Coming to Thailand

[mikemac]

Even the researchers at the arch-conservative TDRI point out that 300 billion baht went to farmers and that farmers had a nearly 600 billion bhat increase in direct and indirect revenues combined.

EJ has had me and other posters point out the facts of the program - as bad as it was - to him, but he refuses (apparently) to either read the information or to go out and find the information for himself.

So in his case, ignorance doesn't seem to be a defense, it seems to be his offense...

Always believe the 'facts" from any Thai body if they happen to suit. Otherwise dismiss them.

I think I'll prefer the WB report.

if you want to go argue with the TDRI, then feel free.

I just read their stuff and understand their bias.

....................."EJ has had me and other posters point out the facts of the program - as bad as it was - to him, but he refuses (apparently) to either read the information or to go out and find the information for himself.".......................

As usual, tb, with his red-tinted glasses on, goes out searching for anything that suits his agenda, picks out the juicy bits and posts them.

In this case he posts a link to a Thai PBS site which runs an article about " Yingluck’s rice pledging scheme".

tb says that -

...................."Even the researchers at the arch-conservative TDRI point out that 300 billion baht went to farmers and that farmers had a nearly 600 billion bhat increase in direct and indirect revenues combined.".....................

I read the whole article and it also contained this -

"Thailand Development Research Institute (TDRI) says the rice-pledging scheme implemented

by the Yingluck government during 2011-2014 has so far caused 660 billion baht loss to the

state.

But it says the loss could reach a trillion baht on assumption that the remaining 17 million tons

of rice in the stocks are sold out in the next 10 years."

"By end of October 31 this year, it was found that 85% of rice in the stocks have lower

quality than normal standard. This low quality rice resulted in the loss of 660 billion baht

to the state from the pledging scheme."

"He said in the research that the rice-pledging scheme had brought about damages to the

societies rather than advantages to farmers and consumers of an estimated 123 billion baht."

"Meanwhile farmers joining the scheme obtained additional 296 billion baht in direct revenues.

But after the combination of both direct and indirect revenues from the scheme, farmers

obtained 561 billion baht in revenues.

But farmers who were benefitted from the scheme were mostly rich and medium earning farmers,

rather than poor and low income farmers."

"Dr Nipon said the rice-pledging scheme also had 585 billion baht of economic rents or 41% of GDP

that resulted in relevant people to seek this special profits from investment in the scheme and was

tantamount to extravagantly spend national resources that would obstruct economic growth."

Note this line -

"But farmers who were benefitted from the scheme were mostly rich and medium earning farmers,

rather than poor and low income farmers."

Which explains why the rich and medium earning farmers were not part of the group of farmers who went to Bangkok to protest about not being paid.

This is what has irked me right from the beginning of this fiasco, that Yingluck and anyone stupid enough to defend this rice scam, has claimed it helped the poor farmers. Absolute lies and bs.

[scorecard]

tell me why the farmers were pissed off then and some commited suicide. they hadn't recieved any money in a long time before the banks weren't allowed to pay anymore.

I can tell you... want to listen? (probably not)... the banks refused to lend the government money to pay the farmers but MIRACULOUSLY did when the guys with the guns took over - amart rak amart

would be more honest to start their own political party called ARA and try and get elected

You say the banks refused to lend the government the money.

What you deliberately don't mention is that all Thai banks operate within various laws, policies, rules, and with an expectation of high ethics and morals. And within well known risk parameters.

Just one item you omit is that many if not all of the banks concerned would never attach any risk or break laws and therefore immediately get offside' with their depositors /perhaps start a run on deposits.

Add: numerous past seniors of one bank that did this just got 18 years in jail.

Edited September 2, 2015 by scorecard

[candide]

tell me why the farmers were pissed off then and some commited suicide. they hadn't recieved any money in a long time before the banks weren't allowed to pay anymore.

I can tell you... want to listen? (probably not)... the banks refused to lend the government money to pay the farmers but MIRACULOUSLY did when the guys with the guns took over - amart rak amart

would be more honest to start their own political party called ARA and try and get elected

You say the banks refused to lend the government the money.

What you deliberately don't mention is that all Thai banks operate within various laws, policies, rules, and with an expectation of high ethics and morals. And within well known risk parameters.

Just one item you omit is that many if not all of the banks concerned would never attach any risk or break laws and therefore immediately get offside' with their depositors /perhaps start a run on deposits.

Add: numerous past seniors of one bank that did this just got 18 years in jail.

And in particular with Suthep openly threatening them!

[halloween]

And in particular with Suthep openly threatening them!

Threatening them to obey the law or face repercussions? Surely that is better than kowtowing to Defendant Number 1, allowing him and his criminal mates to walk off with B8 billion, and then copping 18 years in jail for knowingly breaking banking regulations. Next time the issue arises, they won't even bother asking (as refusal may offend).

[FritsSikkink]

tell me why the farmers were pissed off then and some commited suicide. they hadn't recieved any money in a long time before the banks weren't allowed to pay anymore.

I can tell you... want to listen? (probably not)... the banks refused to lend the government money to pay the farmers but MIRACULOUSLY did when the guys with the guns took over - amart rak amart

would be more honest to start their own political party called ARA and try and get elected

You say the banks refused to lend the government the money.

What you deliberately don't mention is that all Thai banks operate within various laws, policies, rules, and with an expectation of high ethics and morals. And within well known risk parameters.

Just one item you omit is that many if not all of the banks concerned would never attach any risk or break laws and therefore immediately get offside' with their depositors /perhaps start a run on deposits.

Add: numerous past seniors of one bank that did this just got 18 years in jail.

