Democrat Leader Says He's Ready To Become Pm

[george]

Democrat leader says he's ready to become PM

Abhisit Vejjajiva is ready

BANGKOK: -- Abhisit Vejjajiva, leader of the opposition Democrat Party in the last Parliament, said Saturday he is well-prepared to become Thailand's new prime minister if given a

chance by the people and that his government would further develop several populist policies implemented by the current caretaker government of Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra.

Pledging that his party would follow the guidelines of three courts Supreme Administrative Court, Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court -- which are finding solutions to political stalemate including a possible call for a fresh general election, Mr. Abhisit said the Democrat Party would abide by the three courts' decision by fielding its candidates in a fresh general election if the April 2 polls were nullified.

His remarks were made during the party meeting here and was attended by party members and foreign diplomats.

Stressing that the country now needs a national leader with fresh ideas, commitment against corrupt practices and less extravagance for the country's survival, Mr. Abhisit said that his party, if it is voted into power and becomes the new government, would stop the privatisation of state enterprises, especially public utilities, and would encourage competition with an objective to boost their efficiency.

Thailand needs to review its economic policies, especially regarding free trade agreements signed by the current government with varied countries, which have put Thailand at a disadvantage, he said.

Mr. Abhisit said the Democrats would also follow the practice of the self-sufficient economy, initiated by His Majesty the King, stop refinancing programmes and further develop village fund, and the small-, medium- and large (SML) development fund which is designed for boosting job efficiency.

Human resources development in the eyes of the Democrats is much more vital that investment in megaprojects and the state needs to provide support on education to the people such as providing loans to children of poor families so that they would be able to further their studies, he said.

Meanwhile, Jatuporn Prompan, deputy spokesman of the ruling Thai Rak Thai Party, said Mr. Abhisit's speech contradicted reality as he had often claimed to have democratic soul but had asked for a royally-appointed prime minister.

The TRT official said that while the Democrats had also thought of transferring budgets for certain projects, that in itself was not sufficient to solve corruption.

Mr. Jatuporn also charged that some leaders of the Democrat Party were also continued political activities to extend their popularity among the southerners.

--TNA 2006-04-29

Related link (Wikipedia): Democrat Party

[jdinasia]

really bad headline for the article .. but pretty str8 forward

[Sandstone Art]

Should give this guy a chance. At least he is not corrupted ( yet??)

Toxin should be flushed down the toilet bowl!

[LaoPo]

He has an impressive Educational (British) background (a.o.)....hmmmm...who knows?

from Wikipedia.com:

Early Life and Education

Abhisit was born to Thai parents, Dr Athasit Vejjajiva and Dr Sodsai Vejjajiva, in Newcastle-upon-Tyne in the United Kingdom. He has two older sisters. After studying at Yukolthorn Kindergarten and Chulalongkorn Demonstration School, he transferred to Scaitclife School and Eton College. He enrolled at Oxford University, where he graduated with a Bachelor’s degree (first class honours) in Philosophy, Politics and Economics. At Oxford he was elected President of St.John's College Junior Common Room. After graduating with his Bachelor’s degree, he taught briefly at the Chulachomklao Royal Military Academy.

Abhisit returned to Oxford to attain a Master’s degree in economics. He also received a Bachelor’s degree in law from Ramkamhaeng University in 1990. After graduating, he taught economics at Thammasat University. He is married to Pimpen Sakuntabhai, a dentist, with whom he has two children.

LaoPo

[ColPyat]

His remarks were made during the party meeting here and was attended by party members and foreign diplomats.

Very nice.

And now he has to start convincing a millions of Thais that he can do that.

But for that he has to go to the villages, not events attended by foreign diplomats.

[jdinasia]

yeppers! according to some here ... if you aint Thaksin ... you aint crap!

[britmaveric]

Maybe in his next life!!

[ando]

Good to see some positive campaining.

[Thaible]

The traitor finally reveals the real reason he wanted Thaksin out. Can't wait to see him get crushed in the polls! Thai people aren't as clueless as he thinks they are.

