the loss from the scheme this year is expected to exceed estimates, a senior Thailand Development Research Institute (TDRI) official said yesterday.

This topic is not about the return of Thaksin!

[iancnx]

Yet again too much hot air in here ..... Shame, as this is a crucial topic and the ramifications of a rating downgrade will be felt by most in the long run. Speculation on Taksin returning, sales tax, vat and other irrelevant humbug just detracts from what was a good informative debate. If you ain't got anything worthy to add for the benefit of other posters who care about this stuff just try to stay quiet.... Go on try....

[Skywalker69]

It could be argued that no money has been lost since the government still own some (most) of the rice. If you buy 1000 mangos at 100 baht each then sell 999 at 1 Baht each you have not made a loss until you sell the final mango.

Unless all your mangoes go rotten before you sell them ..... or the price drops to less than you paid.

Pro government people say none of the rice is rotten. Anti government people think all of the rice is rotten. So tell us; what percent of the rice in storage is rotten and not able to be sold?

A trial donation last last month of 40 tonnes as humanitarian aid to poor villagers in Phitsanulok province, which a commerce ministry official said would be followed by a few

millions of tonnes more, drew complaints it had been stored too long.

"I don't know why the government gave it to us as no one can eat this rice," said Chaew Malila, 60, in Beung Phra district in Phitsanulok, almost 400 km north of Bangkok.

Villagers who received a 4-kg bag per family, said the rice had a bad smell, yellowish colour and insects in the sacks.

[NeverSure]

assuming the government is paying 40% higher than market price then the minimum annual loss will be about 800000*12*1000*0.4 as i have used the government target of 800,000 tons per month for exports and an average market price of USD 1000 per ton for thai jasmine rice. So that adds up to about USD 3.84 billion per year being the loss incurred by the government due to the rice pledging scheme.

but if the actual production has been higher, with the farmers incentive to have produced as much as they can or/and or/and if the rice in storage is rotting then the losses may be substantially higher.

you can all argue with yourselves and split hairs, but this looks like a fair ballpark minimum figure to me. the actual loss to thailand though is debateable, as this is more about redistribution of wealth than actual loss. the government needs to make up for the costs through tax revenue or/and debt issuance. the gdp of thailand is about usd 350 billion, so the rice pledging scheme is quite modest in % terms.

Judas Priest. Will people please quit using the GDP as if it's the government's money? The cost of the rice pledging scheme is the government's expense, but the GDP is the private sector's output.

The number needs to be a percentage of the government's income, not the GDP. The latest figures I can find show that the government's income is only about 16% of GDP. Link Now if we only knew the truth about what the rice scheme has cost the government over the past few years, we could figure out what percentage of the government's income goes to that scheme. But they don't release those numbers and if they did, they would be corrupt.

All we know from news reports posted on this forum is that the rice pledging scheme has cost the Thai government about 700 billion baht. If we could subtract from that the money the government might be able to recoup from rice sales, we'd know the loss. But there's so much corruption that who could know? I wouldn't be surprised to learn that what isn't rotten has been sold via theft.

The total budget for 2013 is 2,4 trillion Baht (2,400,000,000,000) [$77 billion]

The Government has set a deficit of 300 billion baht, while it is expected to collect revenues of 2.1 trillion baht.

The cost of the rice scam is 600 billion baht so far or 25% of the yearly budget

The Tax revenue (% of GDP) in Thailand was last reported at 15.97(%) in 2010, according to a World Bank report published in 2012.

Links are always appreciated. Thanks.

[rubl]

Interestingly enough end of April 2013 Moody's said

"While Moody's does not anticipate a material deterioration in Thailand's fiscal metrics in 2013-14, populist measures pose a risk to fiscal discipline and increased off-budget financing impairs transparency."

Maybe they referred to various off-budget shenanigans like the THB 350 billion so urgently needed we had a decree in January 2012, or the THB 1.14 trillion under BoT's carpet, or the billions state banks lent for government projects, or the upcoming triffling 2.4 trillion.

