How to save the Thai economy: Opinion

[lostoday]

Junta-huggers! Is that like coup apologists? Wow, where do you guys dream this stuff up!!

After Thaksin, Samak and Yingluck I would support Kermit the Frog if he becomes PM.

No one can be as bad as these 3.....Two are already officially criminals and Yingluck also soon.

Yes, I imagine you would. I think we all understand that.

But is what he said correct or not?

As for Yingluck she should not be in the equation yet until the trial has been completed and the verdict, one way or another is confirmed.

Off topic post another attempt to divert the topic to another topic.

[billd766]

Wow I had no idea that I was so powerful and helped Suthep and the general take over the country. Do you think I will get a medal?

Now glenmohr I will ask you the same question that I asked peterjackson (who still has not replied).

Where did I say that this government was legitimate apart from saying that they have been accepted by the highest person in the land? If he accepted them then that makes them legitimate, unless you think you and your words are more impotant to the Thai people than his are.

Is it against the criminal code of Thailand for a convicted criminal fugitive to make his sister the PM of Thailand and then run the country by Skype and phone calls. Do you think it is legitimate for ministers of state, the PM herself (family visits aside), MPs of the ruling party at the time, High ranking police officers and some senior army officers as well to visit the fugitive in many palces in the world?

There are very few posters on TVF who can have ANY effect on democracy or free speech in Thailand as we(and I include myself) have NO say in the way that Thailand is run.

You have no idea of who I am and what I believe in at all.

What you have said (in your own words)

quote" I believe the current ruler should resign, hand Thailand over to the Thai people, which should include the rural portion of the population, and retire back to his barracks."

So you belive that you have a right to an opinion but that I do not have that same right.

Have you personally done a survey of even 0.001% of the Thai people across the whole country and asked them how they feel about the current status?

I agree that the General should open up his bank accounts to scrutiny in the same way that ALL Thai politicians over the last 30 or 40 years should do so, That however may be embarrasing for many of them.

Do you realise that the fugitives fortune increased by 450% whilst his sister was the nominal PM?

What is your concept of democracy. The sort of democracy where all people can speak freely, yet you accuse me of arrogance for expressing my opinion.

You really have no idea about me at all.

quote "You Sir ,need to examine your own arrogance in coming to a country and giving support to a wicked regime against the wishes of the local populations."

What or who gives you the right to speak for all the wishes of the local populations"?

Off topic nothing to do with the OP.

I was responding to another poster, Am I not allowed to do that?

If you have a problem please complain to the moderators. I am quite happy to listen to them and take their advice.

[lostoday]

Wow I had no idea that I was so powerful and helped Suthep and the general take over the country. Do you think I will get a medal?

Now glenmohr I will ask you the same question that I asked peterjackson (who still has not replied).

Where did I say that this government was legitimate apart from saying that they have been accepted by the highest person in the land? If he accepted them then that makes them legitimate, unless you think you and your words are more impotant to the Thai people than his are.

Is it against the criminal code of Thailand for a convicted criminal fugitive to make his sister the PM of Thailand and then run the country by Skype and phone calls. Do you think it is legitimate for ministers of state, the PM herself (family visits aside), MPs of the ruling party at the time, High ranking police officers and some senior army officers as well to visit the fugitive in many palces in the world?

There are very few posters on TVF who can have ANY effect on democracy or free speech in Thailand as we(and I include myself) have NO say in the way that Thailand is run.

You have no idea of who I am and what I believe in at all.

What you have said (in your own words)

quote" I believe the current ruler should resign, hand Thailand over to the Thai people, which should include the rural portion of the population, and retire back to his barracks."

So you belive that you have a right to an opinion but that I do not have that same right.

Have you personally done a survey of even 0.001% of the Thai people across the whole country and asked them how they feel about the current status?

I agree that the General should open up his bank accounts to scrutiny in the same way that ALL Thai politicians over the last 30 or 40 years should do so, That however may be embarrasing for many of them.

Do you realise that the fugitives fortune increased by 450% whilst his sister was the nominal PM?

What is your concept of democracy. The sort of democracy where all people can speak freely, yet you accuse me of arrogance for expressing my opinion.

You really have no idea about me at all.

quote "You Sir ,need to examine your own arrogance in coming to a country and giving support to a wicked regime against the wishes of the local populations."

What or who gives you the right to speak for all the wishes of the local populations"?

Off topic nothing to do with the OP.

I was responding to another poster, Am I not allowed to do that?

If you have a problem please complain to the moderators. I am quite happy to listen to them and take their advice.