[dan10400]

The traitor finally reveals the real reason he wanted Thaksin out. Can't wait to see him get crushed in the polls! Thai people aren't as clueless as he thinks they are.

traitor? i don't recall Abhisit vowing any loyalty to Thaksin.

anyone other than Thaksin as PM is likely to be more transparent as the

checks and balance mechanisms will be scrutinized.

anyone other than Thaksin will at least have the oppurtunity to make some

progress in the south.

anyone other than Thaksin might actually listen to others and collectively

come up with proposals that are not half-cocked.

at least Abhisit/Democrats understand that education is the true "megaproject"

for Thailand - not sleaze and corruption.

[nganadeeleg]

He appears to good to be PM of Thailand

(well educated, not corrupt etc)

[ilyushin]

He has an impressive Educational (British) background (a.o.)....hmmmm...who knows?

from Wikipedia.com:

Early Life and Education

Abhisit was born to Thai parents, Dr Athasit Vejjajiva and Dr Sodsai Vejjajiva, in Newcastle-upon-Tyne in the United Kingdom. He has two older sisters. After studying at Yukolthorn Kindergarten and Chulalongkorn Demonstration School, he transferred to Scaitclife School and Eton College. He enrolled at Oxford University, where he graduated with a Bachelor’s degree (first class honours) in Philosophy, Politics and Economics. At Oxford he was elected President of St.John's College Junior Common Room. After graduating with his Bachelor’s degree, he taught briefly at the Chulachomklao Royal Military Academy.

Abhisit returned to Oxford to attain a Master’s degree in economics. He also received a Bachelor’s degree in law from Ramkamhaeng University in 1990. After graduating, he taught economics at Thammasat University. He is married to Pimpen Sakuntabhai, a dentist, with whom he has two children.

LaoPo

Looks good to me!

[Tomissan]

Democrat leader says he's ready to become PM

Abhisit Vejjajiva is ready

BANGKOK: -- Abhisit Vejjajiva, leader of the opposition Democrat Party in the last Parliament, said Saturday he is well-prepared to become Thailand's new prime minister

Stressing that the country now needs a national leader with fresh ideas, commitment against corrupt practices and less extravagance for the country's survival, Mr. Abhisit said that his party, if it is voted into power and becomes the new government, would stop the privatisation of state enterprises, especially public utilities, and would encourage competition with an objective to boost their efficiency.

Is this a contradiction or have I mis-read it? I thought the idea of privatisation was to encourage competition, better services, etc. As it is now, especially public utilities are outdated, understaffed and basically inefficient, i.e., frequent power outages, water supply outages (stoppages), frequent water line breakages, etc. I recently rented a shophouse and had a new water meter installed by the gov't and after being notified that it was installed went to check and 'no water'. After digging down found that the water line had not been connected. Continued problems with blackouts & frequent TOT internet/ADSL cut-outs have been commonplace for many years

The TRT official said that while the Democrats had also thought of transferring budgets for certain projects, that in itself was not sufficient to solve corruption. Sounds like an admission of present corruption and lack of interest in correcting it.

Looks like a case of TIT for TRT or ?

Edited April 30, 2006 by Tomissan

[Thaible]

at least Abhisit/Democrats understand that education is the true "megaproject"

for Thailand - not sleaze and corruption.

While I love the idea of free education for everyone, it is a lie that the Democrats are promoting in order to have a remote chance of ever winning an election again in their lifetimes.

Education costs money - there is no such thing as free in this world. You need to pay teachers and build schools. That money comes from tax revenue. To increase tax revenue, you need to increase corporate and personal revenue. To do that, you need to make Thai companies more globally competitive. That is done through megaprojects. Why do you think Singapore and China do so well? Singapore has great infrastructure and China is rapidly building its own.

TRT is realistic in knowing you need megaprojects before you can offer education to all. I suspect the Democrats realize this as well, but are lying to the public for their own benefit.

[Dragonman]

He has an impressive Educational (British) background (a.o.)....hmmmm...who knows?

from Wikipedia.com:

Early Life and Education

Abhisit was born to Thai parents, Dr Athasit Vejjajiva and Dr Sodsai Vejjajiva, in Newcastle-upon-Tyne in the United Kingdom. He has two older sisters. After studying at Yukolthorn Kindergarten and Chulalongkorn Demonstration School, he transferred to Scaitclife School and Eton College. He enrolled at Oxford University, where he graduated with a Bachelor’s degree (first class honours) in Philosophy, Politics and Economics. At Oxford he was elected President of St.John's College Junior Common Room. After graduating with his Bachelor’s degree, he taught briefly at the Chulachomklao Royal Military Academy.

