This might sound like a naive question but I'm not clear where the corruption is within the rice pledging scheme.

I understand the government bought the rice at inflated prices against the market price, with the intention of "shorting the market"; forcing up the price and selling for a profit. India and Vietnam upped their production. Over supply not short supply in the market. Market prices fall. Oops. Money out exceeds the money in so no more money to pay future bills. Economic ineptitude

So where is the corruption? How do they do it? Who are the main beneficiaries? How do they hide it?

Comments on my naivety not helpful. Facts and/or considered opinions sought.

Thanks

You should ask the prime minister. I think her name is Ms Yingluck.

I presume that you don't the answer to my question either then. Maybe others might be able to shed more light on the original topic. But thanks anyway - I did wonder who she was.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/thailand/10618134/Burmese-smugglers-get-rich-on-Yingluck-Shinawatras-13-billion-Thai-rice-subsidies.html

Have a read of this, it might help explain

Edited February 11, 201412 yr by CharlieH

That's helpful, thanks. I didn't think about smuggling rice from Burma. That explains some of the losses but what about the so-called corruption, which it is claimed is soaking up vast amounts of money.

That's helpful, thanks. I didn't think about smuggling rice from Burma. That explains some of the losses but what about the so-called corruption, which it is claimed is soaking up vast amounts of money.

Like any Ponzi scheme you make sure you and your cronies are at the top of the pyramid.

That's helpful, thanks. I didn't think about smuggling rice from Burma. That explains some of the losses but what about the so-called corruption, which it is claimed is soaking up vast amounts of money.

Like any Ponzi scheme you make sure you and your cronies are at the top of the pyramid.

Which characteristics does the Thai rice pledging scheme have in common with a typical Ponzi scheme?

I've checked and don't see any. Maybe you have? Please give details.

Please excuse my naivete. It's an honest question.

it is there for all to see if they want to see it, if they dont you cannot convince them, who owns the warehouses, how many times has the same rice been used to get more money, where has all the money gone, the eveidence is there and in plain sight but you have to want to know the truth, when you start out negative you are simply shutting your eyes to it. If you cannot accept what you have read then no one will be able to convince you, just like all the ptp/reds in here, they will never accept the truth as it destroys their biased views.

I'm just keen to find out more. What we have so far is Burmese Smugglers and dodgy warehouse owners who recycle rice for the own ends.

These seem like fairly small players.

Who are the big players and how do they get the money and keep it hidden .

it is there for all to see if they want to see it, if they dont you cannot convince them, who owns the warehouses, how many times has the same rice been used to get more money, where has all the money gone, the eveidence is there and in plain sight but you have to want to know the truth, when you start out negative you are simply shutting your eyes to it. If you cannot accept what you have read then no one will be able to convince you, just like all the ptp/reds in here, they will never accept the truth as it destroys their biased views.

I'm not negative to the claims of corruption in the scheme, but where is the beef? I don't need convincing, people need evidence and not allegations.

So now let's have it.

• Where are the warehouses, a list of all of them please, and full names in Thai of who who own them, and their family connections to the Shinawatras?
• How many times has what exactly same rice been sold, how much, and to whom? Details please.
• What missing money, and where has it gone? Details please.

"If you cannot accept what you have read then no one will be able to convince you, just like all the ptp/reds in here, they will never accept the truth as it destroys their biased views."

I am not religious. I do not have faith in any side and know all levels of Thai society to be dishonest and corrupt. The problem with the above quoted statement is it resembles a religious requirement of faith, as in, if you are not a believer, you will never see the way.

Where's the beef? Details please.

BTW, I'm still waiting for the name of a single senior member of Suthep's group who was not affiliated with the 2006 military junta and coup.

Does anyone who really knows Thailand believe that the much required proposed so called guardians of the Thai people have hands that are cleaner than the PT party's members?

The fact is Thailand's laws regarding free speech are on par with North Korea and Belarus. It is illegal to discuss the matter at it's most important level. Accordingly, I will self censor and self moderate myself in order to respect the laws of the land and people I very much love.

As a reminder: here.

Edited February 11, 201412 yr by 96tehtarp

My understanding is that the opposition is conflating normal Thai corruption and the relatively new practice of pandering to the common people in order to persuade them to vote for your party.

As in "populism" = "buying votes" = corruption just as bad as the normal Thai style.

From that POV the rice pledging scheme itself is inherently "corrupt".

It's all just spin-positioning with the goal of seeking power, I doubt if any Thais outside those elite groups with an ax to grind believe one side or the other will be less corrupt in fact.