Try posting something on topic instead of trying to hijack the thread.

[Jon Wetherall]

If you put things into perspective, the rice scheme is really a small agriculture subsidy in the overall public spending. Thailand averages 2.5T B yearly budget of which 80% goes to public spending. If 72% are spent for Bangkok and outer Bangkok, that amount dwarf agriculture schemes. Too much public spending is wasted on the already well off 17% of the population. Now we understand why the poorer northern folks want a bigger say in choosing their leaders.

Indeed, it was an agricultural subsidy. Subsidies always lose money, but it's a good pretext for convicting Yingluck and banning a Shinawatra from politics for life.

It's really hard to believe sometimes, but these retards were people once. I can't imagine what happened to them to change them into what they are now. Actually, that's not true. I know exactly what happened to them.

[gandalf12]

Competition is a basis for all business. Thailand needs to produce Thai products that compete with similar products produced overseas

[heybruce]

From the OP and the real crux of the problem, "The generals’ economic policy is hampered by concern for their core constituents, the Bangkok-based establishment: a patronage network among the bureaucracy, the judiciary, the army, business elites and the palace. That network has created staggering inequality: Just 0.1 percent of Thais hold nearly half of the country’s total wealth, according to a 2012 study by the National Economics and Social Development Board, the state economic planning agency."

End of quote

PS don't get angry with me I didn't write the above it was posted by Webfact/Thaivisa and written by the NYT.

In scanning the posts up to this point, I get the impression that you are one of the few, and perhaps the only one, who read the entire article. Well done, and don't let the idiots get you down.

I personally liked this part, because I've been using the same information and source http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2012/05/10/thailand-public-finance-management-review-report since the coup:

"The Thai state spent more than 72 percent of public funds in greater Bangkok, where only 17 percent of Thais lived, according to 2012 figures from the World Bank, the most recent data available."

[Srikcir]

It's growing 3%. How much more do they want?

In January 2015 Commerce Minister General Chatchai Sarikulya said: "The government is confident that the Thai economy will grow by 4 per cent this year, driven by many stimulus strategies, as well as closer cooperation between government and private sector."

Economists now predict 2.5%-3% if Somkid's short-term stimulus package works. Thailand will otherwise face at best a 2.5% growth rate or worse due to unforeseen events such as the Shrine bombing and EU/USA sanctions on Thailand imports.

It's not a matter of how much more they want but how little they will get.

[Thai at Heart]

It's growing 3%. How much more do they want?

In January 2015 Commerce Minister General Chatchai Sarikulya said: "The government is confident that the Thai economy will grow by 4 per cent this year, driven by many stimulus strategies, as well as closer cooperation between government and private sector."

Economists now predict 2.5%-3% if Somkid's short-term stimulus package works. Thailand will otherwise face at best a 2.5% growth rate or worse due to unforeseen events such as the Shrine bombing and EU/USA sanctions on Thailand imports.

It's not a matter of how much more they want but how little they will get.

Well, everyone is talking as though 3% is some sort of catastrophic collapse.

It's positive by a decent margin. Actually, if they get 3% in this situation it will be outstanding. Just look at Brazil.

[Praematura]

Until the baht is devalued companies are deferring investment to see how bad it gets. China devalued followed by Vietnam and Malaysia. Commodity exports here already couldn't be able to compete.

[Praematura]

It's growing 3%. How much more do they want?

In January 2015 Commerce Minister General Chatchai Sarikulya said: "The government is confident that the Thai economy will grow by 4 per cent this year, driven by many stimulus strategies, as well as closer cooperation between government and private sector."

Economists now predict 2.5%-3% if Somkid's short-term stimulus package works. Thailand will otherwise face at best a 2.5% growth rate or worse due to unforeseen events such as the Shrine bombing and EU/USA sanctions on Thailand imports.

It's not a matter of how much more they want but how little they will get.

Well, everyone is talking as though 3% is some sort of catastrophic collapse.

It's positive by a decent margin. Actually, if they get 3% in this situation it will be outstanding. Just look at Brazil.

Compare to Thailand's neighbors who all have much higher than 2-3% growth.

[chiang mai]

This could be a reasonable discussion, were it not for posters constantly being told by a would be mod. that comments are off topic!

[NOC]

Bring in experts from outside as advisers. Economists and social engineers badly needed to guide military rulers who really don't have a clue.

Haven't you ever noticed that they like people to come here and educate them. (read: share corporate secrets)

Then they steal they idea and talk bad about the people who taught them.

