Thai farmers group demands action on debt relief

[webfact]

Farmers group demands action on debt relief
KAMPANART KHANTRAKUL
THE NATION

BANGKOK: -- AFTER BEING reportedly threatened by moneylenders or on the verge of losing their homes or farms, a 2,000-strong group from Phetchaburi and nearby provinces has called for the government to help them escape from their crushing debt load.

Their demands include putting their on-system debts in a rehabilitation fund and providing low-interest and long-term loans to tackle their off-system debts.

The group calling itself Feunfoo Kasettakorn Ruamjai Pattana claims that many of its members were over-stretched by debts owed to banking and financing institutions such as credit unions and cooperatives as well as to moneylenders.

Many had fallen behind their instalments and were taken to court by the creditors to seize their collateral or were subjected to loan sharks' threats, so they borrowed from other loan sharks to repay old obligations and sank even deeper into debt, said Prachuap Charat, president of the farmers group.

Banks and non-banks are now beginning to consider aiding members of the group formed under a law to protect farmers battling debts and land issues.

Most members had no land of their own, so they rented from landowners who sometimes raised the rent too high.

They also faced hardships from the low price of farm produce and the debts from off-system lenders, Prachuap said.

"The debt issue is severe because of lenders' usurious interest rates. Many fall behind payments and are threatened or see their land forfeited," he said.

Jeeranant Sornyim, 49, who borrowed Bt200,000 from a cooperative in 1997 and mortgaged 3 rai (4,800 square metres) of land to fund her shrimp farm, said floods that year swept away the shrimp. Then she and her husband made a living by going scavenging with their old pickup truck.

The couple paid the co-op Bt1,000 per month until they were hit by a drunk driver. The accident wrecked their truck and they sold it for scrap.

The couple and their child were seriously hurt in the accident. While the other side paid their medical bills, the couple lost the truck they had used to make a living. In 2006 when the loan matured, the court allowed the co-op to confiscate their land.

"I was told the Bt200,000 debt plus Bt300,000 interest amounted to Bt500,000. I want the government to help me get my land back. The help I got from a rehabilitation fund didn't cover all my debt. I'm still short by Bt100,000," Jeeranant said.

Parawee Chiangkhaek, 53, who owed Bt350,000 in off-system debt and pledged her 3 ngan 90 square wah (1,560 square metres) of land to fund her farm, said she paid interest of Bt10,000 a month, but fell behind and was in arrears on four months of instalments, so the lender seized her land.

The lender then made her fork out Bt9,000 a month for four years with the promise to change the name on the title deed back to hers. She made 17 instalments and fell behind again, so the lender threatened to sell her land. Advised to borrow from a revolving fund, she asked the lender to wait, but the help came late and she was told the land was sold.

"My remaining debt is Bt280,000, but the lender sold the land for Bt560,000. I can't afford to buy the land back. I have no place to live. I want the government to find me a soft loan," she said.

San Moosiri, 62, said she borrowed money for eight friends who fled, so she was left with almost Bt1 million in off-system debt.

"So far I have sold my 4-rai paddy field for Bt300,000 to repay the debt, but I still have a lot left," she said.

She urged the government to provide a low-interest loan and negotiate with the lender to waive her interest.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Farmers-group-demands-action-on-debt-relief-30251049.html


-- The Nation 2015-01-01

[chainarong]

Seems the man on the land has this problem everywhere , in Australia the banks are for- closing on hundreds of farms , debt relief is all very well but what do the farmers do when they require more money after the government has paid out, this has ben played out so many time before and what do the farmers do, go back to the money lenders, When a bank tells someone that they can't have a loan , they generally mean you can't afford one, so the money lender comes back to help every time, Mind farmers need to survive, so what about a government Co-Op set up to help farmers in debt relief and at 3% interest , not 36%.

[ezzra]

Thai farmers, a breed of people who is stuck somewhere in the 20th century, always with the

hands starched out asking for help and freebees, forever a burden on all governments past,

a perpetual problem that will never go away, that is because look at them a voting block,

and for ever throw money at them hoping they will vote them in.... government after government...