Abhisit returned to Oxford to attain a Master’s degree in economics. He also received a Bachelor’s degree in law from Ramkamhaeng University in 1990. After graduating, he taught economics at Thammasat University. He is married to Pimpen Sakuntabhai, a dentist, with whom he has two children.

LaoPo

Looks good to me!

In fact it looks like he'd make a better British Prime Minister than Thai.

[hammered]

Changes in government are a good way of limiting corruption. However, unless TRT collapses internally they will no doubt win the next election. They still control virtually all of the state aparatus nationally plus the local patronage networks in the North, North East and Center. Abhisit will probably have to wait but he is young and has a clean reputation.

[tettyan]

Education costs money - there is no such thing as free in this world. You need to pay teachers and build schools. That money comes from tax revenue. To increase tax revenue, you need to increase corporate and personal revenue. To do that, you need to make Thai companies more globally competitive. That is done through megaprojects. Why do you think Singapore and China do so well? Singapore has great infrastructure and China is rapidly building its own.

TRT is realistic in knowing you need megaprojects before you can offer education to all. I suspect the Democrats realize this as well, but are lying to the public for their own benefit.

Yeah... and who do you think has to build the infrastructure? If you don't have educated architects, engineers, etc., how do you expect Thailand to get world-class infrastructure like S'pore? Last time I checked... Oxford and Harvard (not to mention universal education systems in Europe) existed before trains and airports were invented, not the other way around.

[dan10400]

Education costs money - there is no such thing as free in this world. You need to pay teachers and build schools. That money comes from tax revenue. To increase tax revenue, you need to increase corporate and personal revenue. To do that, you need to make Thai companies more globally competitive. That is done through megaprojects. Why do you think Singapore and China do so well? Singapore has great infrastructure and China is rapidly building its own.

TRT is realistic in knowing you need megaprojects before you can offer education to all. I suspect the Democrats realize this as well, but are lying to the public for their own benefit.

nice try, but utter BS. both china and singapore have had a strong emphasis on education for many years - and still do. megaprojects don't mean squat for Thailands competitive advantage in low-wage manufacturing and agricultural products. just what do you think they do export from here?

of course, an educated BS might be able to discern the emperor truly doesn't have any clothes....

[Heng]

Education costs money - there is no such thing as free in this world. You need to pay teachers and build schools. That money comes from tax revenue. To increase tax revenue, you need to increase corporate and personal revenue. To do that, you need to make Thai companies more globally competitive. That is done through megaprojects. Why do you think Singapore and China do so well? Singapore has great infrastructure and China is rapidly building its own.

TRT is realistic in knowing you need megaprojects before you can offer education to all. I suspect the Democrats realize this as well, but are lying to the public for their own benefit.

nice try, but utter BS. both china and singapore have had a strong emphasis on education for many years - and still do.

So do the local Thai Chinese (who incidentally are nearly identical to our Hokkien brothers in Singapore... a major difference is the actual Chinese to non-Chinese population distribution, but hey, we get by with the labor we are dealt). Nearly all who can afford it are educated overseas and when they can't, get the best education money can buy locally. More than enough folks to fill the aforementioned architectural and engineering ranks.

[ando]

Its a bit difficult for us westerners to compare democracy in our own countries with that in Thailand.

The principles are the same for sure and corruption is the enemy of democracy everywhere. No argument from me on those issues.

Where Thailand differs is that it is a developing country with a large proportion of its population living in relative poverty. The difference in distribution of wealth and opportunity is far greater in Thailand than in our own western societies.

In Thailand 50% of the population is employed in agriculture. They produce only less than 10% of GDP.

In USA its 1% in agriculture producing around 1% of GDP, and in Australia its 4% in agriculture producing around 4% of GDP. Source -- http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/index.html

Now here is the twist that I think a lot of us overlook. In Thailand, the poor and underprivileged represent the majority of voters. Like it or not, these poor underprivileged, and under educated Thais have as much a right to vote government in and out as the educated elite in a democracy. The thing is that in Thailand they have the numbers to count.