If they really want to 'save the Thai economy', they need to do the following. It's not brain surgery.

Repel the criminal part of the defamation laws.

Allow non-Thai lawyers to practice here.

Overhaul the visa system and make it practical for long term expats.

Allow foreigners to own land.

Allow foreigners to own 100% of their investments, w/out the 4 employee per work permit requirement.

Streamline the business process.

Remove all costs for closing a business. (an expense saddled upon the business owners to create an income stream)

Overhaul the education system so there will be qualified people for the jobs.

Import and staff psychiatrists that the Thai populace can speak with for free, so they can somehow, over time, acknowledge and learn from their many, many mistakes.

[chiang mai]

Wow, how arrogant is that, one suspects self serving also.

You may not like the degree to which Thailand has developed and you may wish it were at a future point that was closer to that of your home country, but making changes that suit the foreigner and make his/her life easier/better doesn't really help the 35 million rural nationals who are native to Thailand.

[lostoday]

This could be a reasonable discussion, were it not for posters constantly being told by a would be mod. that comments are off topic!

OP, "he only way to jolt Thailand out of its economic stagnation is to implement two measures that are sure to upset the Bangkok-based traditional elites: dramatically raise rural incomes (to spur domestic consumption) and aggressively devalue the baht (to boost exports)."

[lostoday]

Bring in experts from outside as advisers. Economists and social engineers badly needed to guide military rulers who really don't have a clue.

Haven't you ever noticed that they like people to come here and educate them. (read: share corporate secrets)

Then they steal they idea and talk bad about the people who taught them.

If they really want to 'save the Thai economy', they need to do the following. It's not brain surgery.

Repel the criminal part of the defamation laws.

Allow non-Thai lawyers to practice here.

Overhaul the visa system and make it practical for long term expats.

Allow foreigners to own land.

Allow foreigners to own 100% of their investments, w/out the 4 employee per work permit requirement.

Streamline the business process.

Remove all costs for closing a business. (an expense saddled upon the business owners to create an income stream)

Overhaul the education system so there will be qualified people for the jobs.

Import and staff psychiatrists that the Thai populace can speak with for free, so they can somehow, over time, acknowledge and learn from their many, many mistakes.

The OP suggests none of these things and their discussion is off topic maybe you should start your own topic. What the OP does suggest is "Devaluing the baht — by, say, 20 percent — also is necessary, to stimulate exports of goods such as rice, rubber, electronics and cars. The standard risks of devaluation would be minimal: Thailand has a tiny stock of foreign-denominated debt, and prices for consumer goods are falling. Yet the Bank of Thailand, the central bank, has been reluctant to significantly weaken the baht. The power elites, facing a sluggish economy at home, have been investing overseas, incurring liabilities in foreign currency; they want to buy their dollars for cheap."

[lostoday]

Wow, how arrogant is that, one suspects self serving also.

You may not like the degree to which Thailand has developed and you may wish it were at a future point that was closer to that of your home country, but making changes that suit the foreigner and make his/her life easier/better doesn't really help the 35 million rural nationals who are native to Thailand.

Your post has nothing to do with the topic but the OP does say, "In a time of prosperity, the Prayuth government might have been able to keep pleasing its main supporters without scuttling the economy. Not these days. Last weekend the junta’s legitimacy took another hit when its proxies voted down its own draft constitution — a move widely seen as a ploy to delay elections that had been planned for early 2016 and extend the generals’ rule."

[chiang mai]

If anyone thinks the BOT is propping up THB to help the elite they need serious help. BOT has long had a stated policy of intervening in markets to smooth out the rise and/or decline of THB so as to aid exporters and their ability to forecast cost/profit and that is exactly what they are doing currently, in line with the managed float policy.

[chiang mai]

Wow, how arrogant is that, one suspects self serving also.

You may not like the degree to which Thailand has developed and you may wish it were at a future point that was closer to that of your home country, but making changes that suit the foreigner and make his/her life easier/better doesn't really help the 35 million rural nationals who are native to Thailand.

Your post has nothing to do with the topic but the OP does say, "In a time of prosperity, the Prayuth government might have been able to keep pleasing its main supporters without scuttling the economy. Not these days. Last weekend the junta’s legitimacy took another hit when its proxies voted down its own draft constitution — a move widely seen as a ploy to delay elections that had been planned for early 2016 and extend the generals’ rule."

If you don't like it, go tell a real Moderator, I will post as I see fit!

