Who is more corrupt?

[GuestHouse]

"The trap of believing an election brought with the gross miss direction of public funds is Democracy"

So when does the "gross miss direction of public funds" began? The 30 Baht Medical coverage that benefits millions of the Citizens of Thailand or laws that aid the top 1% of Thailand's affluent citizens???

Does this mean that any public funds earmarked to help a large segment of Thailand's population, is not a function allowed under a Democracy?

It begins with the rice policy and it is characterized by the direction of public funds towards those who support the government.

The ฿30 health scheme is one that benefits the vast majority of Thais regardless of their political persuasion - it's a good policy. (It also supports a few foreigners which I'm sure was not its intent but it might influence their views)

The rice scheme does not benefit all Thais it specifically benefits the PT support base at huge cost to other areas of public spending.

It is blatant vote buying.

Edited December 24, 2013 by GuestHouse

[GuestHouse]

Expect the long outstanding payments to farmers to come through just in time for the election!

[seajae]

one thing I can always assure myself of is the fact that I make my own decisions without letting others influence them(even my wife). I look at Thailand through neutrality and come to my own decisions by reading as much as possible on it and listening to what others say. Unfortunately a lot of posters simply go with their personal bias or their families bias to make their decisions. This isnt as matter of reds and yellows as a lot of you are trying to make out, look at the majority of protesters in Bangkok, they are ordinary citizens that are fed up with the corruption that is festering in the ptp govt and the shins, they want laws for all Thailand not for the northern voters to keep them happy. They see all their taxes going on things like the rice buys, totyally corrupted process that does not benefit anyone except the reds and their masters, it totally disregards the rest of the country for the benefit of the ptp, the protesters want equality with the laws.

A good example of the bias is kiko's statement "

2. in 2010 Suthep as Deputy Prime Minister authorized a crackdown by security forces that left downtown Bangkok in flames and scores of red-shirt dead.

Along with the former Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva, Suthep faces murder charge over the 2010 crackdown,"

He straight out accuses the dems of murder(deliberate and causing the fires) but he leaves out the fact that the dems offered to step down as the reds requested but the ptp/reds/thaksin wanted blood so they decided to create the violence that resulted in deaths and fires and ignore the offer.

The reds caused all the problems in Bangkok in 2010, they instigated the killings, the explosions and the fires purely because that is what thaksin wanted. How can anyone that truly wants to see peace in this country not accept this is what happened, it is documented in a lot of different news articles so there is no favouratism, it is the truth. The ones that cannot see it are those that are simply too biased because it does not suit their views.

Suthep is an idiot, I agree with the protesters but not him although he has managed to start the ball rolling. What we need now are calm heads, not yellows or reds/ptp etc but people that are not influenced by bribes, we need to see an end to the rice scam as well as the other scams the ptp have set up. The 30baht medical is great, even the dems support it but all the rest of the corrupt policies need to be fixed.

Edited December 26, 2013 by sbk
making it personal - post editd for personal attack

[kikoman]

Crop subsidies have always been supported in western Democracies as a way to assure the farming community gets a fair return for their labor as most Agri-business corporate farms have replaced farming families in The land of the free and the home of The Brave, Where the Mexican farmers were all put out of business as a result of The North American free trade agreement and US subsidized corn. Also the European Union, has issues with having to compete against US government subsidized products.

As your statement, only finds fault when price support legislation helps Thai family farmers and not corporations.

in a country where farmers have never had a government that considered their needs, is it a drain as you stated "a huge cost to other areas of public spending"

That also was a issue in the home country over the navy's $600. toilet seat cover and the $500.price for a single aircraft bolt. Prices given to the rich Corporations to built up its military might..

[seajae]

There is nothing wrong with subsidies but you must do it on a level playing field, you cannot subsidize one crop and ignore all the others. People decide what they want to grow, if they decide wrong why should everyone else pay for their mistake, market prices are world wide not just local. The problem with the rice scam isnt so much that the farmers are getting more, it is the fact that all those above them are reaping the money in, the land owners(who put up the rent), the fertilizer supplies(who put up the price), the mills and the storage owners, then you have the scam of bringing rice from outside Thailand & the rice that doesnt even exist. If you are going to run this sort of program you must do it properly, not to purely garner votes for your party. Then to top it all off the so called hard done by farmers are trying to grow more crops to get more money and are buggering up their fields with chemicals so much so even they dont want to eat the rice they grow, they have let the money overtake their responsibility to their land and their knowledge of farming. If you are going to quote shit at least do it properly.

