Thaksin (or Is It Taksin?)

[crawford]

First off, why do so many of you spell it "Taksin", when the media seems to always spell it "Thaksin"?

OK, so 99% of you hate this guy and are joyous that the Thai military took over the country.

I have some questions:

1) What did this guy do to earn the hatred of apparently the entire expat community? (Why do YOU PERSONALLY hate the guy so much?)

2) Was he really worse than previous Thai leaders, or the leaders of other Asian countries?

3) Was he Thai Chinese? If so, does that help explain anything?

4) Why did he flee to London of all places? Why not the US, Singapore, HK, Japan, France, Switzerland, or some other place? Does this mean that the UK government was somehow behind him, or that he was doing the UK gov't. some favors while in office?

5) The US embassy in Bangkok is expressing concern and unhappiness with the coup, saying it's a setback for "democracy". Do you think they are being disingenuous? Do you think the US liked Thaksin, or not? Why?

6) The book "Bangkok Tatoo", while only a novel, was written by a Brit who apparently has a lot of knowledge of Thailand. One interesting thing in the story is that both the Thai police and army are depicted as running competing drug businesses. So if the police launched that "war on drugs massacre", do you suppose they targeted dealers who were dealing for the army? Might that be why the army has now kicked out Thaksin?

7) Do you really think things will get better in Thailand under a different government? In what ways?

8) How do we know that Thaksin was actually responsible for the massacre of alleged drug dealers, or the massacre of alleged Muslim terrorists in the south? Is it possible that the police and army made these decisions without needing his permission?

9) Is it at all possible that Thaksin was actually a good guy, trying to clean up Thailand and make it less corrupt, more stable and more pro-business?

10) What sectors of Thai society did Thaksin piss off, and how? Seems like he still had solid support among the rural poor majority...

[camerata]

9) Is it at all possible that Thaksin was actually a good guy, trying to clean up Thailand and make it less corrupt, more stable and more pro-business?

Seriously, mate, you need to read the newspapers a bit more. Particularly the editorials.

[kiakaha]

First off, why do so many of you spell it "Taksin", when the media seems to always spell it "Thaksin"?

It is a thai name transliterated phonetically into romanized characters.Therefore open to interpretion.

Can you read Thai ? If so, you'll see that his name is spelled only one way in thai script.

[steveromagnino]

First off, why do so many of you spell it "Taksin", when the media seems to always spell it "Thaksin"?

OK, so 99% of you hate this guy and are joyous that the Thai military took over the country.

I have some questions:

1) What did this guy do to earn the hatred of apparently the entire expat community? (Why do YOU PERSONALLY hate the guy so much?)

2) Was he really worse than previous Thai leaders, or the leaders of other Asian countries?

3) Was he Thai Chinese? If so, does that help explain anything?

4) Why did he flee to London of all places? Why not the US, Singapore, HK, Japan, France, Switzerland, or some other place? Does this mean that the UK government was somehow behind him, or that he was doing the UK gov't. some favors while in office?

5) The US embassy in Bangkok is expressing concern and unhappiness with the coup, saying it's a setback for "democracy". Do you think they are being disingenuous? Do you think the US liked Thaksin, or not? Why?

6) The book "Bangkok Tatoo", while only a novel, was written by a Brit who apparently has a lot of knowledge of Thailand. One interesting thing in the story is that both the Thai police and army are depicted as running competing drug businesses. So if the police launched that "war on drugs massacre", do you suppose they targeted dealers who were dealing for the army? Might that be why the army has now kicked out Thaksin?

7) Do you really think things will get better in Thailand under a different government? In what ways?

8) How do we know that Thaksin was actually responsible for the massacre of alleged drug dealers, or the massacre of alleged Muslim terrorists in the south? Is it possible that the police and army made these decisions without needing his permission?

9) Is it at all possible that Thaksin was actually a good guy, trying to clean up Thailand and make it less corrupt, more stable and more pro-business?

10) What sectors of Thai society did Thaksin piss off, and how? Seems like he still had solid support among the rural poor majority...

1. I don't personally hate him; I just think he is a bad leader; and has made himself and his backers far richer at the expense of the country. He has also IMHO directly insulted a person who I hold in the highest regard through some of his actions for which he should pay. Additionally, he lied in his asset disclosure; he has used his position of influence to benefit those around him and appears therefore to have no morals.