[lostoday]

If anyone thinks the BOT is propping up THB to help the elite they need serious help. BOT has long had a stated policy of intervening in markets to smooth out the rise and/or decline of THB so as to aid exporters and their ability to forecast cost/profit and that is exactly what they are doing currently, in line with the managed float policy.

OP "The Bangkok-based establishment also fears the political implications of a devaluation. When the baht collapsed in 1997, many fortunes were wiped out. Then the whole economy collapsed, discrediting the traditional elites’ stewardship. That in turn led to the adoption of a liberal constitution that restrained their political power and paved the way for the rise of Mr. Thaksin, whose progressive policies weakened their grip even more."

[chiang mai]

The problem with cutting interest rates is that it increases lending/debt, especially among the poor and government spending on infrastructure projects at this stage is likely too late to be beneficial, simply, it would take too long for those funds to cycle into the economy. One suspects one of the main answers might be to to prop up the rural poor whilst waiting for central spending to kick in, further tax incentives to business may also add some value.

[NOC]

Wow, how arrogant is that, one suspects self serving also.

You may not like the degree to which Thailand has developed and you may wish it were at a future point that was closer to that of your home country, but making changes that suit the foreigner and make his/her life easier/better doesn't really help the 35 million rural nationals who are native to Thailand.

It rather basic; they will learn over time through osmosis.

In no way to I wish it were like 'my home country'. I just wish it were more fair, logical and intelligent, for them as much as for me/others.

Edited September 11, 2015 by NOC

[NOC]

The problem with cutting interest rates is that it increases lending/debt, especially among the poor and government spending on infrastructure projects at this stage is likely too late to be beneficial, simply, it would take too long for those funds to cycle into the economy. One suspects one of the main answers might be to to prop up the rural poor whilst waiting for central spending to kick in, further tax incentives to business may also add some value.

Government spending, through debt, is just a transfer of wealth to a banker somewhere.

The best investment is in yourself, through education.

Mirroring the success of others, and avoiding their mistakes, is a smart play.

[chiang mai]

Wow, how arrogant is that, one suspects self serving also.

You may not like the degree to which Thailand has developed and you may wish it were at a future point that was closer to that of your home country, but making changes that suit the foreigner and make his/her life easier/better doesn't really help the 35 million rural nationals who are native to Thailand.

It rather basic; they will learn over time through osmosis.

In no way to I wish it were like 'my home country'. I just wish it were more fair, logical and intelligent, for them as much as for me/others.

I think a lot of people from the west make the same mistake, they look at the country and the way it operates and think, my goodness, it doesn't make sense, so much is broken. But what's really being said is that they don't understand what they're seeing and that's quite reasonable. Most of the comments on this subject, ways to improve the Thai economy, are ways that might improve a western economy and don't necessarily fit here since most of them involve a complete make over everything here and that of course is an impossible task, not least of all because of the time involved, not to mention the cultural barriers.

[chiang mai]

The problem with cutting interest rates is that it increases lending/debt, especially among the poor and government spending on infrastructure projects at this stage is likely too late to be beneficial, simply, it would take too long for those funds to cycle into the economy. One suspects one of the main answers might be to to prop up the rural poor whilst waiting for central spending to kick in, further tax incentives to business may also add some value.

Government spending, through debt, is just a transfer of wealth to a banker somewhere.

The best investment is in yourself, through education.

Mirroring the success of others, and avoiding their mistakes, is a smart play.

That's a price to be paid in this instance perhaps because I suspect Thailand does not have thirty years plus to implement an new improved educational system, the current economic problems need attention today.

[lostoday]

The problem with cutting interest rates is that it increases lending/debt, especially among the poor and government spending on infrastructure projects at this stage is likely too late to be beneficial, simply, it would take too long for those funds to cycle into the economy. One suspects one of the main answers might be to to prop up the rural poor whilst waiting for central spending to kick in, further tax incentives to business may also add some value.

Where does the OP suggest cutting interest rates? OP states, "The Thai state spent more than 72 percent of public funds in greater Bangkok, where only 17 percent of Thais lived, according to 2012 figures from the World Bank, the most recent data available. Mr. Somkid has already announced a $4 billion stimulus package for the rural economy, such as interest-free loans through the state-directed microfinance scheme. But these are essentially unconditional, short-term handouts that will at best cause a small and brief burst in consumption."

[lostoday]

The problem with cutting interest rates is that it increases lending/debt, especially among the poor and government spending on infrastructure projects at this stage is likely too late to be beneficial, simply, it would take too long for those funds to cycle into the economy. One suspects one of the main answers might be to to prop up the rural poor whilst waiting for central spending to kick in, further tax incentives to business may also add some value.