[rametindallas]

In today's world, farming is a business like any other. Say, like having a clothing store. One should have knowledge of the business they want to borrow for. One has to weigh the upfront and operating costs against a worse-case earnings scenario. Some people are natural gamblers. Lenders are gamblers but like to cover their bets with collateral. Are unrealistic borrowers stupid? Are lenders, who lend to risk-takers, evil? Seems to me to be matches made in Heaven.

[worgeordie]

So what did they do with all the money they received

from selling rice to the Government at inflated prices.

money management is not strong in Thailand.

regards Worgeordie

[konying]

I wonder if that strong 2000 group ever considered getting a job or not buying what they can not afford ?

Are they even capable of understanding that no one owes them anything?

[Cake Monster]

If you have a business, whether that be growing rice, selling electronic goods or somtam, then the business has to be profitable and pay its own way.

After all, nobody forced you to have that business, its something you chose to do, and if you have made the wrong decision, then you have to face up to the concequences of the decisions you have made.

I wonder how long Thais would last in the business culture of the developed world ?.

Something that really scares me, is the way the banks Etc just give out loans to " business,s " with what appears to me to be very little credit checking and business plan vetting.

[Chris Lawrence]

Over 70% of GDP is spent just on Bangkok. Military spending should also increase if historic figures repeat themselves.

So that doesn't leave the rest of the country much.

It is not unusual for Governments to support the farming communities. Many Thai farmers borrow funds from loan sharks, paying back at high interest rates.

Hard to get a job in these areas and still work the farm. Very low rates of pay anyway for many jobs in the local farming areas. That makes it hard to live on 2/5 of FA and still pay 10,000 baht a month back to the money shark.

Handouts may help but are not entirely the answer. More Government infrastructure spending in the country areas that will benefit the farming communities is needed. Unfortunately this would re-direct GDP and may be cause to unrest.

[rickirs]

What happen to the Bank for Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperatives (BAAC) low-interest loans to farmers in order to keep them away from loan sharks? In September 2014 it set aside Bt10 billion worth of "soft" loans to help farmers. However, the Junta has shown it is very sensitive to any public protests by farmers and seems it will spend whatever is necessary to keep them quiet. Maybe the Junta will forgive all those loans and make new ones. The Junta has become socialists. It has become no less a political organization than those that it banned from public.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/754890-baac-approves-10-billion-baht-worth-of-soft-loans-to-help-thai-farmers/

[wabothai]

.

stoneage..................5 yrears..................2015.

[NCC1701A]

don't buy stuff...

[IMA_FARANG]

As Bob Dylan sang, "You don't need to be a Weatherman to see which way the wind is blowing".

[Strangebrew]

A little story for the farmers There is a farmer in the Philippines that grew rice. While the rice helped feed him and his family he decided because the price his was getting for his rice was low so the next year the farmer planted a few Rai of vegetables along with his rice, that year he made more money so with extra money he leased more land next to his land and double the size of crop for both. which doubled his profit. so he had a rice mill built and milled his own rice which saved him money which he used to build a warehouse to store his rice. the point being this man saw a problem and over time fixed it he stills farmers and is doing real well he even bought himself a new car cash has money in the bank and buys and mills rice from other farmers now increasing his wealth. So when I hear these farmers looking for hand out it makes me sick. Either your to lazy to be a farmer or to stupid. You can't set a price for your product that is controlled by the market but you can control what you grow supply and demand is the fix.

[jaltsc]

"AFTER BEING reportedly threatened by moneylenders or on the verge of losing their homes or farms, a 2,000-strong group from Phetchaburi and nearby provinces has called for the government to help them escape from their crushing debt load."

And then the government can help gamblers pay off their bookies.

[spidermike007]

The best way for a Thai farmer to get out of debt, is to get out of the rice growing business. Rice is a crop that keeps people in poverty, and is perhaps the least creative choice, for any farmer, worldwide. It is one of the least profitable. The better alternatives are hydroponic herbs, exotic fruits, higher end exotic vegetables, etc. Anything but rice. The elite loves a rice farmer, as the crop keeps them poor.

[rubl]

What happen to the Bank for Agriculture and Agricultural Cooperatives (BAAC) low-interest loans to farmers in order to keep them away from loan sharks? In September 2014 it set aside Bt10 billion worth of "soft" loans to help farmers. However, the Junta has shown it is very sensitive to any public protests by farmers and seems it will spend whatever is necessary to keep them quiet. Maybe the Junta will forgive all those loans and make new ones. The Junta has become socialists. It has become no less a political organization than those that it banned from public.