But for sure the opposition doesn't believe in the necessity of pandering to the common people, they don't want to have to bother with the same pretense of democracy hoops our elites back home have to jump through.

Edited February 11, 201412 yr by wym

Thanks Wym, but I don't think take the original post forward at all.

Anybody out there got the facts or at least some factual supposition or is it all "I think"?

Thanks Wym, but I don't think take the original post forward at all.

Anybody out there got the facts or at least some factual supposition or is it all "I think"?

Why do you care so much?

Sent from my iPhone using ThaiVisa app

But for sure the opposition doesn't believe in the necessity of pandering to the common people, they don't want to have to bother with the same pretense of democracy hoops our elites back home have to jump through.

Well said.

Our farang "elites" do the corruption dance with more finesse, more hoops, and fewer mobs. Recall the occupy movement, and recent G20 meetings, LIBOR, HSBC, JP Morgan an so much more.

I witnessed a group of farmers visibly sick to their stomachs at the sight of Suthep handing out cash to farmers in front of a gauntlet of reporter's cameras yesterday.

I feel, at this point, that the elites of both parties are using the farmers for their own respective twisted sense of the "greater good. It has become quite sickening to see.

...and of course (self-censorship here.)

And back to the OP. Do we have any facts?

Edited February 11, 201412 yr by 96tehtarp

Hi Strad37,

I'm just really interested.

Everything I read on TV suggests massive corruption taking place but no one seems to have any facts.

Opinion is one thing facts are another.

We all have opinions but where are the facts?

All the "corruption corruption oh me oh my" posturing is coming from those sympathetic to the opposition which is posturing as if they are actually going to solve that problem endemic to Thai culture.

By implying there may not be any "beef" to the stories, you are taking a pro-government position.

What I'm saying is I think more objective - of COURSE there is corruption, if there weren't it wouldn't be Thailand.

I don't know why you would think you'd get "factual" details here of all places. Not as if those actually engaging in these crimes are sharing their howto information with the likes of us! In fact I'd go so far as to say - curiosity killed the cat - if you were successful in your quest by actually investigating where you're likely to get answers, your life would be in danger.

And the larger point is that the opposition is in fact lumping the whole idea of the rice scheme into THEIR expanded definition of corruption, which is now supposed to include "buying votes" with policies that are "populist" - which has somehow become a dirty word.

Interesting thread, I wonder why those so strong in their assertions of corruption of the current government have not responded yet? I've only been reading this forum for few weeks and that group seem to be a very local and significant minority, some post about it several times a day.

Of course at times it's hard to show the evidence of government or government backed backed corruption.

For example in the shining light of democracy, free trade and business transparency that is my home country, the UK, not many can point to detailed evidence that the BEA/Saudi Arabia deal was lubricated by over $ 2 billion in bribes to a regime that routinely tortures it's citizens, and funds extremists groups right across the globe. Matters of national security and all that.

I wonder if its this corruption in the UK that drove so many Brits to the bars of Pattaya and Bangkok and villages of Issan and if it was that, how troubled they are to find corruption there too.

All the "corruption corruption oh me oh my" posturing is coming from those sympathetic to the opposition which is posturing as if they are actually going to solve that problem endemic to Thai culture.

Agreed. This is also quite obvious to me. It should be obvious to any observer. It was the justification for the 2006 coup by the coup makers who were (self censorship here). "Corruption corruption oh me oh my" posturing has been the justification used (possibly) in all of Thailand's 11+ coups.

Here, and in this article one needs to read between the lines because the author will only hint at the concept of corruption as the foreign media too is afraid of... (self moderation here).

"By implying there may not be any "beef" to the stories, you are taking a pro-government position."

Wrong, although some will try to say that. Please don't say I said something or implied something that I didn't. I never implied that there was no "beef." I asked the question, where is the beef? The OP asks for simple clarification of the alleged massive corruption in the rice pledging scheme which allegedly threatens to bankrupt Thailand and ruin the nation, and which as many have claimed urgently requires a purge of all of Shinawatras family from Thailand, as well as a suspension of representative democracy, and the implementation of a yet to be named, ruling unelected appointed people's council.

The burden of proof lies upon those making the specific allegations of the massive corruption that the OP requested clarification of. TV is somewhat of a hub for these allegations. Asking on TV for clarification, or asking to see where the "beef" is does in no way imply a pro government position. If someone on Thai Visa told me there was a Celestial Teapot orbiting somewhere between here and Mars the burden of proof does not rest on me, it lies on the persons here on TV making unfalsifiable and so far unsubstantiated claims, rather than shifting the burden of proof to others who are simply asking for very basic clarification.