The rubber farmers and rice farmers or any other farmers that do road blocks etc to get more money should all be jailed, they are their own bosses, they make their own decissions on what they grow, to hold a country to ransom because they chose thew wrong crop is no one elses fault but theirs. Subsidy, yes, bribery, no.

Edited December 24, 2013 by seajae

[txp158]

Then in late 2005/6 he changed the telecommunication laws so that he could sell Shin Corporation to the Singaporeans. He did this and twisted some rules so he did not have to pay any tax.

May I also add that the selling of shin corporation stirred up the protesters because the satellites was sold and not because of the company itself.

Thaksin received a lease from the coup government after he won the auction to put satellites orbit (the only orbit that this country has the right to operate) on september 11th, 1991 (the leased document which is written in Thai can be found at http://talk.mthai.com/topic/375199). The auction was held with a restriction that only Thai national can attend but he ended up selling the whole thing to Singapore.

He changed a part of foreign business act (telecommunication act) which as result allows any foreigners to own the share up to 49%. Previously if a company which its business objectives are reserved for Thai nationals, a foreigner can not hold more than 20% (I don't remember the number). What is so disgusting about it, well...please look at the timeline.

• On January 12th, 2006 - Kularb Kaew was created.
• On January 20th, 2006 (Friday) - the government announced that the telecommunication act became active.
• On January 23rd, 2006 (Monday) - Shin corporation was sold.

The transaction was done via several holding companies, including Cypress Holdings, Kularb Kaew, and Cedar Holdings. Cypress Holdings, a unit of Temasek, owned 49% of the shares of Kularb Kaew, but had 90% of the voting rights. Kularb Kaew owned 41.1% of Cedar Holdings. Cedar Holdings held a 54.54% stake in Shin Corp. Indirectly, Kularb Kaew also directly owned another 22.4% of Shin Corp.

[farang000999]

Funny how Thaksin a police officer made all that money with all those government issued monopoly contracts. I guess those people granting these contracts to him were doing so because they liked him and that they were not also dipping into the trough. They don't care that Thaksin is corrupt, what they really care about is that Thaksin broke the rules of the game by giving too many things to poor people and putting too many ideas into their head about the caste system of Thailand to gain their favor. Why did they let Thaksin go? Because the last thing in the world they want is a precedent for corrupt politicians to actually go to prison. Suthep and Thaksin could be brothers.

[farang000999]

"BP: Veera doesn’t trust Yingluck, but who should we trust? Suthep? The options we have now is Suthep’s model of reform vs Yingluck’s model (which is supported by the government coalition partners). There is nothing else on the table now that is backed by anyone with any level of support. Veera talks about a mediator, but Suthep refuses to negotiate at all. Yingluck offered a referendum on Suthep’s People Assembly proposal and Suthep refused. If we magically delay an election then will have some mystery mediator who can click his fingers and we will have reform which everyone will be happy about? Who this person is and how this reform by Suthep’s unelected People’s Assembly will somehow reform the system to the satisfaction of all Is not explained.We have an election where the people can decide who they trust…..

The Democrats can’t win an election and so the Establishment want to rewrite the rules of the game to give them a fighting chance. This has already happened once after the 2006 coup. They got rid of a fully-elected Senate, they stacked “independent” agencies with those opposed to Thaksin and with the partly-appointed Senate could always ensure that enough establishment sympathisers would be appointed again to exercise enough control of the agencies, changed laws to make it easier to dissolve parties, increased powers of such agencies, changed the electoral system twice,* funnelled billions to get former Thaksin allies to defect and establish smaller parties where those smaller parties outspent pro-Thaksin parties 3 to 1 (yet still lost) etc. Yet, this is still not enough.