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/754890-baac-approves-10-billion-baht-worth-of-soft-loans-to-help-thai-farmers/

In the 2014/2015 National Budget the NLA also set aside 107 billion Baht as first instalment to repay the BAAC the 700++ billion Baht the Yingluck Government guaranteed as part of the RPPS disaster. Do you think they should not have done so?

Anyway, with various government having spent billions on debt relief, loan moratoriums, credit cards and whatever for needy farmers, it might be a good idea to make a detailed report of what's done, what went wrong or worked well, what could be improved, etc., etc. before dropping too much more into this black hole.

[robblok]

Over 70% of GDP is spent just on Bangkok. Military spending should also increase if historic figures repeat themselves.

So that doesn't leave the rest of the country much.

It is not unusual for Governments to support the farming communities. Many Thai farmers borrow funds from loan sharks, paying back at high interest rates.

Hard to get a job in these areas and still work the farm. Very low rates of pay anyway for many jobs in the local farming areas. That makes it hard to live on 2/5 of FA and still pay 10,000 baht a month back to the money shark.

Handouts may help but are not entirely the answer. More Government infrastructure spending in the country areas that will benefit the farming communities is needed. Unfortunately this would re-direct GDP and may be cause to unrest.

Do you have some proof to back up your 70% of the GDP is spend on Bangkok ? Also this is not my first language but how can they spend 70% of GDP on Bangkok as GDP is Gross Domestic Product and not tax. Only part of the GDP comes back as tax and I can tell you for sure that the combined tax rate on the GDP is not 70%.

So please back up your claims a bit because it sounds stupid. Also remember its normal to spend loads of money on BKK, 17 million people live here and most of the money is made here too. So Bangkok should be at least getting 30% or more just based on poplulation numbers, based on tax received it might even be more.

[seajae]

cant afford the repayments but can drink every night, these people need to learn to control their finances, if they cannot repay a loan getting one from a loan shark is plain stupid but they dont know any better. Then to top it off they want the govt to bail them out of their stupidity, seems all thai farmers are unable to manage their money/farms without being helped out by the govt. You cant help stupid, they have to start taking responsibility for themselves and living within their means.

[maidee]

if there is 2000 of them, why don't to go head to head in person with the few loansharks and end this once & for all ?

[Chris Lawrence]

Over 70% of GDP is spent just on Bangkok. Military spending should also increase if historic figures repeat themselves.

So that doesn't leave the rest of the country much.

It is not unusual for Governments to support the farming communities. Many Thai farmers borrow funds from loan sharks, paying back at high interest rates.

Hard to get a job in these areas and still work the farm. Very low rates of pay anyway for many jobs in the local farming areas. That makes it hard to live on 2/5 of FA and still pay 10,000 baht a month back to the money shark.

Handouts may help but are not entirely the answer. More Government infrastructure spending in the country areas that will benefit the farming communities is needed. Unfortunately this would re-direct GDP and may be cause to unrest.

Do you have some proof to back up your 70% of the GDP is spend on Bangkok ? Also this is not my first language but how can they spend 70% of GDP on Bangkok as GDP is Gross Domestic Product and not tax. Only part of the GDP comes back as tax and I can tell you for sure that the combined tax rate on the GDP is not 70%.

So please back up your claims a bit because it sounds stupid. Also remember its normal to spend loads of money on BKK, 17 million people live here and most of the money is made here too. So Bangkok should be at least getting 30% or more just based on poplulation numbers, based on tax received it might even be more.

Rob

I have posted this and referenced it before.

Sounded high at the time, but that is what was reported.

Start researching some of the infrastructure projects being done around Bangkok and the money spent on Military. When coups happen military goes into double figures.

'Then start adding up the infrastructure work done around the country areas. I think the Isan area gets about 6% of GDP spent on it. Population 21,305,000 as at 2010.