The problem for any government in Thailand is how to win the votes of the poor who make up the bulk of voters while at the same time implementing policies that benefit the country as a whole on the international stage. Thaksin recognized he needed the rural vote and went after it. After all it was the only way for a government to stay in power in a democracy. And the country did prosper under Thaksin with strong economic growth and improved living standards for just about everybody. However the demon of corruption still hangs over Thailands head as potential factor that could bring it all undone. Official corruption and exploitation of the poor majority are the two biggest threats to any real progress for Thailand. They are the two big political issues that will continued to be addressed in the coming decades.

The Democrats can win power and pursue their anti-corruption agenda. All they have to do is promote policies that give the rural poor a share of the countries wealth. And I dont mean hand outs, I mean real policies that have long term benefits like better education for the kids, introduction of better and more efficient farm practices, relief from the loan sharks through legitimate bank loans, and better health care. Bringing the living standards up for the poor rural people may seem like a costly exercise for those stuck in the old way of thinking where an elite minority ruled, but Australia and USA didn't become major primary producers by watching the peasants drag ploughs through the mud with buffaloes and sending their daughters off to work as prostitutes and servants for the wealthy.

Thailand is going through a transitional stage right now. Institutionalized corruption is no longer accepted as a normal part of life for most people. No body but those who benefited from it ever really liked it, but, in the past, the poor had no other choice than to accept it without their voice in a true democracy.

Now things are changing slowly. The majority of the people, who are the poor underclass, now have a chance to decide who will govern the country.

The ball is now in the Democrats court. All they have to do is decide if they want to get into government through democratic means or try and take some kind of unachievable shortcut to achieve their goals of reducing corruption and cronyism. Its really up to the Democrats now. They probably wont achieve it this next time around, but they can do it eventually if they start listening to the people. The Democrats can do it if they get out out of their anti-Thaksin mind set and start offering the people some policies that will win elections. Its all up to them.

[tettyan]

nice try, but utter BS. both china and singapore have had a strong emphasis on education for many years - and still do.

So do the local Thai Chinese (who incidentally are nearly identical to our Hokkien brothers in Singapore... a major difference is the actual Chinese to non-Chinese population distribution, but hey, we get by with the labor we are dealt). Nearly all who can afford it are educated overseas and when they can't, get the best education money can buy locally. More than enough folks to fill the aforementioned architectural and engineering ranks.

I don't doubt that Thai people underestimate the value of a good education. But I believe Dan's point wasn't that Thais underemphasize education vs China/Singapore, its that the government doesn't do enough to ensure everyone has the same access to educational opportunities that people in the cities do. Universal free education is still a myth - fees for textbooks, uniforms, as well as demands for "donations" from school principals/teachers makes pursuing an education a costly venture for many families. Not to mention the poor quality of most rural schools. It's a tough issue to tackle, but what has the government done so far about it? TRT's main policy, decentralizing the schools to local governments, isn't a bad idea in principle, but I think it really distracts from the real problems. It's great Abhisit wants to make this an issue - but I'm waiting to hear the details on how he plans to accompish this.

[Heng]

Where Thailand differs is that it is a developing country with a large proportion of its population living in relative poverty. The difference in distribution of wealth and opportunity is far greater in Thailand than in our own western societies.

In Thailand 50% of the population is employed in agriculture. They produce only less than 10% of GDP.

In USA its 1% in agriculture producing around 1% of GDP, and in Australia its 4% in agriculture producing around 4% of GDP. Source -- http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/index.html

Employed in agriculture isn't necessarily = to living in poverty.

I don't have any stats (as "reliable" as stats are anyway), but the feeling that the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer is just as pervasive in many western countries (at least in the US it is).

[tettyan]

The Democrats can win power and pursue their anti-corruption agenda. All they have to do is promote policies that give the rural poor a share of the countries wealth. And I dont mean hand outs, I mean real policies that have long term benefits like better education for the kids, introduction of better and more efficient farm practices, relief from the loan sharks through legitimate bank loans, and better health care. Bringing the living standards up for the poor rural people may seem like a costly exercise for those stuck in the old way of thinking where an elite minority ruled, but Australia and USA didn't become major primary producers by watching the peasants drag ploughs through the mud with buffaloes and sending their daughters off to work as prostitutes and servants for the wealthy.