*Remember under the 1997 Constitution, we had 400 single member constituency MPS and 100 MPs from the party vote. Thaksin won under that system so in 2007, they changed this to 157 multi-member constituencies (with up to 3 MPs per constituency and 400 constituency MPs in total) and 80 MPs from the party vote (because Thai Rak Thai had done well under the party vote system previously) but a pro-Thaksin party still won in 2007 so the Abhisit-led government, who had done well on the party list vote in 2007, changed the electoral system in 2011 to move to 375 single member constituencies and 125 MPs from the party vote. Yet, the pro-Thaksin party won again in 2011 and the change didn’t help. Hence, we need a third change to somehow weaken Puea Thai, but BP thinks they realize this is not enough. They are unhappy that the 2007 Constitution didn’t go far enough in weakening Thaksin so want a do-over. And you think Puea Thai will be happy about this reform? Of course, not. As it is they are not happy with the 2007 Constitution and want a fully-elected Senate and to make other changes, but the establishment want to go the over way entirely…"

Yes, I think we can see that democracy is officially off the table.

[farang000999]

I think one problem the Democrats have is that they warn every populist proposal will bankrupt and destroy Thailand yet Thailand seems to do just fine and poor people seem better off after it goes into effect like raising the minimum wage which was so unpopular on Thai Visa.

[txp158]

Funny how Thaksin a police officer made all that money with all those government issued monopoly contracts. I guess those people granting these contracts to him were doing so because they liked him and that they were not also dipping into the trough. They don't care that Thaksin is corrupt, what they really care about is that Thaksin broke the rules of the game by giving too many things to poor people and putting too many ideas into their head about the caste system of Thailand to gain their favor. Why did they let Thaksin go? Because the last thing in the world they want is a precedent for corrupt politicians to actually go to prison. Suthep and Thaksin could be brothers.

Thaksin was not a just a police officer. His wife Potjaman Na Pombejra (Thai: พจมาน ณ ป้อมเพชร) is a daughter of Samoe Damapong who used to held the position of vice chief of the police department of Thailand. Thaksin's father whose name is Lert Shinawatra (Thai: เลิศ ชินวัตร) was a member of parliament.

Btw I think they don't care whether Thaksin is corrupt or giving money to the poor as long as they get money from Thaksin in return.

[farang000999]

Yingluck should start giving all that rice away to the poor and she should start funding the current rice payments with a 5% tax increase on the wealthiest Thais like Obama did in the USA to help pay for his ACA.

Why shouldn't Thailand have food subsidies like the West?

[Kudel]

I think one problem the Democrats have is that they warn every populist proposal will bankrupt and destroy Thailand yet Thailand seems to do just fine and poor people seem better off after it goes into effect like raising the minimum wage which was so unpopular on Thai Visa.

Thats because many are bitter old gits living on a small fixed income from abroad ,theres a topic running in the news section about the baht taking a plunge the usual suspects are almost having an orgasm judging by the posts made in the west we call these kind of people the ikea pensioners .

[kikoman]

Yingluck should start giving all that rice away to the poor and she should start funding the current rice payments with a 5% tax increase on the wealthiest Thais like Obama did in the USA to help pay for his ACA.

Why shouldn't Thailand have food subsidies like the West?

The rice farmers grow all the rice Thailand consumes and leads Southeast Asia in rice exports not only to the rest of the world but also To Indonesia, Philippines and Malaysia, who are large rice producing countries but local consumption of rice exceed its rice production.

The poor and the elderly in the country should be taken care of, and such a rice subsidy to them would be a giant step in the right direction. There is nothing wrong with Thailand taking care of all of its citizens, the wealthy in Thailand have had their noses in the feed bowl for to long already, and view the wealth of Thailand as their own personal property!

Times have changed!

[kevvy]

The common man .... My wife's sister is a rice farmer and has managed to raise her family on the farming .Went to get her money for her crop and was given a piece of paper to say that they took her rice but no payment yet and didn't tell her when it would happen ... Why is this.....

[benalibina]

The common man .... My wife's sister is a rice farmer and has managed to raise her family on the farming .Went to get her money for her crop and was given a piece of paper to say that they took her rice but no payment yet and didn't tell her when it would happen ... Why is this.....

Self.

[kikoman]

It is time for cooler heads to prevail, in This morning Bangkok Post was a good recommendation for addressing the current crises,

BP stated :

!. "PDRC is entitled to voice their disagreement with the Election".