"What I'm saying is I think more objective - of COURSE there is corruption, if there weren't it wouldn't be Thailand."

Again agreed. Wherever there is government there will be corruption. IMO, and it seems in yours as well, Thailand is a particularly sad case. The topic of this thread is specific corruption in a specific government program which allegedly threatens the national interest so urgently and to such an extent that it requires the suspension of representative democracy. For credibility's sake specific verifiable clarification needs to be provided by those making the allegations.

"I don't know why you would think you'd get "factual" details here of all places. Not as if those actually engaging in these crimes are sharing their howto information with the likes of us! In fact I'd go so far as to say - curiosity killed the cat - if you were successful in your quest by actually investigating where you're likely to get answers, your life would be in danger."

If alleged massive corruption in the rice pledging scheme is so severe that it begs for suspension of representative democracy, tearing up the constitution, and or even a new military coup some factual clarifications are required for credibility's sake. An opposition MP from Phitsanulok showing a bag of rotten rice allegedly from Surin in the national parliament does not clarify such corruption claims.

Returning to the OP, are there any verifiable facts to clarify these allegations of corruption on such a massive scale that it requires suspension of representative democracy and tearing up of the constitution? Allegations of massive corruption require a great deal of verifiable evidenced facts. Not for my sake, as I can't vote, but rather for credibility's sake and the sake of the people of Thailand.

"And the larger point is that the opposition is in fact lumping the whole idea of the rice scheme into THEIR expanded definition of corruption, which is now supposed to include "buying votes" with policies that are "populist" - which has somehow become a dirty word."

I have observed this also, and agree with you. The elitists don't like to see popular policies which attract votes. Policies presented through a political party's platform and presented to the people for consideration at the ballot box is anathema to them. To them it takes the natural order of things and turns it on its head topsy-turvy. In their social order "being bought" needs to be the exclusive domain of appointed officials, their elitist cronies, and those who have already been elected, not the other way around. Thaksin has turned this old school way on its head and is using it against his opponents. As foreigners observing this country we will eventually see how well it works out for the Shiniwatras.

The OP remains unanswered.

Edited February 12, 201412 yr by 96tehtarp

Ok ill bite...

Fact is there were fake deals.. deals that never were.. G2G they are allowed to sell rice below the price they bought it for.

Now a trader closely to Taksin bought up rice under the G2G deals (illigal as they care not the Chinese goverment as they alleged) and then sold that cheaper rice back into the program.. Double whammy money wise.

Besides that there are sales on paper that never were just to make it look good.

This is just the tip of the iceberg, more info about this is posted in an other clip by user Trembly who is fluid in Thai and translated a youtube clip / explanation of the whole scam.

Don't worry the facts will come out.

But also the fact that that is vote buying on a massive scale with losses way above what they projected is of course reason to disband this government. The fact that they hid it all the time and are lying about it all the time says enough. Incompetence is not excuseable everyone said it would fail but they did it anyway and it cost Thailand its leading place as exporter and because it was about volume not quality also its reputation about quality.

Now the farmers in the future will have to sell their rice in competition with the government who also needs to get rid of the rice.. making prices even lower. So all in all an gigantic f. up.

Morally of course totally wrong buying votes like this and letting the small tax-base of middle class pay for it. Can you imagine working and being told that because there are more people on welfare then workers everytime your out voted ant hey raise the money they can get from people working.. because that is basically what it is. Distribution of income from hardworking people who pay tax (office workers and such) to farmers. Now we are not talking about the super rich just the middle class.

Also the raise in alcohol taxes might be related to the lack of money.. so that might also be funding the rice program. If that is proven i bet all the foreigners switch sides

Edited February 12, 201412 yr by robblok

No, neither corruption nor bad policy nor sheer incompetence justifies disbanding anything.

Win elections then govern better than the other guys and you get to keep your power.

Otherwise shut up sit down and work on upping your game for the next time 'round.

No, neither corruption nor bad policy nor sheer incompetence justifies disbanding anything.

Win elections then govern better than the other guys and you get to keep your power.

Otherwise shut up sit down and work on upping your game for the next time 'round.

Sorry I don't agree here.. corruption and breaking the law is clear reason for disbanding. Better yet putting someone in jail for corruption even better. That would sort things out quite quickly.

It is of course unfair to say the least that the ones paying for this are the ones without say in the matter. Office workers and other normal people will always loose out in this way and that is totally unfair.

Vote for me and I will steal from them to give to you. That is why populist policies in many countries are scrutinized first by separate bodies. I know for a fact that where I come from election programs are put to the calculation tests first to see if its feasible so they can't sell pipe dreams like they do here. So none of the parties can get ahead of other with false promises

This is not a real democracy with checks and balances.

