7 years needed to clear Thai rice-pledging debts: BAAC

[belg]

i hope they will convert the rotting rice into fuel ..?

otherwise we will see promotions of 100 baht for 5 kg in tesco , big c ?

big sticker warning : this rice might be dangerous for your health ....

[trogers]

"The budget for fiscal year 2015 allocates Bt6.88 billion for the farmers' income guarantee"

Everyone miss this NEW debt source? On top of paying off the rice pledge debts another debt is being added. What is "farmers' income guarantee," how does it work, and is it going to be open-ended like the rice pledge program, so that Bt.6.88 billion could become Bt. 50 billion? I don't begrudge putting povery-level rice farmers on welfare but this vague program seems very broad - any kind of farmer having any kind of income. Depending on how this new program works, it may actually encourage MORE "farmers" in order to claim an income guarantee and create even greater debt that has no connection with market prices of any kind of crop.

Appalling, isn't it.

Even if all that is lost it still takes the junta 100 years to rake up 700 billion. Real amateurs

Yea, took specialists only a couple of years to incur such losses, and now need amateurs 100 year to straighten things out.

[Eric Loh]

What all the excitement. News just stating the obvious. All government borrow and spread it over few years to pay. No difference from anyone who borrow from the bank to buy their car and pay over 7-10 years period. The infrastructure project likewise will be from bank borrowing and pay over a period of time. Normal practice of any government large spending. As long as the debt to GDP ratio is kept at reasonable level, it has no effect on financial discipline.

[rubl]

What all the excitement. News just stating the obvious. All government borrow and spread it over few years to pay. No difference from anyone who borrow from the bank to buy their car and pay over 7-10 years period. The infrastructure project likewise will be from bank borrowing and pay over a period of time. Normal practice of any government large spending. As long as the debt to GDP ratio is kept at reasonable level, it has no effect on financial discipline.

True, true, nothing special.

First keep the Rice Price Pledging Scheme out of the National Budget and set up a 500 billion Baht funds which is supposed to be revolving, following extend it to 700 billion, try to borrow left and right. Fiscal prudence indeed.

Now we have 107 billion in the 2014/2015 National Budget to start paying back. The coming SEVEN years provisions must be made for the Yingluck folly. Those billions should have been available for improvements, not to pay extra-budget borrowings which didn't even profit the Yingluck government (allegedly).

With SEVEN years of 107 billion we could finance the two double-track 160km/h rail links which are planned at 741 billion Baht.

[trogers]

What all the excitement. News just stating the obvious. All government borrow and spread it over few years to pay. No difference from anyone who borrow from the bank to buy their car and pay over 7-10 years period. The infrastructure project likewise will be from bank borrowing and pay over a period of time. Normal practice of any government large spending. As long as the debt to GDP ratio is kept at reasonable level, it has no effect on financial discipline.

Much like you buying a BMW on installments for 10 years, but with no BMW. No excitement?

[Robby nz]

It would seem from the OP that this is the debt that has passed through the BAAC, as in the original 500 billion and the 270 extra that had to be given to them when the 500 ran out.

Whether this is the full cost or not is unclear.

For instance are the costs of storage, sales, cartage, administration, interest and the banks commission as the payment agent, or the ongoing costs of investigating and inspecting the stocks included ?

Whether these costs were paid through the bank out of the 770 Billion or some or all were paid by ministries out of their own budgets is unclear.

There are still costs being racked up with continued storage, auction costs and others which will continue till stocks are cleared.

Taking these things into consideration the final cost will be a lot more.

[kimamey]

According to BAAC managing director Luck Wajananawat, about Bt50 billion of that debt is from the rice-subsidy scheme before 2013. The remaining amount, in excess of Bt700 billion, was piled up by the former Yingluck Shinawatra administration. It will take about seven years to clear the whole debt based on the government's current repayment rate and sale of rice stocks.

Certainly it seems as if the cost of the Democrats rice subsidy scheme is partly involved however compared to the P.T.P. initiated debt that Democrats induced 50 billion baht is indeed small beer.

The legacy left to this country by the Shinwatra clan P.T.P. and its clique is indeed a millstone of debt and a classic example of ''me first corrupt practices inefficient management at the highest level.''

I don't understand the reference to 'before 2013'. The PTP scheme started before 2013 so is the date just wrong and they mean 2011? A subsidy will almost always return a loss and there's no reason why the PTP one, regardless of what you call it should be any different. The only chance of it breaking even was if the world price if rice had risen substantially. When it was clear it wouldn't the price paid should have dropped. The PTP did try to do that but were threatened with protests so they just altered it a little.

It the scale of loss that's the worrying part.

[Jonmarleesco]

'... allegedly resulting in a loss of at least Bt400 billion.' Allegedly? All but factually, I should have thought. But I likely less a result of corruption than of incompetence and mismanagement.

[AYJAYDEE]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

It seems to me that a very large proportion of these "Politicians" (or thieves if you prefer the more accurate job title) are "unusually wealthy", especially when you take into account the undeclared assets in wives, children's, gardeners, maids names . . . so "if" a Politician is found to be guilty of corruption, then those assets need to be hit and hit hard and the money put back into the state coffers. That would clear some of those debts quickly enough.

Off topic and your comments have been removed to comedy.

The topic is about massive public debts caused by "politicians" . . . how are my comments in any way comedic or off topic? Shouldn't those "politicians" that cause these massive public debts be held accountable for their actions and made to reimburse the public coffers in some way?

Or do you have a better "non-comedy on-topic" answer?

are the politicians in your country of origin held responsible for all the debt due to projects that are designed to benefit their chosen supporters forced to reimburse the public coffers?

[johnh869]

According to BAAC managing director Luck Wajananawat, about Bt50 billion of that debt is from the rice-subsidy scheme before 2013. The remaining amount, in excess of Bt700 billion, was piled up by the former Yingluck Shinawatra administration. It will take about seven years to clear the whole debt based on the government's current repayment rate and sale of rice stocks.

Certainly it seems as if the cost of the Democrats rice subsidy scheme is partly involved however compared to the P.T.P. initiated debt that Democrats induced 50 billion baht is indeed small beer.

The legacy left to this country by the Shinwatra clan P.T.P. and its clique is indeed a millstone of debt and a classic example of ''me first corrupt practices inefficient management at the highest level.''

Amen Brother!!

[Tatsujin]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

It seems to me that a very large proportion of these "Politicians" (or thieves if you prefer the more accurate job title) are "unusually wealthy", especially when you take into account the undeclared assets in wives, children's, gardeners, maids names . . . so "if" a Politician is found to be guilty of corruption, then those assets need to be hit and hit hard and the money put back into the state coffers. That would clear some of those debts quickly enough.

Off topic and your comments have been removed to comedy.

The topic is about massive public debts caused by "politicians" . . . how are my comments in any way comedic or off topic? Shouldn't those "politicians" that cause these massive public debts be held accountable for their actions and made to reimburse the public coffers in some way?

Or do you have a better "non-comedy on-topic" answer?

are the politicians in your country of origin held responsible for all the debt due to projects that are designed to benefit their chosen supporters forced to reimburse the public coffers?

We're talking about Thailand, not "my" country . . . here, where there is massive corruption, those in office increase their personal wealth substantially by their actions which are typically too often to the detriment of the country on the whole . . . but the principle should be the same in all countries however . . . responsibility for actions.

[halloween]

Would those who insist that the Yingluk government should have been allowed to run its full term like to estimate the level of loss at that point?

After their term when they want to be re-elected, are they more likely to cancel the rice scam or increase the buying price?