2, "The protesters have no right to force others to share their views"

3."The attacking and harassing reporters and the storming of the DIS office, These actions are beyond the bounds of peaceful protest: they are illegal and a breach of other people's right"

4. "The great mass of people, will keep their demonstration peaceful and unarmed"

BP Agrees with the demonstrators rights to express their views, showing disagreement with Yingluck's government and its attempts to enact the controversial Amnesty bill and the Charter Amendment draft on the make up of the Senate.

BP disagrees with some protest leaders harsh words attacking members of the Yingluck Administration and other actions that are illegal and the breach of the basis rights of others.

The blocking of voters on the February 2 election could lead to violence, as many voters especially those that support of Pheu Thai party, will insist on casting their ballots. Instead of blocking the election the anti-government protesters should vote (NO) on election day.

BP urges anti-government protesters to support the seven private sector organizations proposal for the government to issue a decree to set up a body to handle political reforms. While the reforms must be agreed upon by all parties they effect, they should occur separately to the election, which is related to the Democratic system. All political parties must commit to political reforms, also after the election the house must be dissolved as soon as reforms are completed and a snap election called under the new reform rules. The new government formed after the February 2 election must not enact any controversial bills-like the Amnesty bill or the Charter amendment draft.

This is the only way out of the current crisis!

Cheers

Edited December 25, 2013 by kikoman

[benalibina]

It is time for cooler heads to prevail, in This morning Bangkok Post was a good recommendation for addressing the current crises,

BP stated :

!. "PDRC is entitled to voice their disagreement with the Election".

2, "The protesters have no right to force others to share their views"

3."The attacking and harassing reporters and the storming of the DIS office, These actions are beyond the bounds of peaceful protest: they are illegal and a breach of other people's right"

4. "The great mass of people, will keep their demonstration peaceful and unarmed"

BP Agrees with the demonstrators rights to express their views, showing disagreement with Yingluck's government and its attempts to enact the controversial Amnesty bill and the Charter Amendment draft on the make up of the Senate.

BP disagrees with some protest leaders harsh words attacking members of the Yingluck Administration and other actions that are illegal and the breach of the basis rights of others.

The blocking of voters on the February 2 election could lead to violence, as many voters especially those that support of Pheu Thai party, will insist on casting their ballots. Instead of blocking the election the anti-government protesters should vote (NO) on election day.

BP urges anti-government protesters to support the seven private sector organizations proposal for the government to issue a decree to set up a body to handle political reforms. While the reforms must be agreed upon by all parties they effect, they should occur separately to the election, which is related to the Democratic system. All political parties must commit to political reforms, also after the election the house must be dissolved as soon as reforms are completed and a snap election called under the new reform rules. The new government formed after the February 2 election must not enact any controversial bills-like the Amnesty bill or the Charter amendment draft.

This is the only way out of the current crisis!

Cheers

And then .....waiting for a new 1 and so and so on.

[Lancelot]

Balian of Ibelin: What is Jerusalem worth?

Saladin: Nothing.

[walks away]

Saladin: Everything! Kingdom of Heaven quote

What does it matter if one party is slightly less corrupt than another?

I see the issue more as folks in the North and North East feeling that they were disenfranchised- and they are now demanding a say in how the country is run. The anti government protestors have their panties in a twist over Thaksin and will never accept him in government.

Take Mr. Thaksin out of the equation (yeah highly unlikely) and the divisions will continue until the poor folks in the North have a real say in government.

If Thaksin really cares about the country he should totally butt out of politics. But the opposition should honestly reach out to the pro government party and make peace.

Hope I'm wrong but I don't see that happening...

Edited December 25, 2013 by Lancelot

[txp158]

who is more corrupt? To me, the question is really irrelevant. It's just another way of Thaksin saying you are telling me I'm bad, why don't you look at other people too? It's a typical question red shirt supporters offten raise so that his boss will not be looked so bad upon.

It may be true that the gap between rich and poor will continue to exist, but it has always been that way in every single countries in the world. Richness and poorness are relative terms that no one will find a way to justify when differences are too great. Many Thai people who considered themselves poor now are fat and overweight. They have TV, microwave, refrigerator, and motor bike at home. Compare to what it was a hundred years ago, these people are living like a king. Nowaway you don't find too many Thai kids with the problem of malnutrition. If you find one, it'll be on the first page of every newspapaers. Fifty years ago malnutrition is a common problem. People die on street from disease like cholera which only require IV supplement to keep them alive. Nowaway you can count how many people actually die of cholera in a year, and our population is now more than 10 ten times the amount of that 50 years ago.