2. Most of the other leaders were inept; however he is the first in a democracy to systematically approach running a country as a personal endeavour, and secure control of media, independent bodies, attempt control of the military and almost every major industry for, as far as I can see, simply personal gain for himself and his friends - EVERY project involving money - 30b healthcare, the airport, mega projects, telecom deregulation and restrictions, tolls pricing, 1 village 1 tambon, OTOP, deregulation of PTT and others, Thailand Elite Card, TAT, etc has either his personal hand skimming off the top or one of his friends. I will bore you with the details of each if you want. The exceptions are giveaways to rural THailand which are almost exclusively to Isaan and the North and never to the south (which is never going to vote TRT). These giveaways have completely undone people's work ethic; if you keep giving things for free then people actually become dependant; by doing this he has kept a captive voting block who can ensure he cannot be censured in parliament, while controlling the media through threats of legal action, buying them or previuosly through the AIS ad budget

3. I believe him being Thai Chinese has zero to do with this, other than perhaps a slightly more dedicated approach to business and education which has given him the background to acheieve all this. All the racist S&*T on this board about Thai Chinese - I am Thai Chinese + White, and none of these parts inherently make me lacking in morals, lazy, hardworking or otherwise.

4. he went to London because he owns property there, his daughter is there and his belongings are there. As good a place as any. Don't worry; his wife brought a large amount of personal things with her most likely; she certainly carried a fair bit out of the country in bags when she left. Unlikely to have anything to do with UK politics.

5. US was pro Taksin; Bush liked Taksin probably because Taksin is also a pseudo business guy and willing to cooperate with war on terror and to be ripped o..I mean to negotiate with USA for an FTA. He also studied in USA and probably as some cool nickname with GWB. USA is anti confusion; and at the moment they don't know who is going to sort things out so better to be anti what they don't know than just say nothing. They have to be seen to be anti coup, after all they are a democracy and if it can occur in Thailand, then maybe it will give some other countries ideas e.g. Iraq. However, there are special factors that make Thailand different; I am sure they know this; however publically they MUST be seen to be pro democracy and thus democratic solutions. USA currently believes that democracy can work anywhere at any stage of a country's development (they didn't always feel this way e.g. Marcos was supported for years)

6. Drugs has nothing to do with this coup. No idea about that book; I assume it is usual expat novel based in Patpong. Plenty of honourable army people here and around the world; anyone willing to die for the good of their country is a lot braver than me.

7. Potentially could be better; this could be 1 step back for many forward. Specifically; true independence needed in some branches of govt; checks and balances; a focus on education nationwide; elimintation of giveaways and vote buying; encouraging the smart, ethical people to want to run the country; a stable form of government; reducing dependence on tourism - many things they could do; too early to say whether things will be better, but any non TRT affiliated businesses have got to have a better time in the years to come e.g. True :-)

8. Taksin created the policies that allowed the massacres, then didn't allow any review of the results. A leader must take responsibility for his actions. The problems of the south are directly Taksin's approach - confront and conquer; not....compromise.

9. No; he and his mates infiltrated and have tried to take over almost every major successful business. name some you don't think he is involved with, and I'll try to tell you who might be part of those. Land deals in the south of Thailand. Healthcare. Adult industry. Banks. Media. Oil. Transportation. Tourism. He either has a part of each or has been trying to get it. Fine if you leave some for others, but he wouldn't even do that unless you were part of his group. Only someone very powerful and rich could control this influence, but that power was built on telecom which is why he totally took over control of the deregulation of his own industry and prevented any changes that would negatively affect the value of Shin.

10. His support among rural poor is only Isaan and the north; various rural Jao Por types control most of the centre and the south is democrat. He got that support through vote buying, giving things away and some great ideas such as 30b healthcare (which is actually a very good idea horribly executed), scholarships and OTOP. Most upcountry people cannot easily understand where the money comes from that they got; they can understand that suddenly this guy is giving them cheap credit, free money and other goodies. he also could give special benefits to village headmen such as free phones and so on; that's the advantage of being super rich and going into rural Thailand.