Proposed National Budget for 2013/2014 THB 2.52 trillion with THB 250 billion deficit. Extra budgets not included. Unknown if financing (i.e. interest and repayment) is included.

[waza]

assuming the government is paying 40% higher than market price then the minimum annual loss will be about 800000*12*1000*0.4 as i have used the government target of 800,000 tons per month for exports and an average market price of USD 1000 per ton for thai jasmine rice. So that adds up to about USD 3.84 billion per year being the loss incurred by the government due to the rice pledging scheme.

but if the actual production has been higher, with the farmers incentive to have produced as much as they can or/and or/and if the rice in storage is rotting then the losses may be substantially higher.

you can all argue with yourselves and split hairs, but this looks like a fair ballpark minimum figure to me. the actual loss to thailand though is debateable, as this is more about redistribution of wealth than actual loss. the government needs to make up for the costs through tax revenue or/and debt issuance. the gdp of thailand is about usd 350 billion, so the rice pledging scheme is quite modest in % terms.

Judas Priest. Will people please quit using the GDP as if it's the government's money? The cost of the rice pledging scheme is the government's expense, but the GDP is the private sector's output.

The number needs to be a percentage of the government's income, not the GDP. The latest figures I can find show that the government's income is only about 16% of GDP. Link Now if we only knew the truth about what the rice scheme has cost the government over the past few years, we could figure out what percentage of the government's income goes to that scheme. But they don't release those numbers and if they did, they would be corrupt.

All we know from news reports posted on this forum is that the rice pledging scheme has cost the Thai government about 700 billion baht. If we could subtract from that the money the government might be able to recoup from rice sales, we'd know the loss. But there's so much corruption that who could know? I wouldn't be surprised to learn that what isn't rotten has been sold via theft.

The total budget for 2013 is 2,4 trillion Baht (2,400,000,000,000) [$77 billion]

The Government has set a deficit of 300 billion baht, while it is expected to collect revenues of 2.1 trillion baht.

The cost of the rice scam is 600 billion baht so far or 25% of the yearly budget

The Tax revenue (% of GDP) in Thailand was last reported at 15.97(%) in 2010, according to a World Bank report published in 2012.

Links are always appreciated. Thanks.

http://www.boi.go.th/tir/issue/201203_22_3/1.htm

http://wdronline.worldbank.org/‎

Edited June 7, 2013 by waza

[OzMick]

I realize you guys have only one point and that is to bash the current government and Thaksin. I'm trying to be polite and answer your questions but the thread is about Moodys warning to Thailand and not Thaksin coming back to town. Is Moodys warning a wake up call? If not it should be. Do you folks disagree?

I did ask you what you expect the result of the wake-up to be. Perhaps now that you are back on topic might be a good time to answer.

I answered before. Nothing. The government will not do anything.

I have some news for you - nothing is not an option.

I explained to my red-shirt g/f how much B260 billion is by pointing out that we would have to pack 6+ houses the size of ours to the rafters with B1000 notes, and then burn them, in order to waste that much money. Not even she finds that acceptable.

[rubl]

On 2013-06-02 we had

"Governments 2.525-trillion-baht budget bill", "projected net income of 2.275 trillion baht in the 2014 fiscal year"
http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/643667-thailand-live-sunday-2-jun-2013/page-2#entry6465833

[Thai at Heart]

I realize you guys have only one point and that is to bash the current government and Thaksin. I'm trying to be polite and answer your questions but the thread is about Moodys warning to Thailand and not Thaksin coming back to town. Is Moodys warning a wake up call? If not it should be. Do you folks disagree?

I did ask you what you expect the result of the wake-up to be. Perhaps now that you are back on topic might be a good time to answer.

I answered before. Nothing. The government will not do anything.

I have some news for you - nothing is not an option.

I explained to my red-shirt g/f how much B260 billion is by pointing out that we would have to pack 6+ houses the size of ours to the rafters with B1000 notes, and then burn them, in order to waste that much money. Not even she finds that acceptable.