When Thaksin first came into power, he often stated he would make the poor disappear. With that statement in mind, I often asked people near me, I'm a drug addict, I don't work, I gamble for a living, do you think Thaksin can make me rich. For the past 10 years, the single answer I got has been "no one can do that and giving you all the money in world won't be enough." That's why I came to the conclusion the people are now today because of what they have been doing. It's like obesity. You don't, won't and can't get fat in one day or a week. Whatever weight you are in now, it is the culmination of your past behavior in years.

The best thing to do is to let people get on with their life. A good government is the kind of a man that teaches people how to fish and not just simply gives them fish. Whether the people want to fish for themselves or not, they should be the one to decide.

Edited December 25, 2013 by txp158

[kikoman]

A good government treat all of its citizens alike, if they give a piece of the pie to the rich they should also give a piece of the pie to the poor. Corruption has been a big problem through out Thailand's history.

It did not start in 2001 with the election of Thaksin under the new reform constitution.. Thaskin was just a much more intelligent politician then the run of the mill Thai politician. He knew that by him giving a piece of the pie to the working class of Thailand, he could build a political machine that would be extremely hard for the old affluent power structure candidates to win future elections. All election since 2001 the old power structure have lost.

When they were handed the government (without an election) they were to dumb to realize to stay competitive at the polls, they had to reform their parties platform to also include the needs of a vast majority of the Thai voters (the working poor) in Thailand. That they failed too and as a result lost an election to Yingluck who came into power by a one-sided landslide vote.

Thailand workers lack some of the basic rights granted to Western working class, a livable wage, unemployment insurance, A Social Security retirement act, Collective bargaining, Paid vacations, 40 hour work week, After 40 hours over-time. Many of the rights enjoyed by western working class.

In a recent long overdue wage increase was met with a lot of negativity of TV expat community, that they themselves would not work for 300-350 baht per day or for that matter 350 baht for an hour as being below their dignity. Yet their only concern here is how the increase would lessen their Thai purchasing power,

In my home country provides help to the less fortunate citizen's with Food stamps, welfare, Aid to dependent Children, work fare and many programs designed to give a piece of the U.S. pie to all of its citizens..

Thailand's working poor know how to work, the statement to teach them how to fish instead of giving them fish, they already know how to fish, all they ask for is to be provided some of the benefits the rich have enjoyed in Thailand for a long time.

Times have changed in Thailand!

[jpeg]

There is a difference in being "interested" and getting "involved" , I stated the latter, as resident here of 7 years, yes, I am interested and yes it concerns me as it can effect my status and future here, but I still maintain it is not a good idea to become "involved".

and just for the record I am not nor have ever been a "sexpat", a term I find offensive.

Then change your avatar. It gives people the wrong impression.

[GuestHouse]

A good government treat all of its citizens alike, if they give a piece of the pie to the rich they should also give a piece of the pie to the poor. Corruption has been a big problem through out Thailand's history.

This is true, but of course this government is not treating all citizens the same.

The people demonstrating against the government are not the rich elite - they are middle class Thais, they are not demanding protection of the elite in Thai society - They want a single rule of law applied to all, and they want an end to this government buying political support with tax payer's money.

The rice scheme is and has always been an unmitigated disaster - its corrupt from top to bottom, worst of all it is corrupting the political system by buying votes.

The rice is rotting in warehouses, cannot be sold on the open market, the people who control the mills and warehouses are creaming off the subsidies, robbing the farms of half the money that was planned to go their way, the government can't meet the payments to farmers and all the while Thailand's rice growing industry is heading down the toilet.

Fat short term profits to warehouses, rice mills and agro chemical sellers - but the rice is still not being sold on, still stacking up in the warehouses, still rotting

All to buy votes.

The Democrat proposal to remove restrictions on the rice market and allow international rice buyers to buy rice directly from Thai rice farmers (giving them options who to sell to) would have increased buyer competition, would have removed the government (and the tax payer) from the market and would have forced up prices and quality at the farm gate.