It could be argued that some people are not sufficiently educated for democracy. That's why most democracies go through cycles of left wing governments who give too much away, make the country broke, then a right wing business govt comes in, stimulates business and makes rich richer, then social welfare state returns and so on. However, when you also factor in vote buying and only one side has the money to pay, then you get an impossible situation. His backing was based on legal and non legal monetary incentives. Most of the protesters in the city such as assembly of the poor were paid to come to BKK. I am speaking to the area where my family own significant land in the middle of nowhere upcountry, and just like Chatichai, they are saying, ah well, nice while it lasted, alright....NEXT!

I am prouder of my Thai blood and the Thai way in which things were handled in the last few days than probably any other time I can think of. I am also saddened, because Thaksin could have been Thailand's greatest PM - he had the connections, skills and vision to do anything - however he chose to focus his attention on his own empire rather than the good of the country. NEEEEXXXXT!

Edited September 21, 2006 by steveromagnino

[Jai Dee]

I am prouder of my Thai blood and the Thai way in which things were handled in the last few days than probably any other time I can think of.

Nice sentiments Steve.

[meadish_sweetball]

Agree with kiakaha about the name.

The sound is not a lisp like in "the" or "thigh", but should be pronounced as in 'Thai'. The 'h' is included to indicate the difference between an aspirated and unaspirated sound, both of which occur in Thai, and are phonemic (carry meaning).

In the cases where the 'h' is excluded, the writer wants to avoid that the unknowing reader pronounces it with a lisp, or is writing it according to the spelling rules in his language (and since most posters are native English speakers, they would rather use a 't' than 'th').

The most common romanized spelling is 'Thaksin' though. It means "south" or "southern".

1) What did this guy do to earn the hatred of apparently the entire expat community? (Why do YOU PERSONALLY hate the guy so much?)

I don't hate him. He is by far not the worst leader in Thai history. The allegations of corruption are true enough though.

Many expats tie him together with the tightening of visa rules that have occurred during his term. There is nothing to say that the same changes would not have occurred if somebody else had been in power though. I am also not so certain that he personally is responsible for the drafting of these rules. His party gathered many fractions and interests together, some more xenophobic than others.

I think it is fair to say that all Thai political parties are fairly nationalistic and conservative by Western (at least by European) standards. In some ways, Thaksin was more outward looking than some of his opponents. In others, he was very nationalistic. He stressed the idea of not relying on outward help to get things done by denying international aid money and symbolically paying off debt. He was also intent on trying to make Thai people learn better English and learn information technology.

As for the downsides, well, the corruption in the changing of legislation regarding foreign ownership of information technology companies before selling off AIS to Singaporean interests, in order to make the sale go through, avoiding tax on the sale etc. really got up some people's noses.

Others focused on his failure to solve the unrest in the Southernmost provinces, and the same people also pointed out all the extrajudicial killings committed during the so called War on Drugs.

His rude and curt image in front of the media and his increasingly self-important and impolite style will also have bothered people.

[camerata]

First off, why do so many of you spell it "Taksin", when the media seems to always spell it "Thaksin"?

His name is pronounced "Taksin." In Thai, apart from the familiar "t" consonant, there is another that is harder, somewhere between a "t" and a "d" - rather like the way the French pronounce a "t." For clarity in writing, the soft "t" is written as "th" and the hard "t" is written as "t."

So for consistency, we should write "Thaksin" to indicate it is a soft "t." It's confusing if you don't know the rules. I've heard Westerners pronounce "Thailand" as "Thigh Land" a couple of times. There is a similar problem with p and ph, which a couple of years ago prompted The Sun to assure its readers that Phuket was pronounced "<deleted> it."

[rcm]

First off, why do so many of you spell it "Taksin", when the media seems to always spell it "Thaksin"?

OK, so 99% of you hate this guy and are joyous that the Thai military took over the country.

I have some questions:

1) What did this guy do to earn the hatred of apparently the entire expat community? (Why do YOU PERSONALLY hate the guy so much?)

2) Was he really worse than previous Thai leaders, or the leaders of other Asian countries?

3) Was he Thai Chinese? If so, does that help explain anything?

4) Why did he flee to London of all places? Why not the US, Singapore, HK, Japan, France, Switzerland, or some other place? Does this mean that the UK government was somehow behind him, or that he was doing the UK gov't. some favors while in office?

5) The US embassy in Bangkok is expressing concern and unhappiness with the coup, saying it's a setback for "democracy". Do you think they are being disingenuous? Do you think the US liked Thaksin, or not? Why?