And in particular with Suthep openly threatening them!

the farmers didn't get paid at least 6 months BEFORE the banks had problems

[tbthailand]

if you want to go argue with the TDRI, then feel free.

Always believe the 'facts" from any Thai body if they happen to suit. Otherwise dismiss them.

I think I'll prefer the WB report.

I just read their stuff and understand their bias.

....................."EJ has had me and other posters point out the facts of the program - as bad as it was - to him, but he refuses (apparently) to either read the information or to go out and find the information for himself.".......................

As usual, tb, with his red-tinted glasses on, goes out searching for anything that suits his agenda, picks out the juicy bits and posts them.

In this case he posts a link to a Thai PBS site which runs an article about " Yingluck’s rice pledging scheme".

tb says that -

...................."Even the researchers at the arch-conservative TDRI point out that 300 billion baht went to farmers and that farmers had a nearly 600 billion bhat increase in direct and indirect revenues combined.".....................

I read the whole article and it also contained this -

"Thailand Development Research Institute (TDRI) says the rice-pledging scheme implemented

by the Yingluck government during 2011-2014 has so far caused 660 billion baht loss to the

state.

But it says the loss could reach a trillion baht on assumption that the remaining 17 million tons

of rice in the stocks are sold out in the next 10 years."

"By end of October 31 this year, it was found that 85% of rice in the stocks have lower

quality than normal standard. This low quality rice resulted in the loss of 660 billion baht

to the state from the pledging scheme."

"He said in the research that the rice-pledging scheme had brought about damages to the

societies rather than advantages to farmers and consumers of an estimated 123 billion baht."

"Meanwhile farmers joining the scheme obtained additional 296 billion baht in direct revenues.

But after the combination of both direct and indirect revenues from the scheme, farmers

obtained 561 billion baht in revenues.

But farmers who were benefitted from the scheme were mostly rich and medium earning farmers,

rather than poor and low income farmers."

"Dr Nipon said the rice-pledging scheme also had 585 billion baht of economic rents or 41% of GDP

that resulted in relevant people to seek this special profits from investment in the scheme and was

tantamount to extravagantly spend national resources that would obstruct economic growth."

Note this line -

"But farmers who were benefitted from the scheme were mostly rich and medium earning farmers,

rather than poor and low income farmers."

Which explains why the rich and medium earning farmers were not part of the group of farmers who went to Bangkok to protest about not being paid.

This is what has irked me right from the beginning of this fiasco, that Yingluck and anyone stupid enough to defend this rice scam, has claimed it helped the poor farmers. Absolute lies and bs.

actually, I sought out 'the bits" which explained how EJ made a completely inaccurate statement.

I did not express my own opinion on the rice scheme, not this one nor previous programs. I could, but there is seldom the chance to do so in the current news environment.

But to your point, I agree that this program did not deliver much benefit to smaller (poorer) farmers. Neither did the plan under Abhisit. Nor did the previous plans from the 'devil in dubai'...

I do believe that agricultural subsidies are needed in a volatile commodities market. I also think that nearly every government in the world caters to their agro-industrial base when they create subsidies and does not take the time or the effort to create programs which will support specific goals within society, eg: support small, local farms... The same could be said for supporting small, local businesses, small, local schools, etc, ...

Please note that I am discussing Thailand, but also other countries. I see it as a problem which occurs often. As a Thai example, I recently came across a report which proposed (as a solution) that the farmers combine smaller plots into larger plots and use mechanisation to improve efficiency. I believe this moron was also from the TDRI. His point makes it clear that he has no idea about rice farming out here in the wilds, nor does he have the interests of the small farmer in mind - his 'solution' would just squash the small farmer and turn him into a hired-hand or a 'former' farmer.

[Thai at Heart]

if you want to go argue with the TDRI, then feel free.

Always believe the 'facts" from any Thai body if they happen to suit. Otherwise dismiss them.

I think I'll prefer the WB report.

I just read their stuff and understand their bias.

....................."EJ has had me and other posters point out the facts of the program - as bad as it was - to him, but he refuses (apparently) to either read the information or to go out and find the information for himself.".......................

As usual, tb, with his red-tinted glasses on, goes out searching for anything that suits his agenda, picks out the juicy bits and posts them.

In this case he posts a link to a Thai PBS site which runs an article about " Yingluck’s rice pledging scheme".

tb says that -

...................."Even the researchers at the arch-conservative TDRI point out that 300 billion baht went to farmers and that farmers had a nearly 600 billion bhat increase in direct and indirect revenues combined.".....................

I read the whole article and it also contained this -

"Thailand Development Research Institute (TDRI) says the rice-pledging scheme implemented

by the Yingluck government during 2011-2014 has so far caused 660 billion baht loss to the

state.

But it says the loss could reach a trillion baht on assumption that the remaining 17 million tons

of rice in the stocks are sold out in the next 10 years."

"By end of October 31 this year, it was found that 85% of rice in the stocks have lower

quality than normal standard. This low quality rice resulted in the loss of 660 billion baht

to the state from the pledging scheme."

"He said in the research that the rice-pledging scheme had brought about damages to the

societies rather than advantages to farmers and consumers of an estimated 123 billion baht."

"Meanwhile farmers joining the scheme obtained additional 296 billion baht in direct revenues.

But after the combination of both direct and indirect revenues from the scheme, farmers

obtained 561 billion baht in revenues.

But farmers who were benefitted from the scheme were mostly rich and medium earning farmers,

rather than poor and low income farmers."

"Dr Nipon said the rice-pledging scheme also had 585 billion baht of economic rents or 41% of GDP

that resulted in relevant people to seek this special profits from investment in the scheme and was

tantamount to extravagantly spend national resources that would obstruct economic growth."