These proposals where rejected by the PTP - Why?

[Issangeorge]

I hate to say this but is it possible to get reforms that everybody will agree with? For instance the 1997 senate was fully elected and members could not belong to parties. The idea was that it would present a true balance of power against the parliament. Thaksin didn't like this too much, because it meant he would have to tailor laws to get by the senate. So what did he do? He had party members brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers, aunts, uncles, and cousins run for the senate. The independence of the senate was soon gone. The 2007 constitution tried to correct this problem by having about half the senate appointed and no members could have family members who were MPs. Thaksin didn't like this so he forced through an amendment to the constitution that would have all members elected and members to have family members as MPs. The dems went along with the all elected, but would not go along with the second part. Is true reform going to come up with a solution to this? There is no way the anti Thaksin people are going to go along with MPs family members being in the senate, because it would mean there would never be a legislative check and balance against Thaksin. That is just one of the reforms that unless Thaksin compromises will never happen. As long as Thaksin is involved I don't see true reform. If the Red Shirts would ditch Thaksin perhaps we could see real reform. I think the Bangkok Middle-class would be reasonable if Thaksin was out of the equation, but as long as the Red Shirts continue to back Thaksin he will always be in the background. I have read certain things that suggests some Red Shirts are starting to realize this, but I think the leaders get to much money from him to change. I hope I'm wrong. Just as an aside do you realize Santa is a Red Shirt, or at least wears one. I support the Red Shirts demands for fairness, the problem is they kind of blow that idea when they support Thaksin.

Sent from my i-mobile IQ X using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

Edited December 25, 2013 by Issangeorge

[kikoman]

is it possible for compromise in the current situation, As long as Suthep is leading the PDRC, no, he knows his side "can not win an election he would not agree with the idea of giving the Thai people a right to pick their leadership. As Yingluck stated in BP, yesterday "if the voters do not want the Shinawatra family to be involved in politics, they can have their say at the polls"

PDRC spokesman Akanot Promphan insist "the protesters do not want to obstruct the election, but wanted to express their view that a election is not a way out of the crisis"

PDRC's opposition to an election is based on alledged vote buying' by the pro-government side.

Sunai Phasuk an ANFRET observer at the last two Thai elections stated "Everybody buy votes in this country".

Chris Baker an author of several books on Thaksin Shinawatra, dismissed the "mythology" that vote buying became clear under Thaksin. "People claim it to de-legitimize Thaksin_this is nonsense,'

"People are not going to sell their votes for a few hundred baht, They're very passionate about it [their vote]

Somchai Srisuthiyakorn, a former deputy rector of Thammasat University, after more than a decade as a critical observer of Thai Elections, with the Pollwatch Foundation and the People's Network for Elections. " He sees problems with advance voting, unused ballots and the make-up of the 10- member committees set up under the auspices of the ECT to screen the 100,000 polling stations around the country on election day.'

He believes advance voting was one of the areas most open to corruption, as a political party could pay someone to vote before another party made a counter offer, Typical payment were 500-1000 baht.

At the 2011 election, where more than 35 million votes wee cast, 2.6 million people registered to cast advance votes while 1.4 million actually did so, according to ECT statistics.

He also said they will also look at how many ballot's the ECT prints for an election. Usually there are 7% more ballots papers than the number of eligible voters in a electorate, "People usually wonder what the ECT does with the remaining ballot papers"

Both Mr. Srisuthiyakorn and Mr.Baker state while some people keep throwing money at elections, but vote-buying doesn't work any more,

PDRO Secretary General claims there where over 6 million people at his rally last Sunday, and he had a lot more supporters in the provinces, if the numbers are factual he should have no problem winning the election.

Based on the fact That there will be an election and both side are set in their demands the outline of the agreement printed by the Bangkok Post today, seems like a fair compromise to settle the current crisis..

Cheers

[Thai at Heart]

If the question is, which party is more corrupt then we need to examine the corruption (and the parties).

We know that in both parties there is a base level of corruption that might be best described as the snouts of the politicians and their families hog feasting in the national coffers.

The only difference Thailand sees between the political parties at this level is who's snouts are in the trough.