The region's poverty is also shown in its infrastructure: eight of the ten provinces in Thailand with the fewest physicians per capita are in Isan. (Sisaket has fewest, with one per 14,661 in 2001, with the national average being 3,289). It also has eight of the ten provinces with the fewest hospital beds per head. Chaiyapum has fewest, with one per 1,131 in 2001 (the national average was 453). Nevertheless, as in the rest of Thailand, all districts (amphoe) have a hospital, and all sub districts (tambon) have clinics providing primary health care. The introduction of the "30 baht" health card has dramatically changed the numbers of those attending hospitals for treatment, as it has meant that full health care is available to all who register for only 30 baht per visit. The few who can afford it travel to the modern private hospitals and clinics in the large cities for non-urgent specialist consultations and care.'http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isan

Then there are the areas of Chiang Rai and Chiang Mai?

The city occupies 1,568.7 square kilometres (605.7 sq mi) in the Chao Phraya River delta in Central Thailand, and has a population of over 8 million, or 12.6 percent of the country's population. Over 14 million people (22.2 percent) live within the surrounding Bangkok Metropolitan Region. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangkok. In 2014, Bangkok has an estimated population of 8.5 million. as reported by http://worldpopulationreview.com/world-cities/bangkok-population/

Although Bangkok is the centre piece of the country, there is an unequal amount spent on the capital compared to the regional country areas where most of the population live and work.

So as you see I reference. Old habits die hard, but I tend to let others chase things if I have already done the work. Otherwise you will never learn.

If you only gave 30% to Bangkok Rob, I don't think you would be well liked. The military would step in and take you over. A brave estimate but not understanding the financial climate of Thailand.

[Chris Lawrence]

Rob, where did you get the figure of 17 million as the population for Bangkok? Where did you get a figure of 30% of GDP spent on Bangkok?

Have a look at the World Bank site. That’s where I saw the spending on Bangkok.

Apart from our differences, spending in rural areas is not excessive. The lack is in infrastructure projects that bypass them and go towards the spending on Bangkok.

A few years ago, the young nephew in Chiang Rai, was working in a job paying 80 Baht a day. Average wage in this area is not what it is in Bangkok, Pattaya, and Phuket. The higher wages draws a lot of people off the farms and into the city of Bangkok.

Thailand is still a feudal system, in a way. Education levels are low, but lower still in regional areas. Living in Chiang Rai, I saw a generous & sincere people working very hard for little financial reward, but having their families close by. When we left, I felt the strength of the family as a support. We had neighbours and many relatives seeing us off at the airport.

As I have said to you before my work has primarily been in helping others get on their feet. Except for a dark period of being an out and out capitalist. Help people in the right way and they will get ahead. Stymie their progress and they will go nowhere.

The reason spending is so important, is that it will help develop the area. That is why I highlight the spending on Bangkok.

A lot of people can sit on a bar stool in Pattaya or Bangkok, and 'sprout worthless bums' should just get a proper job; that is not feasible in some of these rural areas as there is no proper paying jobs there.

Handouts are not always the best way to go. It may be that the governments of the past has conditioned this thinking into the population as it is a quick band aid that doesn't require a major commitment on infrastructure spending?

[Lunchbob]

Give assistance to farmers who agree to learn and practice new theory agriculture and cannot sell or borrow further against the asset.

[allan michaud]

I wonder if that strong 2000 group ever considered getting a job or not buying what they can not afford ?

Are they even capable of understanding that no one owes them anything?

Yup. I think the answers there are no, no and no. Sadly many of these people are so dumb it hurts. I know from personal experience just how stupid many of these people are and I have little sympathy for most. The reality is if you borrow money from a local thug at 10% or more per month knowing full well you can't arrord the interest payements, YOU ARE AN IDIOT. Maybe it's time to sell that expensive smartphone or stop dinking cheap whiskey 24/7.

My wife's village is full of drunken morons with smartphones and IQ's seemingly in single digits. Most sit around all day doing nothing and when the farang turns up the hands come out looking for a few baht to by alcohol. I NEVER pay and I have zero sympathy with these people. From my experience the average Thai villager is incredibly lazy and dumb beyond belief.

If any govt actually wants do do something about this, a good start would be to outlaw loan sharks, but, as most are related to powerful local figures or are lining the pockets of police etc, these scumbags will never be tackled.

[robblok]

Rob, where did you get the figure of 17 million as the population for Bangkok? Where did you get a figure of 30% of GDP spent on Bangkok?

Have a look at the World Bank site. That’s where I saw the spending on Bangkok.