Note this line -

"But farmers who were benefitted from the scheme were mostly rich and medium earning farmers,

rather than poor and low income farmers."

Which explains why the rich and medium earning farmers were not part of the group of farmers who went to Bangkok to protest about not being paid.

This is what has irked me right from the beginning of this fiasco, that Yingluck and anyone stupid enough to defend this rice scam, has claimed it helped the poor farmers. Absolute lies and bs.

actually, I sought out 'the bits" which explained how EJ made a completely inaccurate statement.

I did not express my own opinion on the rice scheme, not this one nor previous programs. I could, but there is seldom the chance to do so in the current news environment.

But to your point, I agree that this program did not deliver much benefit to smaller (poorer) farmers. Neither did the plan under Abhisit. Nor did the previous plans from the 'devil in dubai'...

I do believe that agricultural subsidies are needed in a volatile commodities market. I also think that nearly every government in the world caters to their agro-industrial base when they create subsidies and does not take the time or the effort to create programs which will support specific goals within society, eg: support small, local farms... The same could be said for supporting small, local businesses, small, local schools, etc, ...

Please note that I am discussing Thailand, but also other countries. I see it as a problem which occurs often. As a Thai example, I recently came across a report which proposed (as a solution) that the farmers combine smaller plots into larger plots and use mechanisation to improve efficiency. I believe this moron was also from the TDRI. His point makes it clear that he has no idea about rice farming out here in the wilds, nor does he have the interests of the small farmer in mind - his 'solution' would just squash the small farmer and turn him into a hired-hand or a 'former' farmer.

If it's a volume based system, of course it will go to the farmers with bigger crops who by definition will be "richer".

Note in the quotes it says "mostly".... They could have capped it to the first 10 tonnes.

[halloween]

actually, I sought out 'the bits" which explained how EJ made a completely inaccurate statement.

I did not express my own opinion on the rice scheme, not this one nor previous programs. I could, but there is seldom the chance to do so in the current news environment.

But to your point, I agree that this program did not deliver much benefit to smaller (poorer) farmers. Neither did the plan under Abhisit. Nor did the previous plans from the 'devil in dubai'...

I do believe that agricultural subsidies are needed in a volatile commodities market. I also think that nearly every government in the world caters to their agro-industrial base when they create subsidies and does not take the time or the effort to create programs which will support specific goals within society, eg: support small, local farms... The same could be said for supporting small, local businesses, small, local schools, etc, ...

Please note that I am discussing Thailand, but also other countries. I see it as a problem which occurs often. As a Thai example, I recently came across a report which proposed (as a solution) that the farmers combine smaller plots into larger plots and use mechanisation to improve efficiency. I believe this moron was also from the TDRI. His point makes it clear that he has no idea about rice farming out here in the wilds, nor does he have the interests of the small farmer in mind - his 'solution' would just squash the small farmer and turn him into a hired-hand or a 'former' farmer.

But this plan was advertised, as an electoral bribe, to lift the incomes of the poorer farmers. Which was a blatant lie given the way it was structured.

Why do you claim the Abhisit plan didn't help small farmers? Are you referring to those who didn't sell their rice, which excluded them from both schemes?

The previous plan from Thaksin was the same as that offered by Yingluk. Despite evidence it was a miserable failure with mounting stocks, rife with corruption and very little of the high cost was heading to the claimed intended recipients. That it was re-instated without any attempt at improving efficiency or reducing its faults, and with increased prices TYVM Yingluk (an off the cuff statement at an electoral rally) is one of the main complaints about it.

BTW whatever you do don't increase efficiency and get rid of those tiny plots of land.

Edited September 2, 2015 by halloween

[Linky]

tell me why the farmers were pissed off then and some commited suicide. they hadn't recieved any money in a long time before the banks weren't allowed to pay anymore.

I can tell you... want to listen? (probably not)... the banks refused to lend the government money to pay the farmers but MIRACULOUSLY did when the guys with the guns took over - amart rak amart

would be more honest to start their own political party called ARA and try and get elected

You say the banks refused to lend the government the money.

What you deliberately don't mention is that all Thai banks operate within various laws, policies, rules, and with an expectation of high ethics and morals. And within well known risk parameters.

Just one item you omit is that many if not all of the banks concerned would never attach any risk or break laws and therefore immediately get offside' with their depositors /perhaps start a run on deposits.

Add: numerous past seniors of one bank that did this just got 18 years in jail.

Those laws, morals and ethics all went out the window when the junta forced its way in and the banks paid up.

So it would seem they are quite capable of dismissing those virtues on a whim

[LannaGuy]

tell me why the farmers were pissed off then and some commited suicide. they hadn't recieved any money in a long time before the banks weren't allowed to pay anymore.

I can tell you... want to listen? (probably not)... the banks refused to lend the government money to pay the farmers but MIRACULOUSLY did when the guys with the guns took over - amart rak amart

would be more honest to start their own political party called ARA and try and get elected

You say the banks refused to lend the government the money.

What you deliberately don't mention is that all Thai banks operate within various laws, policies, rules, and with an expectation of high ethics and morals. And within well known risk parameters.

Just one item you omit is that many if not all of the banks concerned would never attach any risk or break laws and therefore immediately get offside' with their depositors /perhaps start a run on deposits.

Add: numerous past seniors of one bank that did this just got 18 years in jail.

and what you deliberately don't mention is the money flowed when the guys with the GUNS too took over

[tbthailand]

tell me why the farmers were pissed off then and some commited suicide. they hadn't recieved any money in a long time before the banks weren't allowed to pay anymore.

I can tell you... want to listen? (probably not)... the banks refused to lend the government money to pay the farmers but MIRACULOUSLY did when the guys with the guns took over - amart rak amart

would be more honest to start their own political party called ARA and try and get elected

You say the banks refused to lend the government the money.