If the rice doesnt revolve neither does the cash, so ongoing purchase will need more cash unless they can sell it? How much?

[StefanBBK]

This really seems to be a subject we are all very eager to discuss, judging by the number of replies.

I just would like to comment a little about earlier posts regarding how little 400 Billion Baht is compared to the GDP.

GDP cannot be used as a measure. Government budget should be the measurement.

Give or take a couple billion, 2013 budget ranges at about 2,400 Bn Baht. The losses incurred by the various agriculture subsides (foremost Rice pledging) need to be paid of that budget. One could defer these losses with some creative accounting, the most common would be overstating the value of stockpiled rice.

At some point however the losses will need to be "realized".

Back to the figures, it means that roughly 17% of the annual Budget of the country will need to be used to pay for the losses. This is an enormous amount.

To compare, Defense budget 178 bn Baht, Public Health 254 bn Baht, Environment 2 bn Baht.

400 bn Baht is also 5,995 baht per each Thai citizen (using 66,720,153 total)

The whole thing does not look good and the country, it's people, will have to pay for a failed policy.

[GentlemanJim]

I did ask you what you expect the result of the wake-up to be. Perhaps now that you are back on topic might be a good time to answer.

I answered before. Nothing. The government will not do anything.

I have some news for you - nothing is not an option.

I explained to my red-shirt g/f how much B260 billion is by pointing out that we would have to pack 6+ houses the size of ours to the rafters with B1000 notes, and then burn them, in order to waste that much money. Not even she finds that acceptable.

If the rice doesnt revolve neither does the cash, so ongoing purchase will need more cash unless they can sell it? How much?

2.2 Trillion should keep the rice revolving quicker than a really quick thing on slicks on a sunny day. For the Government, I believe they are in a situation now where everything depends on securing this preposterously large loan to cover all the mistakes. If they do not secure the loan it will be a 'bejeezus' moment and I expect they will call early elections with the intent of losing so that they are not in power when the inevitable crash occurs and Thailand goes bust.

This has all been tragic, unnecessary and avoidable. If only the members of parliament had the honour and integrity to follow the oath they swore when they were elected as MP's great things could be achieved in this country, alas we got pigs at the trough rather than MP's.

[paddyjenkins]

assuming the government is paying 40% higher than market price then the minimum annual loss will be about 800000*12*1000*0.4 as i have used the government target of 800,000 tons per month for exports and an average market price of USD 1000 per ton for thai jasmine rice. So that adds up to about USD 3.84 billion per year being the loss incurred by the government due to the rice pledging scheme.

but if the actual production has been higher, with the farmers incentive to have produced as much as they can or/and or/and if the rice in storage is rotting then the losses may be substantially higher.

you can all argue with yourselves and split hairs, but this looks like a fair ballpark minimum figure to me. the actual loss to thailand though is debateable, as this is more about redistribution of wealth than actual loss. the government needs to make up for the costs through tax revenue or/and debt issuance. the gdp of thailand is about usd 350 billion, so the rice pledging scheme is quite modest in % terms.

Judas Priest. Will people please quit using the GDP as if it's the government's money? The cost of the rice pledging scheme is the government's expense, but the GDP is the private sector's output.

The number needs to be a percentage of the government's income, not the GDP. The latest figures I can find show that the government's income is only about 16% of GDP. Link Now if we only knew the truth about what the rice scheme has cost the government over the past few years, we could figure out what percentage of the government's income goes to that scheme. But they don't release those numbers and if they did, they would be corrupt.