Its not as simple as one party or the other because politicians themselves will switch allegiance after an election, make their own private deal with the political elite to get their own snout in the trough and secure the feasting of their new found political allies.

A westerner viewing politics might expect fundamental differences in the parties, different views of how the nation is run. That difference does not exist in Thailand ~ The political space in which even the politicians can and do act is limited. Why, how and by whom is another discussion.

What Thaksin recognized and what he made very smart personal political use of is the fact that the Thai people have been long schooled in deference and the belief that they need a good person to look after them. This might be at the very local level, it might be at a more national level. Taksin instigated populist policies with his name firmly attached to buy himself in to the position of that good man with national funds.

Where the polices corrupt? No you could not say they in themselves were corrupt, though the later rice policies have been a disastrous mistake and their is corruption in the implementation of all the populist policies.

The problem arises that the policies and the Thaksin political use of these polices has corrupted the political process - not the politicians and policies but the whole relationship between voter and government. It is no longer vote for the government it is vote for or against Thaksin.

The people in the villages understand they are voting for Thaksin, they understand he looks after them.

The urban middle class (not the rich and powerful elite but ordinary urban middle class Thais) understand the corruption of the political process, they understand the economic and social damage and they very much understand the challenge of a Thaksin (Shinawatra) dynasty - it is this latter point that has the attention of the elites.

The forthcoming election is not a fare and free election, the result has already been bought.

Its been bought with public money and it is being daily secured with the appointment of political supporters to positions of local influence, be that heads of civil servant departments, heads of university departments, heads of police.

The game at play is not who is going to win the next election, the game is who is going to take control over the Thai political scene for the coming generation or longer.

To some degree this is due to corruption but the real argument is about which companies get to sit at the political top table in the future?

Thaksin business cronies or the democrats business cronies.

One flick of a pen and the governing party can open up any restricted business to foreign entry. That would be enough reason for me to want to keep ptp out of power.

[kikoman]

Have no doubt about it the February 2 election will be held, and Yingluck will not step down from her position of acting PM, the real threat of Violence will happen on February 2, 2014, when the anti-government demonstrators attempt to force the vast majority of rural Thailand voters not to exercise their right and duty to vote!

The PDRC is racing headlong into an action that will surely tear Thailand apart, maybe that is what the Thai-haters want.

Now is the time for cooler hears to prevail, as the Yingluck government has been attempting to reach an compromise to the current crisis, she announced that her government will start a reform committee before the end of the year to work side by side with the election, to address reform and that the next government be required to follow up on the reform process.

PDRC response was "the government could have a hidden agenda" and that the governments "reform assembly" is intended to only to "force the seven key business organizations to join the process of selecting members".

The Democrats party leadership statements "Politicians, who are shareholders in the conflict, must be excluded from the reform process to ensure success of the reforms'.

I could not agree with them more, as Suthep a 34 year career politician and the (8) other ex-MP's of the Democrat's party that are leaders in the protest, must also be exclude from the reform process!

A slight public crack appeared in the military solidarity of their (sic) hands off policy!

General Chainsit Shinawatra stated that only two members of his family will contest the 2-2-14 election, Yingluck and Somchi Wongsawat! He expressed hope that General Prayuth Chan-Ocha would use his connections with protest leader Suthep T. to break the deadlock.

General Shinawatra called the protest a "quiet coup" specifically pointing out that the police and soldier had not attempted to end the month-long rally.

He also warned the demonstrators about attacks on his family, and goal of forcing them out of Thailand by stating "I don't mess with you and you should not mess with me either"

It is quite clear that now is the time for cooler heads to prevail, and as Suthep clearly knows that compromise is the only way to deal with political gird-lock, for the sake of Thailand!

Cheers

Edited December 26, 2013 by kikoman

[kikoman]

There has been expressed a great concern posted on TV about the Rice scheme!

What position does rice holds for the local as well as export market.?

South east Asia is the greatest exporter of rice to the rest of the world, to meet the international world wide consumption of rice,

As Thailand produces all of its rice that is needed for local consumption and is the nation that exports more rice to the rest of the world, besides exporting rice to Indonesia, Philippines and Malaysia, that are also rice producing nations but do not produce enough rice for their own local consumption.