What you deliberately don't mention is that all Thai banks operate within various laws, policies, rules, and with an expectation of high ethics and morals. And within well known risk parameters.

Just one item you omit is that many if not all of the banks concerned would never attach any risk or break laws and therefore immediately get offside' with their depositors /perhaps start a run on deposits.

Add: numerous past seniors of one bank that did this just got 18 years in jail.

and what you deliberately don't mention is the money flowed when the guys with the GUNS too took over

and he forgot the active campaign of intimidation by the PDRC...

oops.

[ginjag]

tell me why the farmers were pissed off then and some commited suicide. they hadn't recieved any money in a long time before the banks weren't allowed to pay anymore.

I can tell you... want to listen? (probably not)... the banks refused to lend the government money to pay the farmers but MIRACULOUSLY did when the guys with the guns took over - amart rak amart

would be more honest to start their own political party called ARA and try and get elected

You say the banks refused to lend the government the money.

What you deliberately don't mention is that all Thai banks operate within various laws, policies, rules, and with an expectation of high ethics and morals. And within well known risk parameters.

Just one item you omit is that many if not all of the banks concerned would never attach any risk or break laws and therefore immediately get offside' with their depositors /perhaps start a run on deposits.

Add: numerous past seniors of one bank that did this just got 18 years in jail.

and what you deliberately don't mention is the money flowed when the guys with the GUNS too took over

Were you talking about the army---or the red shirts ?? but you did not question the fact that---why didn't Yingluck pay out 6 months earlier.?? you never answer the fact-truth, have to come out with a statement slagging the army at every opportunity.

[tbthailand]

actually, I sought out 'the bits" which explained how EJ made a completely inaccurate statement.

I did not express my own opinion on the rice scheme, not this one nor previous programs. I could, but there is seldom the chance to do so in the current news environment.

But to your point, I agree that this program did not deliver much benefit to smaller (poorer) farmers. Neither did the plan under Abhisit. Nor did the previous plans from the 'devil in dubai'...

I do believe that agricultural subsidies are needed in a volatile commodities market. I also think that nearly every government in the world caters to their agro-industrial base when they create subsidies and does not take the time or the effort to create programs which will support specific goals within society, eg: support small, local farms... The same could be said for supporting small, local businesses, small, local schools, etc, ...

Please note that I am discussing Thailand, but also other countries. I see it as a problem which occurs often. As a Thai example, I recently came across a report which proposed (as a solution) that the farmers combine smaller plots into larger plots and use mechanisation to improve efficiency. I believe this moron was also from the TDRI. His point makes it clear that he has no idea about rice farming out here in the wilds, nor does he have the interests of the small farmer in mind - his 'solution' would just squash the small farmer and turn him into a hired-hand or a 'former' farmer.

But this plan was advertised, as an electoral bribe, to lift the incomes of the poorer farmers. Which was a blatant lie given the way it was structured.

Why do you claim the Abhisit plan didn't help small farmers? Are you referring to those who didn't sell their rice, which excluded them from both schemes?

The previous plan from Thaksin was the same as that offered by Yingluk. Despite evidence it was a miserable failure with mounting stocks, rife with corruption and very little of the high cost was heading to the claimed intended recipients. That it was re-instated without any attempt at improving efficiency or reducing its faults, and with increased prices TYVM Yingluk (an off the cuff statement at an electoral rally) is one of the main complaints about it.

BTW whatever you do don't increase efficiency and get rid of those tiny plots of land.

but money did flow to the poor farmers.

Some people don't understand basic math. Poor farmers got more money for their rice. The amount of the total which "poor farmers" received was correspondingly small because they don't produce as much rice...

Jeez, that's kindergarten math, guy...

And it would be the same for the Abhisit plan as well, and the various Thaksin programs before that.

In addition, the plan was advertised to help rice farmers, not just poor ones. But that is a nice try to spin it and then call it an electoral "lie" ... As I recall the 2011 campaigns, there were many platform policies from all of the parties, including the PTP and the Dems. And I recall the Dems having their own rice scheme, etc... It was pretty clear at the time (before the election) that the PTP had the more popular platform ... And the election results bore that out. The rice program was one of many.

And if you want to call having a platform and promising to do something for the people "vote-buying" then go ahead.... I have a lot of ROFL icons for you.

As for combining tiny plots, have you ever been up here in Isaan?

I like and support small family farms. I find them, along with family businesses to be an extremely important part of a town's social fabric. I want to see them be more efficient, and more profitable, for sure. The point about the TDRI moron is that he clearly had no clue about rice farming or about improving the life of the small farmer. His answer was to turn them into a smaller number of bigger farmers. That's the kind of ideas which typically come from out-of-touch "think tanks".

[ginjag]

You say the banks refused to lend the government the money.

What you deliberately don't mention is that all Thai banks operate within various laws, policies, rules, and with an expectation of high ethics and morals. And within well known risk parameters.

Just one item you omit is that many if not all of the banks concerned would never attach any risk or break laws and therefore immediately get offside' with their depositors /perhaps start a run on deposits.

Add: numerous past seniors of one bank that did this just got 18 years in jail.

and what you deliberately don't mention is the money flowed when the guys with the GUNS too took over

and he forgot the active campaign of intimidation by the PDRC...

oops.

OOOps 3 times---4am parliament vote the final countdown to them Shins backed controllers of the Thai government. maybe manipulators is a better word

[scorecard]

actually, I sought out 'the bits" which explained how EJ made a completely inaccurate statement.

I did not express my own opinion on the rice scheme, not this one nor previous programs. I could, but there is seldom the chance to do so in the current news environment.