6) The book "Bangkok Tatoo", while only a novel, was written by a Brit who apparently has a lot of knowledge of Thailand. One interesting thing in the story is that both the Thai police and army are depicted as running competing drug businesses. So if the police launched that "war on drugs massacre", do you suppose they targeted dealers who were dealing for the army? Might that be why the army has now kicked out Thaksin?

7) Do you really think things will get better in Thailand under a different government? In what ways?

8) How do we know that Thaksin was actually responsible for the massacre of alleged drug dealers, or the massacre of alleged Muslim terrorists in the south? Is it possible that the police and army made these decisions without needing his permission?

9) Is it at all possible that Thaksin was actually a good guy, trying to clean up Thailand and make it less corrupt, more stable and more pro-business?

10) What sectors of Thai society did Thaksin piss off, and how? Seems like he still had solid support among the rural poor majority...

1. I don't personally hate him; I just think he is a bad leader; and has made himself and his backers far richer at the expense of the country. He has also IMHO directly insulted a person who I hold in the highest regard through some of his actions for which he should pay. Additionally, he lied in his asset disclosure; he has used his position of influence to benefit those around him and appears therefore to have no morals.

2. Most of the other leaders were inept; however he is the first in a democracy to systematically approach running a country as a personal endeavour, and secure control of media, independent bodies, attempt control of the military and almost every major industry for, as far as I can see, simply personal gain for himself and his friends - EVERY project involving money - 30b healthcare, the airport, mega projects, telecom deregulation and restrictions, tolls pricing, 1 village 1 tambon, OTOP, deregulation of PTT and others, Thailand Elite Card, TAT, etc has either his personal hand skimming off the top or one of his friends. I will bore you with the details of each if you want. The exceptions are giveaways to rural THailand which are almost exclusively to Isaan and the North and never to the south (which is never going to vote TRT). These giveaways have completely undone people's work ethic; if you keep giving things for free then people actually become dependant; by doing this he has kept a captive voting block who can ensure he cannot be censured in parliament, while controlling the media through threats of legal action, buying them or previuosly through the AIS ad budget

3. I believe him being Thai Chinese has zero to do with this, other than perhaps a slightly more dedicated approach to business and education which has given him the background to acheieve all this. All the racist S&*T on this board about Thai Chinese - I am Thai Chinese + White, and none of these parts inherently make me lacking in morals, lazy, hardworking or otherwise.

4. he went to London because he owns property there, his daughter is there and his belongings are there. As good a place as any. Don't worry; his wife brought a large amount of personal things with her most likely; she certainly carried a fair bit out of the country in bags when she left. Unlikely to have anything to do with UK politics.

5. US was pro Taksin; Bush liked Taksin probably because Taksin is also a pseudo business guy and willing to cooperate with war on terror and to be ripped o..I mean to negotiate with USA for an FTA. He also studied in USA and probably as some cool nickname with GWB. USA is anti confusion; and at the moment they don't know who is going to sort things out so better to be anti what they don't know than just say nothing. They have to be seen to be anti coup, after all they are a democracy and if it can occur in Thailand, then maybe it will give some other countries ideas e.g. Iraq. However, there are special factors that make Thailand different; I am sure they know this; however publically they MUST be seen to be pro democracy and thus democratic solutions. USA currently believes that democracy can work anywhere at any stage of a country's development (they didn't always feel this way e.g. Marcos was supported for years)

6. Drugs has nothing to do with this coup. No idea about that book; I assume it is usual expat novel based in Patpong. Plenty of honourable army people here and around the world; anyone willing to die for the good of their country is a lot braver than me.

7. Potentially could be better; this could be 1 step back for many forward. Specifically; true independence needed in some branches of govt; checks and balances; a focus on education nationwide; elimintation of giveaways and vote buying; encouraging the smart, ethical people to want to run the country; a stable form of government; reducing dependence on tourism - many things they could do; too early to say whether things will be better, but any non TRT affiliated businesses have got to have a better time in the years to come e.g. True :-)

8. Taksin created the policies that allowed the massacres, then didn't allow any review of the results. A leader must take responsibility for his actions. The problems of the south are directly Taksin's approach - confront and conquer; not....compromise.