The government supporting farmers in this way is quite common in many countries, but normally the following would occur, a special price is offered for the rice, the rice is still then sold at the commodity value, the difference is then made up by taxes on the masses, fuel tax for such things is quite common.

The biggest problem here is they didn't sell the rice and now most of it is old rice and worth a lot less than new rice, so a payback scheme would need to rake in even more to cover that loss. I can't see how corruption has occurred here, they didn't sell the rice and pocket the money, the government followed a standard practise but didn't finish the job from what I see.

The government supporting farmers in this way is quite common in many countries, but normally the following would occur, a special price is offered for the rice, the rice is still then sold at the commodity value, the difference is then made up by taxes on the masses, fuel tax for such things is quite common.

The biggest problem here is they didn't sell the rice and now most of it is old rice and worth a lot less than new rice, so a payback scheme would need to rake in even more to cover that loss. I can't see how corruption has occurred here, they didn't sell the rice and pocket the money, the government followed a standard practise but didn't finish the job from what I see.

The corruption as i have read is this.

G2G deals that are not G2G so they said they sold to an other government thus allowing a lower price but in reality sold it to a PTP supporter. That guy then in turn resold it to the government again for a higher price.

Also the complete lack of transparency and the lying about sales of this project the complete refusal to take the losses into the budget as it would cut in their spending (and thus other corrupt schemes) is also not a good thing.

I don't disagree with supporting farmers, why not do it on a transparent way of a subsidy per rai of farmland with a max amounts of rais. So easy so simple and easy to check too. It would mainly benefit the poor farmers and not the rich big ones.

They made the scheme the way it is so they could act like it did not cost money thus keep spending on other projects they pillaged. Every inquiry in the project returned low figures of loss untill they could not hold on to that and then they made the loss a bit higher.. until the next challenge came and made the loss higher again. No transparency at all. Making fake deals to hide losses.. id say that is fraud and corruption.

Sorry I don't agree here.. corruption and breaking the law is clear reason for disbanding. Better yet putting someone in jail for corruption even better. That would sort things out quite quickly.

Of course, if there were any areas of government free of corruption to prosecute and punish, throw individuals in jail.

But not reason to bring down a government and ban parties, wouldn't be a stable country in the world if they did that.

Trade and business are these days far more important than government, and instability and uncertainty will do much more harm to ordinary citizens than the normal corruption they accept and are used to here.

No matter who is in power that problem just isn't going to go away, if you think it is you're dreaming.

That is why populist policies in many countries are scrutinized first by separate bodies. I know for a fact that where I come from election programs are put to the calculation tests first to see if its feasible so they can't sell pipe dreams like they do here. So none of the parties can get ahead of other with false promises

This is not a real democracy with checks and balances.

Then your home country must be a small, non-English-speaking one.

All the so-called "democracies" I'm familiar with in the NES world aren't run like you're talking about, and at a very fundamental level baked right into their operating system are just as corrupt and undemocratic as Thailand.

Pretty unrealistic to think the Thais can come up with something better.

By trying they'll end up with something much much worse.

I don't disagree with supporting farmers, why not do it on a transparent way of a subsidy per rai of farmland with a max amounts of rais. So easy so simple and easy to check too. It would mainly benefit the poor farmers and not the rich big ones.

How many would sit around doing nothing in this style of scheme knowing they would just get money for owning land, better to have it on product produced so there is some incentive to produce max yield per rai.

I don't disagree with supporting farmers, why not do it on a transparent way of a subsidy per rai of farmland with a max amounts of rais. So easy so simple and easy to check too. It would mainly benefit the poor farmers and not the rich big ones.

How many would sit around doing nothing in this style of scheme knowing they would just get money for owning land, better to have it on product produced so there is some incentive to produce max yield per rai.

Max yield is not max quality and that was one of the major problems in the program Thai rice got less good and harder to sell.

We are not talking about enormous amounts per rai here.. at any rate it would be much cheaper as you exclude the rich farmers and exclude the mils and pay straight to the poor farmers. Win win.

Sorry I don't agree here.. corruption and breaking the law is clear reason for disbanding. Better yet putting someone in jail for corruption even better. That would sort things out quite quickly.

Of course, if there were any areas of government free of corruption to prosecute and punish, throw individuals in jail.

But not reason to bring down a government and ban parties, wouldn't be a stable country in the world if they did that.

Trade and business are these days far more important than government, and instability and uncertainty will do much more harm to ordinary citizens than the normal corruption they accept and are used to here.

No matter who is in power that problem just isn't going to go away, if you think it is you're dreaming.