All we know from news reports posted on this forum is that the rice pledging scheme has cost the Thai government about 700 billion baht. If we could subtract from that the money the government might be able to recoup from rice sales, we'd know the loss. But there's so much corruption that who could know? I wouldn't be surprised to learn that what isn't rotten has been sold via theft.

no, GDP is a perfectly reaonable yardstick to use. i estimated the cost of the progarm and i put that estimate in the context of gdp. that is what people do when they talk about economics. perhaps if you read more economic type analysis and get yourself a bit better educated you may get used to the concept of gdp. people compare all kinds of things to gdp...tax, debt, interest on debt, spending on x, y, z...rice programs....the rice scheme doesn't seem sensible but it won't by itself break thailand's back as it is too small a % of gdp top be able to do that.

and by the way, gdp is not just the private sector. even a communist state with no private sector would still have a gdp. so you are talking rubbish. instead of talking rubbish why don't you get off your high horse, donkey, kangeroo....wharever...and listen to what people have to say...

[StefanBBK]

assuming the government is paying 40% higher than market price then the minimum annual loss will be about 800000*12*1000*0.4 as i have used the government target of 800,000 tons per month for exports and an average market price of USD 1000 per ton for thai jasmine rice. So that adds up to about USD 3.84 billion per year being the loss incurred by the government due to the rice pledging scheme.

but if the actual production has been higher, with the farmers incentive to have produced as much as they can or/and or/and if the rice in storage is rotting then the losses may be substantially higher.

you can all argue with yourselves and split hairs, but this looks like a fair ballpark minimum figure to me. the actual loss to thailand though is debateable, as this is more about redistribution of wealth than actual loss. the government needs to make up for the costs through tax revenue or/and debt issuance. the gdp of thailand is about usd 350 billion, so the rice pledging scheme is quite modest in % terms.

Judas Priest. Will people please quit using the GDP as if it's the government's money? The cost of the rice pledging scheme is the government's expense, but the GDP is the private sector's output.

The number needs to be a percentage of the government's income, not the GDP. The latest figures I can find show that the government's income is only about 16% of GDP. Link Now if we only knew the truth about what the rice scheme has cost the government over the past few years, we could figure out what percentage of the government's income goes to that scheme. But they don't release those numbers and if they did, they would be corrupt.

All we know from news reports posted on this forum is that the rice pledging scheme has cost the Thai government about 700 billion baht. If we could subtract from that the money the government might be able to recoup from rice sales, we'd know the loss. But there's so much corruption that who could know? I wouldn't be surprised to learn that what isn't rotten has been sold via theft.

no, GDP is a perfectly reaonable yardstick to use. i estimated the cost of the progarm and i put that estimate in the context of gdp. that is what people do when they talk about economics. perhaps if you read more economic type analysis and get yourself a bit better educated you may get used to the concept of gdp. people compare all kinds of things to gdp...tax, debt, interest on debt, spending on x, y, z...rice programs....the rice scheme doesn't seem sensible but it won't by itself break thailand's back as it is too small a % of gdp top be able to do that.

and by the way, gdp is not just the private sector. even a communist state with no private sector would still have a gdp. so you are talking rubbish. instead of talking rubbish why don't you get off your high horse, donkey, kangeroo....wharever...and listen to what people have to say...

I just goggled "gross domestic product versus government budget"

For Thailand the government budget apparently is only 17.7% of GDP. Losses are expenditures under the budget.

Methinks the amount is huge and cannot be covered by existing budget.

[GentlemanJim]

assuming the government is paying 40% higher than market price then the minimum annual loss will be about 800000*12*1000*0.4 as i have used the government target of 800,000 tons per month for exports and an average market price of USD 1000 per ton for thai jasmine rice. So that adds up to about USD 3.84 billion per year being the loss incurred by the government due to the rice pledging scheme.

but if the actual production has been higher, with the farmers incentive to have produced as much as they can or/and or/and if the rice in storage is rotting then the losses may be substantially higher.

you can all argue with yourselves and split hairs, but this looks like a fair ballpark minimum figure to me. the actual loss to thailand though is debateable, as this is more about redistribution of wealth than actual loss. the government needs to make up for the costs through tax revenue or/and debt issuance. the gdp of thailand is about usd 350 billion, so the rice pledging scheme is quite modest in % terms.