9. No; he and his mates infiltrated and have tried to take over almost every major successful business. name some you don't think he is involved with, and I'll try to tell you who might be part of those. Land deals in the south of Thailand. Healthcare. Adult industry. Banks. Media. Oil. Transportation. Tourism. He either has a part of each or has been trying to get it. Fine if you leave some for others, but he wouldn't even do that unless you were part of his group. Only someone very powerful and rich could control this influence, but that power was built on telecom which is why he totally took over control of the deregulation of his own industry and prevented any changes that would negatively affect the value of Shin.

10. His support among rural poor is only Isaan and the north; various rural Jao Por types control most of the centre and the south is democrat. He got that support through vote buying, giving things away and some great ideas such as 30b healthcare (which is actually a very good idea horribly executed), scholarships and OTOP. Most upcountry people cannot easily understand where the money comes from that they got; they can understand that suddenly this guy is giving them cheap credit, free money and other goodies. he also could give special benefits to village headmen such as free phones and so on; that's the advantage of being super rich and going into rural Thailand.

It could be argued that some people are not sufficiently educated for democracy. That's why most democracies go through cycles of left wing governments who give too much away, make the country broke, then a right wing business govt comes in, stimulates business and makes rich richer, then social welfare state returns and so on. However, when you also factor in vote buying and only one side has the money to pay, then you get an impossible situation. His backing was based on legal and non legal monetary incentives. Most of the protesters in the city such as assembly of the poor were paid to come to BKK. I am speaking to the area where my family own significant land in the middle of nowhere upcountry, and just like Chatichai, they are saying, ah well, nice while it lasted, alright....NEXT!

I am prouder of my Thai blood and the Thai way in which things were handled in the last few days than probably any other time I can think of. I am also saddened, because Thaksin could have been Thailand's greatest PM - he had the connections, skills and vision to do anything - however he chose to focus his attention on his own empire rather than the good of the country. NEEEEXXXXT!

I found this an truly excellent post.....and it kept me reading for a while...

[A_Traveller]

First off, why do so many of you spell it "Taksin", when the media seems to always spell it "Thaksin"? Since the Soi I live in, when in Bangkok, has at least three 'legal' English spellings from the transliteration of the Thai, I'll let you guess.

OK, so 99% of you hate this guy and are joyous that the Thai military took over the country. People have many more views on that then you suggest

I have some questions:

1) What did this guy do to earn the hatred of apparently the entire expat community? (Why do YOU PERSONALLY hate the guy so much?) I don't personally hate him, however, he created many obstacles, either directly with the Government sector, or indirectly by building up so called nationalist enterprises, that many commercial operations found Thailand less 'investment friendly'.

2) Was he really worse than previous Thai leaders, or the leaders of other Asian countries? Define ... His oligarchic tendencies and his disregard for the existing social hierarchy did put him into a singular place. It should be noted, that he, unlike the drafters of the '97 Constitution, saw the development of modern political techniques {especially from the UK's 'New Labour'} and saw how they could be applied, with judicious sums of money. He also had cut deals over time with existing parties which allowed him to springboard into the arena. I've always wondered if the people who brought him in, Chavlit etc., thought as the new boy on the block he would be more controllable.

3) Was he Thai Chinese? If so, does that help explain anything? Yes, and no not really. The mutual dependencies of the group might in some ways have helped in the commercial arena, but on balance, less so in the direct elements of politics. Since his technique was to link commercial and political imperatives and make each a feed back mechanism for the other the issue of his family was less important. One other point, if I may, was his attempt to portray himself as the 'poor boy made good', despite the first job being running the cinema which belonged to the family.

4) Why did he flee to London of all places? Why not the US, Singapore, HK, Japan, France, Switzerland, or some other place? Does this mean that the UK government was somehow behind him, or that he was doing the UK gov't. some favors while in office? London would probably rather not have him, but the manner of his exit means that most western democracies would find it difficult to turn him away. The expat staus in the UK, can be very beneficial, which is why there are a number of Billionaire who use the UK as their base, more than you might expect.

5) The US embassy in Bangkok is expressing concern and unhappiness with the coup, saying it's a setback for "democracy". Do you think they are being disingenuous? Do you think the US liked Thaksin, or not? Why? Yes, in part, there is the complex history, and the link between Thailand and the US during the Vietnam era. In broad terms, by definition, a coup is a set back for democracy, though many observers would agree that the issue stems from the Machiavellian use of the 'Peoples Constitution', which had been crafted to reduce the revolving door of Thai politics, care of the 'vote of no confidence', and the increasingly splintering, in party form, of politics. Again Thaksin, {or his money} unified these elements.