They also need to build a genuine organization on the ground. The Democrats' hitherto contept for any form of grassroots politics is frustrating, but not really surprising. In the 2003 Provincial Administrative Organization elections, they were very reluctant to endorse any candidates at first. Even in the cities of the South, they have neglected municipal politics. Indeed, this neglect of local politics almost cost former Foreign Minister Surin Pitsuwan (one of the Democrats' southern stars) his seat in parliament in last year's election. TRT managed to recruit a former long-time mayor of Nakhon Si Thammarat, who presided over a formidable electoral machine, to give Surin a big scare. Bottom line is - if you don't bother getting your guys elected at the local level, how anyone feel your presence, or even know who you are?

Edited April 30, 2006 by tettyan

[Heng]

nice try, but utter BS. both china and singapore have had a strong emphasis on education for many years - and still do.

So do the local Thai Chinese (who incidentally are nearly identical to our Hokkien brothers in Singapore... a major difference is the actual Chinese to non-Chinese population distribution, but hey, we get by with the labor we are dealt). Nearly all who can afford it are educated overseas and when they can't, get the best education money can buy locally. More than enough folks to fill the aforementioned architectural and engineering ranks.

I don't doubt that Thai people underestimate the value of a good education. But I believe Dan's point wasn't that Thais underemphasize education vs China/Singapore, ...

Yeah, I was talking about Thais as individuals and families, not the government. If more local families looked to the segment of the Thai population (not just the Thai Chinese, but Thai Indians, Thai Sikhs, and many Thai-Thai's as well) who excel in commerce and at the same time push the next generation as far as they can go in education it would be good for the entire country... and certainly more in their own control than just waiting for the government to get their act together.

As an example, in my grandfather's generation, we had a lot of relatives from Trat/Chantaboon/Chantaburi come to live with us to work and study. Kids who wanted an education would actually have to pick up and move to Bangkok and not live with their families... and these were kids who were 8-15 years old. If they took the attitude that they should just kick back and wait until government schools were setup in the countryside, they would have had to wait for 20-30+ years. Just because it's not on your doorstep, it doesn't mean there isn't opportunity out there.

*edit: these were in the days when the move was more or less permanent... you might not see your family for 3-4 years at a time at best, sometimes your relative's family became your new family, not like nowadays where you just get on a tour bus and go back and forth all year round if you wanted to.

Edited April 30, 2006 by Heng

[ando]

Employed in agriculture isn't necessarily = to living in poverty.

I don't have any stats (as "reliable" as stats are anyway), but the feeling that the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer is just as pervasive in many western countries (at least in the US it is).

Thats EXACTLY the kind of thinking I was talking about re westerners not grasping the situation in Thailand. While USA does have a big difference in the division of wealth it is nothing like that in Thailand where the majority live in relative poverty. If the poor folk in Thailand could live as well as the poor folk in USA I doubt they would be complaining about much.

And yes, I do agree its not just those employed in agricultural industries who represent the poor and underprivileged. There are many city dwellers who have little chance of bettering their position in life. I used the agricultural example to emphasize that Thailand is very much a social/financially divided class society at the moment. Education and opportunity through democracy will hopefully narrow that gap in time. I think a few of the ruling class (eg: those who were calling for a Royally appointed PM), are now a little frightened to realize that under a democractic elections the poverty stricken masses could actually put a government in place that might challenge the old status quo. Change is always painfull for those on the losing end.

[Heng]

Employed in agriculture isn't necessarily = to living in poverty.

I don't have any stats (as "reliable" as stats are anyway), but the feeling that the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer is just as pervasive in many western countries (at least in the US it is).

While USA does have a big difference in the division of wealth it is nothing like that in Thailand where the majority live in relative poverty.

Poverty as defined by who? If you take a poverty line of having less than $1X,000 a year, then it's hardly surprising to find a majority of people living in poverty when you apply it to a developing country. Or are you defining poverty as people starving, homeless, or living in shacks?

Edited April 30, 2006 by Heng

[tettyan]

I don't doubt that Thai people underestimate the value of a good education. But I believe Dan's point wasn't that Thais underemphasize education vs China/Singapore, ...

Yeah, I was talking about Thais as individuals and families, not the government. If more local families looked to the segment of the Thai population (not just the Thai Chinese, but Thai Indians, Thai Sikhs, and many Thai-Thai's as well) who excel in commerce and at the same time push the next generation as far as they can go in education it would be good for the entire country... and certainly more in their own control than just waiting for the government to get their act together.