Judas Priest. Will people please quit using the GDP as if it's the government's money? The cost of the rice pledging scheme is the government's expense, but the GDP is the private sector's output.

The number needs to be a percentage of the government's income, not the GDP. The latest figures I can find show that the government's income is only about 16% of GDP. Link Now if we only knew the truth about what the rice scheme has cost the government over the past few years, we could figure out what percentage of the government's income goes to that scheme. But they don't release those numbers and if they did, they would be corrupt.

All we know from news reports posted on this forum is that the rice pledging scheme has cost the Thai government about 700 billion baht. If we could subtract from that the money the government might be able to recoup from rice sales, we'd know the loss. But there's so much corruption that who could know? I wouldn't be surprised to learn that what isn't rotten has been sold via theft.

no, GDP is a perfectly reaonable yardstick to use. i estimated the cost of the progarm and i put that estimate in the context of gdp. that is what people do when they talk about economics. perhaps if you read more economic type analysis and get yourself a bit better educated you may get used to the concept of gdp. people compare all kinds of things to gdp...tax, debt, interest on debt, spending on x, y, z...rice programs....the rice scheme doesn't seem sensible but it won't by itself break thailand's back as it is too small a % of gdp top be able to do that.

and by the way, gdp is not just the private sector. even a communist state with no private sector would still have a gdp. so you are talking rubbish. instead of talking rubbish why don't you get off your high horse, donkey, kangeroo....wharever...and listen to what people have to say...

Pot calling Kettle

Edited June 7, 2013 by metisdead
30) Do not modify someone else's post in your quoted reply, either with font or color changes, added emoticons, or altered wording.

[Gulfsailor]

assuming the government is paying 40% higher than market price then the minimum annual loss will be about 800000*12*1000*0.4 as i have used the government target of 800,000 tons per month for exports and an average market price of USD 1000 per ton for thai jasmine rice. So that adds up to about USD 3.84 billion per year being the loss incurred by the government due to the rice pledging scheme.

but if the actual production has been higher, with the farmers incentive to have produced as much as they can or/and or/and if the rice in storage is rotting then the losses may be substantially higher.

you can all argue with yourselves and split hairs, but this looks like a fair ballpark minimum figure to me. the actual loss to thailand though is debateable, as this is more about redistribution of wealth than actual loss. the government needs to make up for the costs through tax revenue or/and debt issuance. the gdp of thailand is about usd 350 billion, so the rice pledging scheme is quite modest in % terms.

Judas Priest. Will people please quit using the GDP as if it's the government's money? The cost of the rice pledging scheme is the government's expense, but the GDP is the private sector's output.

The number needs to be a percentage of the government's income, not the GDP. The latest figures I can find show that the government's income is only about 16% of GDP. Link Now if we only knew the truth about what the rice scheme has cost the government over the past few years, we could figure out what percentage of the government's income goes to that scheme. But they don't release those numbers and if they did, they would be corrupt.

All we know from news reports posted on this forum is that the rice pledging scheme has cost the Thai government about 700 billion baht. If we could subtract from that the money the government might be able to recoup from rice sales, we'd know the loss. But there's so much corruption that who could know? I wouldn't be surprised to learn that what isn't rotten has been sold via theft.

no, GDP is a perfectly reaonable yardstick to use. i estimated the cost of the progarm and i put that estimate in the context of gdp. that is what people do when they talk about economics. perhaps if you read more economic type analysis and get yourself a bit better educated you may get used to the concept of gdp. people compare all kinds of things to gdp...tax, debt, interest on debt, spending on x, y, z...rice programs....the rice scheme doesn't seem sensible but it won't by itself break thailand's back as it is too small a % of gdp top be able to do that.

and by the way, gdp is not just the private sector. even a communist state with no private sector would still have a gdp. so you are talking rubbish. instead of talking rubbish why don't you get off your high horse, donkey, kangeroo....wharever...and listen to what people have to say...