But to your point, I agree that this program did not deliver much benefit to smaller (poorer) farmers. Neither did the plan under Abhisit. Nor did the previous plans from the 'devil in dubai'...

I do believe that agricultural subsidies are needed in a volatile commodities market. I also think that nearly every government in the world caters to their agro-industrial base when they create subsidies and does not take the time or the effort to create programs which will support specific goals within society, eg: support small, local farms... The same could be said for supporting small, local businesses, small, local schools, etc, ...

Please note that I am discussing Thailand, but also other countries. I see it as a problem which occurs often. As a Thai example, I recently came across a report which proposed (as a solution) that the farmers combine smaller plots into larger plots and use mechanisation to improve efficiency. I believe this moron was also from the TDRI. His point makes it clear that he has no idea about rice farming out here in the wilds, nor does he have the interests of the small farmer in mind - his 'solution' would just squash the small farmer and turn him into a hired-hand or a 'former' farmer.

But this plan was advertised, as an electoral bribe, to lift the incomes of the poorer farmers. Which was a blatant lie given the way it was structured.

Why do you claim the Abhisit plan didn't help small farmers? Are you referring to those who didn't sell their rice, which excluded them from both schemes?

The previous plan from Thaksin was the same as that offered by Yingluk. Despite evidence it was a miserable failure with mounting stocks, rife with corruption and very little of the high cost was heading to the claimed intended recipients. That it was re-instated without any attempt at improving efficiency or reducing its faults, and with increased prices TYVM Yingluk (an off the cuff statement at an electoral rally) is one of the main complaints about it.

BTW whatever you do don't increase efficiency and get rid of those tiny plots of land.

but money did flow to the poor farmers.

Some people don't understand basic math. Poor farmers got more money for their rice. The amount of the total which "poor farmers" received was correspondingly small because they don't produce as much rice...

Jeez, that's kindergarten math, guy...

And it would be the same for the Abhisit plan as well, and the various Thaksin programs before that.

In addition, the plan was advertised to help rice farmers, not just poor ones. But that is a nice try to spin it and then call it an electoral "lie" ... As I recall the 2011 campaigns, there were many platform policies from all of the parties, including the PTP and the Dems. And I recall the Dems having their own rice scheme, etc... It was pretty clear at the time (before the election) that the PTP had the more popular platform ... And the election results bore that out. The rice program was one of many.

And if you want to call having a platform and promising to do something for the people "vote-buying" then go ahead.... I have a lot of ROFL icons for you.

As for combining tiny plots, have you ever been up here in Isaan?

I like and support small family farms. I find them, along with family businesses to be an extremely important part of a town's social fabric. I want to see them be more efficient, and more profitable, for sure. The point about the TDRI moron is that he clearly had no clue about rice farming or about improving the life of the small farmer. His answer was to turn them into a smaller number of bigger farmers. That's the kind of ideas which typically come from out-of-touch "think tanks".

OK you had your rant, the reality is that in some circumstances very small farms can no longer produce the income to support modern day living, education for the children etc.

Sad but true.

[scorecard]

tell me why the farmers were pissed off then and some commited suicide. they hadn't recieved any money in a long time before the banks weren't allowed to pay anymore.

I can tell you... want to listen? (probably not)... the banks refused to lend the government money to pay the farmers but MIRACULOUSLY did when the guys with the guns took over - amart rak amart

would be more honest to start their own political party called ARA and try and get elected

You say the banks refused to lend the government the money.

What you deliberately don't mention is that all Thai banks operate within various laws, policies, rules, and with an expectation of high ethics and morals. And within well known risk parameters.

Just one item you omit is that many if not all of the banks concerned would never attach any risk or break laws and therefore immediately get offside' with their depositors /perhaps start a run on deposits.

Add: numerous past seniors of one bank that did this just got 18 years in jail.

and what you deliberately don't mention is the money flowed when the guys with the GUNS too took over

And you continue to push a line, which you often do (with little credibility), which avoids the whole details.

Seems to be your trademark.

[MiKT]

Disgraceful witch-hunt you got criminal evidence of corruption? arrest her! not make up laws and rules as you go everyone I speak to knows it's vengeance 'Thai Style'

nothing wrong with rice subsidies happens in all countries go look up Europe (Common Agriculcutral Policy) or American farmer subsidies

I wonder how, in your little world, you reconcile the fact that of the 700 billion or whatever, over 500 billion never made it to the farmers. Where do you think it might have gone ?. Did the spirits who live under your bed take it ?.

I don't suppose it bothers you too much. That's why we have other people running the country now.

We've seen plenty of vengeance - Thai Style, at the end of an M79. It's about time the medieval throwbacks joined the rest of the world in the 21st century. This is a start - but only a start.

You are very frightening because your insight and knowledge is so limited but, thankfully, you have no say. 700 billion? 500 billion? evidence? facts? you think someone took it? say WHO? links? FACTS? or are you making it all up?

Ignorance is no defence but, in your case, you do try to present it as such

if you bothered to read the OP you would know there are 60000 pages of evidence

60,000 pages of "evidence". Oh yes, and I know where you can get some pumpkins.

[MiKT]

tell me why the farmers were pissed off then and some commited suicide. they hadn't recieved any money in a long time before the banks weren't allowed to pay anymore.

I can tell you... want to listen? (probably not)... the banks refused to lend the government money to pay the farmers but MIRACULOUSLY did when the guys with the guns took over - amart rak amart

would be more honest to start their own political party called ARA and try and get elected

You say the banks refused to lend the government the money.

What you deliberately don't mention is that all Thai banks operate within various laws, policies, rules, and with an expectation of high ethics and morals. And within well known risk parameters.