Apart from our differences, spending in rural areas is not excessive. The lack is in infrastructure projects that bypass them and go towards the spending on Bangkok.

A few years ago, the young nephew in Chiang Rai, was working in a job paying 80 Baht a day. Average wage in this area is not what it is in Bangkok, Pattaya, and Phuket. The higher wages draws a lot of people off the farms and into the city of Bangkok.

Thailand is still a feudal system, in a way. Education levels are low, but lower still in regional areas. Living in Chiang Rai, I saw a generous & sincere people working very hard for little financial reward, but having their families close by. When we left, I felt the strength of the family as a support. We had neighbours and many relatives seeing us off at the airport.

As I have said to you before my work has primarily been in helping others get on their feet. Except for a dark period of being an out and out capitalist. Help people in the right way and they will get ahead. Stymie their progress and they will go nowhere.

The reason spending is so important, is that it will help develop the area. That is why I highlight the spending on Bangkok.

A lot of people can sit on a bar stool in Pattaya or Bangkok, and 'sprout worthless bums' should just get a proper job; that is not feasible in some of these rural areas as there is no proper paying jobs there.

Handouts are not always the best way to go. It may be that the governments of the past has conditioned this thinking into the population as it is a quick band aid that doesn't require a major commitment on infrastructure spending?

I still don't see any reference in your links. Also GDP is not tax proceeds.. totally different things. You are confusing things and like that no debate can be held.

My 30 percent on BKK would be the minimum, one has to take into account where money is being made 30% would be on basis of people living there. Would you spend as much money on unproductive sites as productive ones ? I would not as I think of economics. However if 70 percent of the tax proceeds are spend on BKK its too much (unless also 70% of those tax proceeds is earned there)

In Belgium they have big problems between the French and Dutch parts as the Dutch parts is more prosperous and its where money is made while the French part wants the money. Money should be divided on basis where it is made and what is best economical.

[Thai at Heart]

Rob, where did you get the figure of 17 million as the population for Bangkok? Where did you get a figure of 30% of GDP spent on Bangkok?

Have a look at the World Bank site. Thats where I saw the spending on Bangkok.

Apart from our differences, spending in rural areas is not excessive. The lack is in infrastructure projects that bypass them and go towards the spending on Bangkok.

A few years ago, the young nephew in Chiang Rai, was working in a job paying 80 Baht a day. Average wage in this area is not what it is in Bangkok, Pattaya, and Phuket. The higher wages draws a lot of people off the farms and into the city of Bangkok.

Thailand is still a feudal system, in a way. Education levels are low, but lower still in regional areas. Living in Chiang Rai, I saw a generous & sincere people working very hard for little financial reward, but having their families close by. When we left, I felt the strength of the family as a support. We had neighbours and many relatives seeing us off at the airport.

As I have said to you before my work has primarily been in helping others get on their feet. Except for a dark period of being an out and out capitalist. Help people in the right way and they will get ahead. Stymie their progress and they will go nowhere.

The reason spending is so important, is that it will help develop the area. That is why I highlight the spending on Bangkok.

A lot of people can sit on a bar stool in Pattaya or Bangkok, and 'sprout worthless bums' should just get a proper job; that is not feasible in some of these rural areas as there is no proper paying jobs there.

Handouts are not always the best way to go. It may be that the governments of the past has conditioned this thinking into the population as it is a quick band aid that doesn't require a major commitment on infrastructure spending?

I still don't see any reference in your links. Also GDP is not tax proceeds.. totally different things. You are confusing things and like that no debate can be held.

My 30 percent on BKK would be the minimum, one has to take into account where money is being made 30% would be on basis of people living there. Would you spend as much money on unproductive sites as productive ones ? I would not as I think of economics. However if 70 percent of the tax proceeds are spend on BKK its too much (unless also 70% of those tax proceeds is earned there)

In Belgium they have big problems between the French and Dutch parts as the Dutch parts is more prosperous and its where money is made while the French part wants the money. Money should be divided on basis where it is made and what is best economical.

Your statment that money should be divided where it is made is interesting. Most large Thai companies declare all their earnings at head office which is ordinarily bangkok.

Localities in Thailand have little way to leverage local taxes. The amount of business declared in bangkok is massaged upwards by this distortion.

Rayong would be like Monaco if PTT and the other chemical firms declared their earnings where they produced it.....