6) The book "Bangkok Tatoo", while only a novel, was written by a Brit who apparently has a lot of knowledge of Thailand. One interesting thing in the story is that both the Thai police and army are depicted as running competing drug businesses. So if the police launched that "war on drugs massacre", do you suppose they targeted dealers who were dealing for the army? Might that be why the army has now kicked out Thaksin? There is a deal of evidence supporting the basis for the fiction, {which I've not read} but in my view, it's a jump too far to link these activities with the ouster. ,

7) Do you really think things will get better in Thailand under a different government? In what ways? On blance yes. It will depend if the good, though it was hugely flawed, is carried through. The key element here will be if the Bangkok 'elite' accept the idea that the countryside has an agenda which must be addressed, for example health, education, {though these were not addressed in a sustainable fashion by TRT, as opposed to seeing them as peasants.

8) How do we know that Thaksin was actually responsible for the massacre of alleged drug dealers, or the massacre of alleged Muslim terrorists in the south? Is it possible that the police and army made these decisions without needing his permission? He ordered the crackdown, publically. The extrajudicial killings were a result of the crackdown and how it was structured.

9) Is it at all possible that Thaksin was actually a good guy, trying to clean up Thailand and make it less corrupt, more stable and more pro-business? Maybe it would be time to read some of the studies of the results of TRT's leadership. There are a number which might make one consider matters.

10) What sectors of Thai society did Thaksin piss off, and how? Seems like he still had solid support among the rural poor majority... Mainly, the Bangkok elite, the middle class, which is growing, and those in the countryside who saw the OTOP and 1 million baht schemes as ways to provide short term money but with little, if any, long term strategic benefit. There were, and are many more of those then you might expect, especially if one is not aware of the 'village' dynamics. Forcing people into a position where the risk of debt was substantive, by coercion, was a fact. However, many took the route of saving the 'loan' and giving the money back rather than buying a mobile phone, motorbike etc. which was not always popular. No leverage you see?

I would suggest that you now go and spend some money on books and take the time to study the position here, then you might be able answer your own questions to your own satisfaction.

Regards

PS Steveromagnino seems to say it better then I and his typing is better then mine, unless he did it in word first, an excellent post if I may say so.

/edit typos and PS//

Edited September 21, 2006 by A_Traveller

[steveromagnino]

I would suggest that you now go and spend some money on books and take the time to study the position here, then you might be able answer your own questions to your own satisfaction.

Regards

PS Steveromagnino seems to say it better then I and his typing is better then mine, unless he did it in word first, an excellent post if I may say so.

Great post; and no; I just feel very very very happy today (and the whole office I work with is in a very good mood too!) so wanted to explain some things I have felt in the last few days :-) Seems like we think quite similarly on many issues!

I only type once and don't proof read for the most part; so maybe the spelling fairies were looking after me; normally I have lots of mistakes!

I do actually in many ways admire Thaksin; he actually saw the gaps left in the constitution and was also aware of the 'interference' for want of a better word that had led to the downfalls of two 'non-overthrown by coup leaders', Banharn and Chavalit. He must have spent a while planning exactly how he intended to change the shape of how things ran and I can admire the effort and success of that; had he just been willing to compromise a little more, I think he would have been in power for the 20 years he initially suggested.

once again...I think you have a very astute understanding of politics here.

RCM - thanks for the kind words :-)

[HeikoJT]

Thaksin was the first real efficient prime minister. This is why he had been admired by the people - in the beginning. He still is by the rural folks of the North because he has showered them with money. But educated people soon realized that his politics were very questionable in terms of democracy and economy as well. Protests became louder and louder. The yellow colour got the meaning of "Anti-Thaksin". The people thought that he was not a democrat but an autocrat

He was totally inept to quell the unrest in the Southestern provinces.

But what he was very much critizised for, the sale of his family's shares of Shinawatra without paying taxes, was totally legal.

[steveromagnino]

But what he was very much critizised for, the sale of his family's shares of Shinawatra without paying taxes, was totally legal.