Just one item you omit is that many if not all of the banks concerned would never attach any risk or break laws and therefore immediately get offside' with their depositors /perhaps start a run on deposits.

Add: numerous past seniors of one bank that did this just got 18 years in jail.

You obviously know little about Thai banks or the situation, Suthep and his thugs stopped the banks paying the farmers and physically prevented Red shirts from depositing money to help the farmers. The whole thing is a fairy tale set-up to discredit political opponents. LKY would be proud of them. Where did the missing money go you may well ask? Possibly to help Suthep pay the income tax on all the money he conned out of stary eyed teenagers strutting about like a fat Justin Beber rattling a beggers tin can.

[mikemac]

actually, I sought out 'the bits" which explained how EJ made a completely inaccurate statement.

I did not express my own opinion on the rice scheme, not this one nor previous programs. I could, but there is seldom the chance to do so in the current news environment.

But to your point, I agree that this program did not deliver much benefit to smaller (poorer) farmers. Neither did the plan under Abhisit. Nor did the previous plans from the 'devil in dubai'...

I do believe that agricultural subsidies are needed in a volatile commodities market. I also think that nearly every government in the world caters to their agro-industrial base when they create subsidies and does not take the time or the effort to create programs which will support specific goals within society, eg: support small, local farms... The same could be said for supporting small, local businesses, small, local schools, etc, ...

Please note that I am discussing Thailand, but also other countries. I see it as a problem which occurs often. As a Thai example, I recently came across a report which proposed (as a solution) that the farmers combine smaller plots into larger plots and use mechanisation to improve efficiency. I believe this moron was also from the TDRI. His point makes it clear that he has no idea about rice farming out here in the wilds, nor does he have the interests of the small farmer in mind - his 'solution' would just squash the small farmer and turn him into a hired-hand or a 'former' farmer.

But this plan was advertised, as an electoral bribe, to lift the incomes of the poorer farmers. Which was a blatant lie given the way it was structured.

Why do you claim the Abhisit plan didn't help small farmers? Are you referring to those who didn't sell their rice, which excluded them from both schemes?

The previous plan from Thaksin was the same as that offered by Yingluk. Despite evidence it was a miserable failure with mounting stocks, rife with corruption and very little of the high cost was heading to the claimed intended recipients. That it was re-instated without any attempt at improving efficiency or reducing its faults, and with increased prices TYVM Yingluk (an off the cuff statement at an electoral rally) is one of the main complaints about it.

BTW whatever you do don't increase efficiency and get rid of those tiny plots of land.

but money did flow to the poor farmers.

Some people don't understand basic math. Poor farmers got more money for their rice. The amount of the total which "poor farmers" received was correspondingly small because they don't produce as much rice...

Jeez, that's kindergarten math, guy...

And it would be the same for the Abhisit plan as well, and the various Thaksin programs before that.

In addition, the plan was advertised to help rice farmers, not just poor ones. But that is a nice try to spin it and then call it an electoral "lie" ... As I recall the 2011 campaigns, there were many platform policies from all of the parties, including the PTP and the Dems. And I recall the Dems having their own rice scheme, etc... It was pretty clear at the time (before the election) that the PTP had the more popular platform ... And the election results bore that out. The rice program was one of many.

And if you want to call having a platform and promising to do something for the people "vote-buying" then go ahead.... I have a lot of ROFL icons for you.

As for combining tiny plots, have you ever been up here in Isaan?

I like and support small family farms. I find them, along with family businesses to be an extremely important part of a town's social fabric. I want to see them be more efficient, and more profitable, for sure. The point about the TDRI moron is that he clearly had no clue about rice farming or about improving the life of the small farmer. His answer was to turn them into a smaller number of bigger farmers. That's the kind of ideas which typically come from out-of-touch "think tanks".

................"but money did flow to the poor farmers.

Some people don't understand basic math. Poor farmers got more money for their rice. The amount of the total which "poor farmers" received was correspondingly small because they don't produce as much rice...

Jeez, that's kindergarten math, guy..."....................

Poor farmers got more money for their rice. ???

tb, I don't know if you live in Thailand or not, and if you do whether or not you have anything whatsoever to do with the rice farming game, but that was a bit silly to say that.

For a start the vast majority of the poor farmers did not produce enough rice to qualify for the rice scam, so they were in fact lucky. They did not receive a higher price per tonne for their crop but they did not get scammed either.

Some farmers who did qualify for it thought they would cash in on it, make a lot of money for their crop, and were burned by not being paid on time. This led to being forced into borrowing money, big financial problems, and in some cases suicide.

My sister-in-law in Surin was the only one in her family to use the rice scheme and she had to wait a long time before she was paid.

And lastly, I was in Surin late in 2014 when the crop was harvested and the farmers were upset because they received a lot less than they expected for their crops. They blamed Yingluck and the PTP for that.

Please stop trying to convince people that the rice pledging scheme benefited poor farmers. It did not, and as I said it was followed up with lower prices per tonne, for all farmers.

[Prbkk]

It's sad. She came and she gave without taking but they sent her away

Edited September 2, 2015 by Prbkk

[mikemac]

It's sad. She came and she gave without taking but they sent her away

I hope you were tongue in cheek when you wrote that masterpiece Prbkk !

[scorecard]

tell me why the farmers were pissed off then and some commited suicide. they hadn't recieved any money in a long time before the banks weren't allowed to pay anymore.

I can tell you... want to listen? (probably not)... the banks refused to lend the government money to pay the farmers but MIRACULOUSLY did when the guys with the guns took over - amart rak amart

would be more honest to start their own political party called ARA and try and get elected

You say the banks refused to lend the government the money.