I agree that It is common to compare to GDP. However, 1.5% just doesn't seem to show the enormity of the cost. For example, China spends 2% of its GDP on military. So if this rice scheme shows even slightly larger losses, it would mean that in relation to its GDP, Thailand waists more money on rice, than china spends on its military!!

[Robby nz]

At this moment the MR's sitting behind me looking at her computer is watching a press conference with the Minister of Commerce and his off sider that apparently started at 4 oclock.

This she says is direct from the Nation channel.

The press is grilling the minister's on the amount of rice in storage, what has been sold etc.

Answers started out as "It is a secret we cant tell you"

Then they finally after a lot of evasion got round to admitting they didn't know.

It is ongoing for anyone who does facebook, it is of course in Thai.

[StefanBBK]

assuming the government is paying 40% higher than market price then the minimum annual loss will be about 800000*12*1000*0.4 as i have used the government target of 800,000 tons per month for exports and an average market price of USD 1000 per ton for thai jasmine rice. So that adds up to about USD 3.84 billion per year being the loss incurred by the government due to the rice pledging scheme.

but if the actual production has been higher, with the farmers incentive to have produced as much as they can or/and or/and if the rice in storage is rotting then the losses may be substantially higher.

you can all argue with yourselves and split hairs, but this looks like a fair ballpark minimum figure to me. the actual loss to thailand though is debateable, as this is more about redistribution of wealth than actual loss. the government needs to make up for the costs through tax revenue or/and debt issuance. the gdp of thailand is about usd 350 billion, so the rice pledging scheme is quite modest in % terms.

Judas Priest. Will people please quit using the GDP as if it's the government's money? The cost of the rice pledging scheme is the government's expense, but the GDP is the private sector's output.

The number needs to be a percentage of the government's income, not the GDP. The latest figures I can find show that the government's income is only about 16% of GDP. Link Now if we only knew the truth about what the rice scheme has cost the government over the past few years, we could figure out what percentage of the government's income goes to that scheme. But they don't release those numbers and if they did, they would be corrupt.

All we know from news reports posted on this forum is that the rice pledging scheme has cost the Thai government about 700 billion baht. If we could subtract from that the money the government might be able to recoup from rice sales, we'd know the loss. But there's so much corruption that who could know? I wouldn't be surprised to learn that what isn't rotten has been sold via theft.

no, GDP is a perfectly reaonable yardstick to use. i estimated the cost of the progarm and i put that estimate in the context of gdp. that is what people do when they talk about economics. perhaps if you read more economic type analysis and get yourself a bit better educated you may get used to the concept of gdp. people compare all kinds of things to gdp...tax, debt, interest on debt, spending on x, y, z...rice programs....the rice scheme doesn't seem sensible but it won't by itself break thailand's back as it is too small a % of gdp top be able to do that.

and by the way, gdp is not just the private sector. even a communist state with no private sector would still have a gdp. so you are talking rubbish. instead of talking rubbish why don't you get off your high horse, donkey, kangeroo....wharever...and listen to what people have to say...

I agree that It is common to compare to GDP. However, 1.5% just doesn't seem to show the enormity of the cost. For example, China spends 2% of its GDP on military. So if this rice scheme shows even slightly larger losses, it would mean that in relation to its GDP, Thailand waists more money on rice, than china spends on its military!!

Yes agree 100%, GDP is a common yardstick. But using it in this particular context really does not show the magnitude of things. Thailand spends only 0.75% of its GDP on "defense"....

[GentlemanJim]

At this moment the MR's sitting behind me looking at her computer is watching a press conference with the Minister of Commerce and his off sider that apparently started at 4 oclock.

This she says is direct from the Nation channel.

The press is grilling the minister's on the amount of rice in storage, what has been sold etc.

Answers started out as "It is a secret we cant tell you"

Then they finally after a lot of evasion got round to admitting they didn't know.

It is ongoing for anyone who does facebook, it is of course in Thai.

I am just astonished the press are giving them a grilling instead of just smiling and wai-ing after the first answer. I hope the journo's get somewhere near the truth.