Rice is a very important segment of the Thai economy, as many countries in the world have innovative crop support subsidies to protect their valuable cash crops, the USA with wheat and corm subsidies, Mexico with price supports for corn, the middle east with oil, Venezuela, with oil etc.

The price of rice has been increasing for the Thai consumer while as one poster stated "The rice is rotting in the warehouses and cannot be sold on the open market" Why would that be happening in Thailand, where rice is the most consumed staple in the country.

Also stated that the Democrat's want to by pass Thai middleman and sell it directly to the international market.

But if some smart politician suggest why not distribute the rice "That is rotting in the warehouses" to the needy population in Thailand. as many other countries have done when the US gave away to its needy stockpiles of cheese, butter and powdered milk in the 1970-1980's that flooded the country, Mexico ate the deficient of the Corn price support to keep lower tortilla prices to it population, Venezuela that sold some of the less expensive gas in the world to its domestic consumers, why is it not the function of a government to give all of its citizens a better life?

The future of the Thai rice crop looks bleak as the children of the rice farmers opt for careers outside of the rice field, because of the hard word and low profits, Who will grow the rice in the future??

As so many farming offspring's go into more rewarding paying jobs and leave the family rice farms!

But if some smart politician sees that opportunity and acts on it it will only be seen as a vote buying scheme, not that they have a moral obligation to serve all the citizens of Thailand, Not only the rich that are reaping the profit of ever increasing prices for rice for Thailand's consumption, but to benefit the poor and rich alike.

Cheers

Edited December 26, 2013 by kikoman

[johnmarhall]

A good government treat all of its citizens alike, if they give a piece of the pie to the rich they should also give a piece of the pie to the poor. Corruption has been a big problem through out Thailand's history.

It did not start in 2001 with the election of Thaksin under the new reform constitution.. Thaskin was just a much more intelligent politician then the run of the mill Thai politician. He knew that by him giving a piece of the pie to the working class of Thailand, he could build a political machine that would be extremely hard for the old affluent power structure candidates to win future elections. All election since 2001 the old power structure have lost.

When they were handed the government (without an election) they were to dumb to realize to stay competitive at the polls, they had to reform their parties platform to also include the needs of a vast majority of the Thai voters (the working poor) in Thailand. That they failed too and as a result lost an election to Yingluck who came into power by a one-sided landslide vote.

Thailand workers lack some of the basic rights granted to Western working class, a livable wage, unemployment insurance, A Social Security retirement act, Collective bargaining, Paid vacations, 40 hour work week, After 40 hours over-time. Many of the rights enjoyed by western working class.

In a recent long overdue wage increase was met with a lot of negativity of TV expat community, that they themselves would not work for 300-350 baht per day or for that matter 350 baht for an hour as being below their dignity. Yet their only concern here is how the increase would lessen their Thai purchasing power,

In my home country provides help to the less fortunate citizen's with Food stamps, welfare, Aid to dependent Children, work fare and many programs designed to give a piece of the U.S. pie to all of its citizens..

Thailand's working poor know how to work, the statement to teach them how to fish instead of giving them fish, they already know how to fish, all they ask for is to be provided some of the benefits the rich have enjoyed in Thailand for a long time.

Times have changed in Thailand!

well said

[GuestHouse]

The price of rice has been increasing for the Thai consumer while as one poster stated "The rice is rotting in the warehouses and cannot be sold on the open market" Why would that be happening in Thailand, where rice is the most consumed staple in the country.

Its rotting because the pledging scheme has put more rice into storage than can be sold - The PTP has refused to make public details of sales it claims to have made, but of which the international rice markets are unable to find records - either of sale or transport.

The PTP has taken legal action to prevent reporting of the condition of the rice, criminal trespass cases against reporters who have tried to gain access to rice storage warehouses.

Reports of rotten rice being delivered to overseas are in the international press.

But somehow a these reports are ignored by those for whom they seem to be and inconvenient truth.

[GuestHouse]

Can somebody give us examples of PDP real wealth distribution schemes or proposals to remove the control of the elite.

Actual PDP policies with links to where that policy has been stated by the PDP, not dreamed up or imagined policies.

I recall Yingluck's first appointment after the last election was a very swift drive around the the home of the leader of the hated elite.

If you have evidence of what they discussed - please let us know.