What you deliberately don't mention is that all Thai banks operate within various laws, policies, rules, and with an expectation of high ethics and morals. And within well known risk parameters.

Just one item you omit is that many if not all of the banks concerned would never attach any risk or break laws and therefore immediately get offside' with their depositors /perhaps start a run on deposits.

Add: numerous past seniors of one bank that did this just got 18 years in jail.

You obviously know little about Thai banks or the situation, Suthep and his thugs stopped the banks paying the farmers and physically prevented Red shirts from depositing money to help the farmers. The whole thing is a fairy tale set-up to discredit political opponents. LKY would be proud of them. Where did the missing money go you may well ask? Possibly to help Suthep pay the income tax on all the money he conned out of stary eyed teenagers strutting about like a fat Justin Beber rattling a beggers tin can.

Your post is way off the truth, errors of fact, made up silly stories and multiple twists, but no doubt it suits your purpose.

[candide]

tell me why the farmers were pissed off then and some commited suicide. they hadn't recieved any money in a long time before the banks weren't allowed to pay anymore.

I can tell you... want to listen? (probably not)... the banks refused to lend the government money to pay the farmers but MIRACULOUSLY did when the guys with the guns took over - amart rak amart

would be more honest to start their own political party called ARA and try and get elected

You say the banks refused to lend the government the money.

What you deliberately don't mention is that all Thai banks operate within various laws, policies, rules, and with an expectation of high ethics and morals. And within well known risk parameters.

Just one item you omit is that many if not all of the banks concerned would never attach any risk or break laws and therefore immediately get offside' with their depositors /perhaps start a run on deposits.

Add: numerous past seniors of one bank that did this just got 18 years in jail.

You obviously know little about Thai banks or the situation, Suthep and his thugs stopped the banks paying the farmers and physically prevented Red shirts from depositing money to help the farmers. The whole thing is a fairy tale set-up to discredit political opponents. LKY would be proud of them. Where did the missing money go you may well ask? Possibly to help Suthep pay the income tax on all the money he conned out of stary eyed teenagers strutting about like a fat Justin Beber rattling a beggers tin can.

Your post is way off the truth, errors of fact, made up silly stories and multiple twists, but no doubt it suits your purpose.

"He then warned the state bank that it would face shutdown if it lends to the government through whatever channel be it is a loan auction.

Commercial banks are also warned of any channel to extend rice loan to the caretaker government, possibly this week, with threat that they be shut down by protesters."

englishnews.thaipbs.or.th/pdrc-leader-warns-banks-rice-loans-government

[mikemac]

I can tell you... want to listen? (probably not)... the banks refused to lend the government money to pay the farmers but MIRACULOUSLY did when the guys with the guns took over - amart rak amart

would be more honest to start their own political party called ARA and try and get elected

You say the banks refused to lend the government the money.

What you deliberately don't mention is that all Thai banks operate within various laws, policies, rules, and with an expectation of high ethics and morals. And within well known risk parameters.

Just one item you omit is that many if not all of the banks concerned would never attach any risk or break laws and therefore immediately get offside' with their depositors /perhaps start a run on deposits.

Add: numerous past seniors of one bank that did this just got 18 years in jail.

and what you deliberately don't mention is the money flowed when the guys with the GUNS too took over

And you continue to push a line, which you often do (with little credibility), which avoids the whole details.

Seems to be your trademark.

Trademark ? I thought he was the "decoy", drawing attention away from bs the other Shin lovers were posting !

[billd766]

tell me why the farmers were pissed off then and some commited suicide. they hadn't recieved any money in a long time before the banks weren't allowed to pay anymore.

I can tell you... want to listen? (probably not)... the banks refused to lend the government money to pay the farmers but MIRACULOUSLY did when the guys with the guns took over - amart rak amart

would be more honest to start their own political party called ARA and try and get elected

I could explain if you cared to listen.

Under the law at that time it was illegal for any caretaker government of ANY colour or flavour (PTP or Democrats et al) to increase the national debt for the caretaker government to increase the national debt in case they don't get back into power.

Granted that the way Suthep did it was an overkill but he was correct to remind the banks of the law that they must obey.

What the current government did to pay the farmers was something out of the ordinary and that could be tested on a change of government whenever that may be.

[tomacht8]

No theft in the Rice scam?
read this:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/791405-rice-damage-charge-filed/

Previously, the Thailand Development Research Institute estimated that the pledging programme had cost the country Bt660 billion.

It further alleged that about one-sixth of that cost, or Bt123 billion, went to politicians involved in the rice-subsidy project.

This was not a subsidy, but was a systematically planned theft of taxpayers money.

Unfortunately the prosecutors and courts are here too slow and flabby to get back the embezzled money.

With 123.000.000.000 Baht all schools in the country could be modernized.

Those responsible have cheated the children of this country to get better education opportunities.

And those who try to justify this deception in a hairsplitting manner, should be ashamed.

[billd766]

tell me why the farmers were pissed off then and some commited suicide. they hadn't recieved any money in a long time before the banks weren't allowed to pay anymore.

I can tell you... want to listen? (probably not)... the banks refused to lend the government money to pay the farmers but MIRACULOUSLY did when the guys with the guns took over - amart rak amart

would be more honest to start their own political party called ARA and try and get elected

You say the banks refused to lend the government the money.

What you deliberately don't mention is that all Thai banks operate within various laws, policies, rules, and with an expectation of high ethics and morals. And within well known risk parameters.

Just one item you omit is that many if not all of the banks concerned would never attach any risk or break laws and therefore immediately get offside' with their depositors /perhaps start a run on deposits.

Add: numerous past seniors of one bank that did this just got 18 years in jail.