I wouldn't say he was efficient; perhaps better to describe him as effective; schemes like 30b healthcare are great ideas, but they weren't efficiently implemented at all. ASk any doctor or hospital. And also someone will shortly ask how come the Health minister's family holds licenses to many of the medicines (second rate ones) was also involved with this program,,,surely is that not a conflict of interest?!

agree with the rest, but for the above....

only if you believe that ex market transactions which are clearly trades (the shares sold to his kids at 3 baht then ressold by his kids at 45b - numbers thereabouts) should be also considered as non-taxable; that it is ok for Yingluck Shinawatra to sell shares in ther company of which she is CEO using inside information regarding the takeover and that it is ok to sell 96% of a company which has a license not allowing more than 49% foreign ownership and in fact that very rule was increased from 25% by the PM himself in the same month as the company was sold. And that his family didn't disclose any of this to the market as per regulations. And that he should not be subject to analysis of the transactions.

Should he pay capital gains tax overall? I think not.

but definitely for the transactions not done on the open market between the family.

As it stands now, there is insufficient objective information to decide whether he should be made to pay tax and if so on what grounds and how much. There are precedents on both sides of the table.

However I think people were insensed by it as you say...however it is now pretty clear that like most Temasak transactions, the Singaporeans overpaid. So at least he can take some consolation in that :-) As he watches (hopefully) his kids go to jail.

Edited September 21, 2006 by steveromagnino

[j_cheung]

Being legal doesn't make it right or moral ... especially if you're the (now-ex) legitimate political leader of a country. Besides, with his legal & financial firepower, he could have easily set up fronts (or "foundations") to "donate" the 45B to the poor, etc. (reclaiming most through big purchases from his business partners) and superfacially reclaim the moral high ground politically. Altogether, he's too arrogant & just plain dumb ...

Postnote: This topic has been by far the most constructive & fair-minded discussion on Thaksin to date :-)

[jomama]

First off, why do so many of you spell it "Taksin", when the media seems to always spell it "Thaksin"?

OK, so 99% of you hate this guy and are joyous that the Thai military took over the country.

I have some questions:

1) What did this guy do to earn the hatred of apparently the entire expat community? (Why do YOU PERSONALLY hate the guy so much?)

2) Was he really worse than previous Thai leaders, or the leaders of other Asian countries?

3) Was he Thai Chinese? If so, does that help explain anything?

4) Why did he flee to London of all places? Why not the US, Singapore, HK, Japan, France, Switzerland, or some other place? Does this mean that the UK government was somehow behind him, or that he was doing the UK gov't. some favors while in office?

5) The US embassy in Bangkok is expressing concern and unhappiness with the coup, saying it's a setback for "democracy". Do you think they are being disingenuous? Do you think the US liked Thaksin, or not? Why?

6) The book "Bangkok Tatoo", while only a novel, was written by a Brit who apparently has a lot of knowledge of Thailand. One interesting thing in the story is that both the Thai police and army are depicted as running competing drug businesses. So if the police launched that "war on drugs massacre", do you suppose they targeted dealers who were dealing for the army? Might that be why the army has now kicked out Thaksin?

7) Do you really think things will get better in Thailand under a different government? In what ways?

8) How do we know that Thaksin was actually responsible for the massacre of alleged drug dealers, or the massacre of alleged Muslim terrorists in the south? Is it possible that the police and army made these decisions without needing his permission?

9) Is it at all possible that Thaksin was actually a good guy, trying to clean up Thailand and make it less corrupt, more stable and more pro-business?

10) What sectors of Thai society did Thaksin piss off, and how? Seems like he still had solid support among the rural poor majority...

1. I don't personally hate him; I just think he is a bad leader; and has made himself and his backers far richer at the expense of the country. He has also IMHO directly insulted a person who I hold in the highest regard through some of his actions for which he should pay. Additionally, he lied in his asset disclosure; he has used his position of influence to benefit those around him and appears therefore to have no morals.

2. Most of the other leaders were inept; however he is the first in a democracy to systematically approach running a country as a personal endeavour, and secure control of media, independent bodies, attempt control of the military and almost every major industry for, as far as I can see, simply personal gain for himself and his friends - EVERY project involving money - 30b healthcare, the airport, mega projects, telecom deregulation and restrictions, tolls pricing, 1 village 1 tambon, OTOP, deregulation of PTT and others, Thailand Elite Card, TAT, etc has either his personal hand skimming off the top or one of his friends. I will bore you with the details of each if you want. The exceptions are giveaways to rural THailand which are almost exclusively to Isaan and the North and never to the south (which is never going to vote TRT). These giveaways have completely undone people's work ethic; if you keep giving things for free then people actually become dependant; by doing this he has kept a captive voting block who can ensure he cannot be censured in parliament, while controlling the media through threats of legal action, buying them or previuosly through the AIS ad budget

3. I believe him being Thai Chinese has zero to do with this, other than perhaps a slightly more dedicated approach to business and education which has given him the background to acheieve all this. All the racist S&*T on this board about Thai Chinese - I am Thai Chinese + White, and none of these parts inherently make me lacking in morals, lazy, hardworking or otherwise.