That is why populist policies in many countries are scrutinized first by separate bodies. I know for a fact that where I come from election programs are put to the calculation tests first to see if its feasible so they can't sell pipe dreams like they do here. So none of the parties can get ahead of other with false promises

This is not a real democracy with checks and balances.

Then your home country must be a small, non-English-speaking one.

All the so-called "democracies" I'm familiar with in the NES world aren't run like you're talking about, and at a very fundamental level baked right into their operating system are just as corrupt and undemocratic as Thailand.

Pretty unrealistic to think the Thais can come up with something better.

By trying they'll end up with something much much worse.

Funny that you equate bigger and English speaking with better. Seems like a load of B.S. a system where election programs are tested for economical feasibility is not that hard as my country the Netherlands has shown. That way you remove what is a problem here.

edit

feasibility studies of political programs are already quite normal in the EU. So its not just the Netherlands that implemented it.

You are stuck in the past and approve of corruption because its your party that does so. I say go after all corruption and would applaud corrupt officials int he party that i support to go to jail. That is kinda a fundamental difference between red thinking and real thinking.

I want to improve and not dwel in the pas and think i things can never change. Corruption can get less with the right laws. Too bad if it brings a government down it will make the next one less corrupt or better at hiding it. That way corruption gets less.

Saying it can't be done or has always been so is just an excuse not to go after corrupt officials because they are in your party.. its a weak excuse.

My suggestion would be make sure the opposition gets seats in an anti corruption agency. It would keep the current government in check. Some extra transparency would be good too. Whatever government is in charge the opposition should be there to check them That is their job that is now not possible with all the scams and dealings and backrooms. So its time for a change.

Edited February 12, 201412 yr by robblok

The OP and the pro Shin support appear to be attempting to pull a Shin on us. Ignore the facts, a couple years of 'rice program topics' on the news forum and start from scratch, again.

If the OP has a real intrest, he and his friends may want to go to work and review, the ruling, findings, audit findings, attorney genral assisment, blue flag rice etc which have been made public and are presently presuing charges and investigating additional charges against government officials, private sector, and others.

the truth is that if this was corruption free then the govt could produce all the documentation to prove it, thing is they cannot, they have not included the scheme in the countries approved payments so it is totally under the radar where proof/payments is required, they cannot tell anyone how much rice has been stored, how much rice has been sold, how much rice is unnacounted for or even how much rice has been totally ruined. They cannot tell us how much it has cost the country to keep it going/been lost or where all the money has gone, when anyone in an official position says anythinf negative the govt denies it but offers no proof it is wrong. If it was above board they would be able to prove it but they cannot, work your own opinion out from this or just go with the red flow.

Funny that you equate bigger and English speaking with better. Seems like a load of B.S. a system where election programs are tested for economical feasibility is not that hard as my country the Netherlands has shown. That way you remove what is a problem here.

Actually I was saying that the larger English speaking countries don't have good democracies, the smaller ones - and perhaps Holland - are much better, less corrupt and more democratic.

You are stuck in the past and approve of corruption because its your party that does so. I say go after all corruption and would applaud corrupt officials int he party that i support to go to jail. That is kinda a fundamental difference between red thinking and real thinking.

Actually I have no ax to grind and couldn't give a stuff which corrupt elite runs the show. Just talking about their methods used to seize power so that normal (corruption-ridden) life and business can continue.

I want to improve and not dwel in the pas and think i things can never change. Corruption can get less with the right laws. Too bad if it brings a government down it will make the next one less corrupt or better at hiding it. That way corruption gets less.

Saying it can't be done or has always been so is just an excuse not to go after corrupt officials because they are in your party.. its a weak excuse.

My suggestion would be make sure the opposition gets seats in an anti corruption agency. It would keep the current government in check. Some extra transparency would be good too. Whatever government is in charge the opposition should be there to check them That is their job that is now not possible with all the scams and dealings and backrooms. So its time for a change.

Sorry I think you are totally naive.

All the laws in the world won't change anything when there are no uncorrupted agencies nor officials, corruption is so endemic to every level of society here there is no way to improve that situation.

At least not without radical changes in the hearts of the general population.

What you're saying is that replacing all the officials in the MoE stands a chance at improving the education system here. Wrong - a new crop of people with the same knowledge and attitudes will simply replace them.

IF the opposition was really genuine about getting rid of corruption, they could do that, and do it via winning elections. That is my point, how you go about winning the reins of power, not what people might dream might be the results of that change.

All it takes is intelligence, willpower and money. Their collective resources are sufficient to win elections, they just feel having to regain power that way is "beneath their dignity".