You obviously know little about Thai banks or the situation, Suthep and his thugs stopped the banks paying the farmers and physically prevented Red shirts from depositing money to help the farmers. The whole thing is a fairy tale set-up to discredit political opponents. LKY would be proud of them. Where did the missing money go you may well ask? Possibly to help Suthep pay the income tax on all the money he conned out of starry eyed teenagers strutting about like a fat Justin Beber rattling a beggars tin can.

If I have read your post correctly (and I may have got it wrong) what you have said is that Suthep and his thugs (your words and not mine) put people in EVERY branch of EVERY bank in the country to physically prevent the Red Shirts from depositing money to help the poor farmers.

If I have misread or misunderstood what you have written please explain to me where I am incorrect. I am sure you have the links or references to prove me wrong.

AFAIK the money that Suthep collected went to the farmers or to his supporters. Now once again if I am incorrect please tell me where and of course provide some links or references to confirm what you have said.

[candide]

No theft in the Rice scam?

read this:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/791405-rice-damage-charge-filed/

Previously, the Thailand Development Research Institute estimated that the pledging programme had cost the country Bt660 billion.

It further alleged that about one-sixth of that cost, or Bt123 billion, went to politicians involved in the rice-subsidy project.

This was not a subsidy, but was a systematically planned theft of taxpayers money.

Unfortunately the prosecutors and courts are here too slow and flabby to get back the embezzled money.

With 123.000.000.000 Baht all schools in the country could be modernized.

Those responsible have cheated the children of this country to get better education opportunities.

And those who try to justify this deception in a hairsplitting manner, should be ashamed.

This figure is not based on investigation, it's an estimate from their so-called model and is obviously politically biased. The figures displayed after investigation (i.e. in judicial investigation) don't fit with it.

As far as I know (please add more if you have other proven cases involving politicians), we only have the so-called fake g-to-g deals worth around THB 600 million (the deal, not the fraud amount). It's not been judged and I don't think they have shown proof of payment to politicians yet.

[tomacht8]

No theft in the Rice scam?

read this:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/791405-rice-damage-charge-filed/

Previously, the Thailand Development Research Institute estimated that the pledging programme had cost the country Bt660 billion.

It further alleged that about one-sixth of that cost, or Bt123 billion, went to politicians involved in the rice-subsidy project.

This was not a subsidy, but was a systematically planned theft of taxpayers money.

Unfortunately the prosecutors and courts are here too slow and flabby to get back the embezzled money.

With 123.000.000.000 Baht all schools in the country could be modernized.

Those responsible have cheated the children of this country to get better education opportunities.

And those who try to justify this deception in a hairsplitting manner, should be ashamed.

This figure is not based on investigation, it's an estimate from their so-called model and is obviously politically biased. The figures displayed after investigation (i.e. in judicial investigation) don't fit with it.

As far as I know (please add more if you have other proven cases involving politicians), we only have the so-called fake g-to-g deals worth around THB 600 million (the deal, not the fraud amount). It's not been judged and I don't think they have shown proof of payment to politicians yet.

If these numbers would be based on current investigations/court actions, I would applaud the prosecutors and the courts.

Corruption unfortunately is not confined to one political direction.

No this figures are not "obviously politically biased".

One-sixth as a percentage of corruption, I think it is even too low.

If the investigating authorities were not so lazy and would not be so linked with the thieves , the people of this country could not be so easily stolen.

It does not matter who is in power, whether the red, yellow, green or whatever color.

As long as the money-hungry corrupt people with impunity allowed to keep their booty here, the honest people are the idiots.

I hope there is in the future a joint movement in Thailand of honest people, regardless of t-shirt colors, which have the muzzle full of thieves in the civil service.

Edited September 2, 2015 by tomacht8

[Thai at Heart]

No theft in the Rice scam?

read this:

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/791405-rice-damage-charge-filed/

Previously, the Thailand Development Research Institute estimated that the pledging programme had cost the country Bt660 billion.

It further alleged that about one-sixth of that cost, or Bt123 billion, went to politicians involved in the rice-subsidy project.

This was not a subsidy, but was a systematically planned theft of taxpayers money.

Unfortunately the prosecutors and courts are here too slow and flabby to get back the embezzled money.

With 123.000.000.000 Baht all schools in the country could be modernized.

Those responsible have cheated the children of this country to get better education opportunities.

And those who try to justify this deception in a hairsplitting manner, should be ashamed.

This figure is not based on investigation, it's an estimate from their so-called model and is obviously politically biased. The figures displayed after investigation (i.e. in judicial investigation) don't fit with it.

As far as I know (please add more if you have other proven cases involving politicians), we only have the so-called fake g-to-g deals worth around THB 600 million (the deal, not the fraud amount). It's not been judged and I don't think they have shown proof of payment to politicians yet.

If these numbers would be based on current investigations/court actions, I would applaud the prosecutors and the courts.

Corruption unfortunately is not confined to one political direction.

No this figures are not "obviously politically biased".

One-sixth as a percentage of corruption, I think it is even too low.

If the investigating authorities were not so lazy and would not be so linked with the thieves , the people of this country could not be so easily stolen.

It does not matter who is in power, whether the red, yellow, green or whatever color.

As long as the money-hungry corrupt people with impunity allowed to keep their booty here, the honest people are the idiots.

I hope there is in the future a joint movement in Thailand of honest people, regardless of t-shirt colors, which have the muzzle full of thieves in the civil service.

Are u seriously telling me that the junta isn't able to pin 4bn USD worth of theft on any politician? Oh please.

Accept that that figure is a complete thumbsuck and move on. There isn't proof of politicians stealing 125bn, just surmises and estimates. How did they steal it if it's so obvious.