As an example, in my grandfather's generation, we had a lot of relatives from Trat/Chantaboon/Chantaburi come to live with us to work and study. Kids who wanted an education would actually have to pick up and move to Bangkok and not live with their families... and these were kids who were 8-15 years old. If they took the attitude that they should just kick back and wait until government schools were setup in the countryside, they would have had to wait for 20-30+ years. Just because it's not on your doorstep, it doesn't mean there isn't opportunity out there.

*edit: these were in the days when the move was more or less permanent... you might not see your family for 3-4 years at a time at best, sometimes your relative's family became your new family, not like nowadays where you just get on a tour bus and go back and forth all year round if you wanted to.

Interesting post - thanks for sharing your experiences.

You sort of reinforce one of the points I was trying to make - that the inequality of opportunity between city and country is very real. Your relatives from the East were very lucky to have your family in Bangkok - for those families not so fortunate, their best hope is with the village schools. Even with the city schools, with competition for the good schools so fierce these days, opportunities are still limited for the underpriveledged. Who can afford all the cram schools and tutors to help then pass the exam for Triam Udom or Suan Kularb? Sure, maybe the very brightest will always have a shot no matter how poor their family may be - but such a system is not really universal education. Not everyone is destined to study abroad, or even at Thammasart or Chula. But everyone should be able to have a decent shot at getting a good, affordable education from their village schools to their local Rajaphat university - and be able to find a decent job as a result. Only then could Thailand have a chance of becoming a true middle-class society, like Japan or South Korea.

Edited April 30, 2006 by tettyan

[ando]

Poverty as defined by who? If you take a poverty line of having less than $1X,000 a year, then it's hardly surprising to find a majority of people living in poverty when you apply it to a developing country. Or are you defining poverty as people starving, homeless, or living in shacks?

You are right. Defining what is poverty is subjective depending on what standard of living you compare it with. The definition of what constitutes poverty or not is not what I was talking about though. Thats an issue that could go round in circles forever.

What I was talking about was the very large divide in wealth and living standard between rural agricultural workers and the rest of the country. And the fact that agricultural workers represent 50% of the population but produce only 10% of GDP. The rural folk are definitely underprivileged compared to the average population, yet they hold the key to making or breaking governments as their vote is as good as a wealthy persons vote in a democracy. My view is that rural folks do in fact deserve a better deal in sharing the nations wealth and what ever political party recognizes that fact will win government. So far its only been Thaksin who has figured it out.

Farming practices will have to change if standards of living are to improve in rural areas. Mechanization will have to take over from labour intensive practices if wages are to rise. These things are already starting to happen under Thaksin. It will be decades before 10% of the population on the land are producing 10% of GDP as is the ratio in developed countries, but things are moving that way thanks to democracy.

Right now the rural vote holds the balance of power and any aspiring political leaders will need to recognize that if they want to govern. All the lofty ideals about eradicating corruption dont count for shit if you cant get the endorsement of the people to get into government so as to bring about change.

[jdinasia]

is it me? or am I smelling some rampant socialism (or perhaps communism) theology (not philosophy) starting to come out here?

strangely the distribution of wealth is about the same in Thailand as it is in the USA ... just a lower starting point.

I don't know about the rest of you ... but I rather like that Thailand still has farmers ... I don't want to see Thailand become Japan or the USA or anywhere else for that matter.

as for funding this socialist revolution .... I guess if you sell off all the countries assets (remember PTT? or the threat to EGAT?) and then you increase taxes on the rather small middleclass ... then MAYBE you can buy a few tractors and drive the small farmers off their land ....

[ando]

is it me? or am I smelling some rampant socialism (or perhaps communism) theology (not philosophy) starting to come out here?

strangely the distribution of wealth is about the same in Thailand as it is in the USA ... just a lower starting point.

I don't know about the rest of you ... but I rather like that Thailand still has farmers ... I don't want to see Thailand become Japan or the USA or anywhere else for that matter.

as for funding this socialist revolution .... I guess if you sell off all the countries assets (remember PTT? or the threat to EGAT?) and then you increase taxes on the rather small middleclass ... then MAYBE you can buy a few tractors and drive the small farmers off their land ....

Reds under the beds?