4. he went to London because he owns property there, his daughter is there and his belongings are there. As good a place as any. Don't worry; his wife brought a large amount of personal things with her most likely; she certainly carried a fair bit out of the country in bags when she left. Unlikely to have anything to do with UK politics.

5. US was pro Taksin; Bush liked Taksin probably because Taksin is also a pseudo business guy and willing to cooperate with war on terror and to be ripped o..I mean to negotiate with USA for an FTA. He also studied in USA and probably as some cool nickname with GWB. USA is anti confusion; and at the moment they don't know who is going to sort things out so better to be anti what they don't know than just say nothing. They have to be seen to be anti coup, after all they are a democracy and if it can occur in Thailand, then maybe it will give some other countries ideas e.g. Iraq. However, there are special factors that make Thailand different; I am sure they know this; however publically they MUST be seen to be pro democracy and thus democratic solutions. USA currently believes that democracy can work anywhere at any stage of a country's development (they didn't always feel this way e.g. Marcos was supported for years)

6. Drugs has nothing to do with this coup. No idea about that book; I assume it is usual expat novel based in Patpong. Plenty of honourable army people here and around the world; anyone willing to die for the good of their country is a lot braver than me.

7. Potentially could be better; this could be 1 step back for many forward. Specifically; true independence needed in some branches of govt; checks and balances; a focus on education nationwide; elimintation of giveaways and vote buying; encouraging the smart, ethical people to want to run the country; a stable form of government; reducing dependence on tourism - many things they could do; too early to say whether things will be better, but any non TRT affiliated businesses have got to have a better time in the years to come e.g. True :-)

8. Taksin created the policies that allowed the massacres, then didn't allow any review of the results. A leader must take responsibility for his actions. The problems of the south are directly Taksin's approach - confront and conquer; not....compromise.

9. No; he and his mates infiltrated and have tried to take over almost every major successful business. name some you don't think he is involved with, and I'll try to tell you who might be part of those. Land deals in the south of Thailand. Healthcare. Adult industry. Banks. Media. Oil. Transportation. Tourism. He either has a part of each or has been trying to get it. Fine if you leave some for others, but he wouldn't even do that unless you were part of his group. Only someone very powerful and rich could control this influence, but that power was built on telecom which is why he totally took over control of the deregulation of his own industry and prevented any changes that would negatively affect the value of Shin.

10. His support among rural poor is only Isaan and the north; various rural Jao Por types control most of the centre and the south is democrat. He got that support through vote buying, giving things away and some great ideas such as 30b healthcare (which is actually a very good idea horribly executed), scholarships and OTOP. Most upcountry people cannot easily understand where the money comes from that they got; they can understand that suddenly this guy is giving them cheap credit, free money and other goodies. he also could give special benefits to village headmen such as free phones and so on; that's the advantage of being super rich and going into rural Thailand.

It could be argued that some people are not sufficiently educated for democracy. That's why most democracies go through cycles of left wing governments who give too much away, make the country broke, then a right wing business govt comes in, stimulates business and makes rich richer, then social welfare state returns and so on. However, when you also factor in vote buying and only one side has the money to pay, then you get an impossible situation. His backing was based on legal and non legal monetary incentives. Most of the protesters in the city such as assembly of the poor were paid to come to BKK. I am speaking to the area where my family own significant land in the middle of nowhere upcountry, and just like Chatichai, they are saying, ah well, nice while it lasted, alright....NEXT!

I am prouder of my Thai blood and the Thai way in which things were handled in the last few days than probably any other time I can think of. I am also saddened, because Thaksin could have been Thailand's greatest PM - he had the connections, skills and vision to do anything - however he chose to focus his attention on his own empire rather than the good of the country. NEEEEXXXXT!

Execellent post (that's why I have