Government spending, through debt, is just a transfer of wealth to a banker somewhere.

The best investment is in yourself, through education.

Mirroring the success of others, and avoiding their mistakes, is a smart play.

The OP, "To stimulate sustainable domestic spending, especially among the poor, the Thai government should increase public expenditures in the provinces to at least one half of the total by 2025, up from nearly 28 percent in 2012. Support should be determined based on the recipients’ income rather than their localities or the crops they cultivate, as has traditionally been the case.

The transfers should also be made conditional on the beneficiaries’ compliance with, for example, vaccination requirements and the enrollment of children in school. Promoting socially responsible behavior in exchange for funds would not only serve the public good; it would also go some way toward appeasing the Bangkok elites who resent redistribution policies as a form of state charity."

[lostoday]

The problem with cutting interest rates is that it increases lending/debt, especially among the poor and government spending on infrastructure projects at this stage is likely too late to be beneficial, simply, it would take too long for those funds to cycle into the economy. One suspects one of the main answers might be to to prop up the rural poor whilst waiting for central spending to kick in, further tax incentives to business may also add some value.

Government spending, through debt, is just a transfer of wealth to a banker somewhere.

The best investment is in yourself, through education.

Mirroring the success of others, and avoiding their mistakes, is a smart play.

That's a price to be paid in this instance perhaps because I suspect Thailand does not have thirty years plus to implement an new improved educational system, the current economic problems need attention today.

The OP, "The junta, if it wants to stay in power, must embrace tough measures that run against the vested interests of its core constituents. It has no other choice, and neither do they — at least not if they hope to maintain the system of soft economic dictatorship that has served them so well."

[lostoday]

Wow, how arrogant is that, one suspects self serving also.

You may not like the degree to which Thailand has developed and you may wish it were at a future point that was closer to that of your home country, but making changes that suit the foreigner and make his/her life easier/better doesn't really help the 35 million rural nationals who are native to Thailand.

It rather basic; they will learn over time through osmosis.

In no way to I wish it were like 'my home country'. I just wish it were more fair, logical and intelligent, for them as much as for me/others.

I think a lot of people from the west make the same mistake, they look at the country and the way it operates and think, my goodness, it doesn't make sense, so much is broken. But what's really being said is that they don't understand what they're seeing and that's quite reasonable. Most of the comments on this subject, ways to improve the Thai economy, are ways that might improve a western economy and don't necessarily fit here since most of them involve a complete make over everything here and that of course is an impossible task, not least of all because of the time involved, not to mention the cultural barriers.

The OP who is based in Bangkok shows a good understanding of Thai problems for example writes, "To stimulate sustainable domestic spending, especially among the poor, the Thai government should increase public expenditures in the provinces to at least one half of the total by 2025, up from nearly 28 percent in 2012. Support should be determined based on the recipients’ income rather than their localities or the crops they cultivate, as has traditionally been the case.

The transfers should also be made conditional on the beneficiaries’ compliance with, for example, vaccination requirements and the enrollment of children in school. Promoting socially responsible behavior in exchange for funds would not only serve the public good; it would also go some way toward appeasing the Bangkok elites who resent redistribution policies as a form of state charity."

As you can see nothing like a Western economy which you mistakenly write in your post.

[eliotness]

From the OP and the real crux of the problem, "The generals economic policy is hampered by concern for their core constituents, the Bangkok-based establishment: a patronage network among the bureaucracy, the judiciary, the army, business elites and the palace. That network has created staggering inequality: Just 0.1 percent of Thais hold nearly half of the countrys total wealth, according to a 2012 study by the National Economics and Social Development Board, the state economic planning agency."

End of quote

PS don't get angry with me I didn't write the above it was posted by Webfact/Thaivisa and written by the NYT.

In scanning the posts up to this point, I get the impression that you are one of the few, and perhaps the only one, who read the entire article. Well done, and don't let the idiots get you down.

I personally liked this part, because I've been using the same information and source http://www.worldbank.org/en/news/feature/2012/05/10/thailand-public-finance-management-review-report since the coup:

"The Thai state spent more than 72 percent of public funds in greater Bangkok, where only 17 percent of Thais lived, according to 2012 figures from the World Bank, the most recent data available."

Some interesting figures quoted here. It might have more weight if they were compared to other countries in Asia and Europe. Not sure where to find these facts, but perhaps another poster with more experience in that field could provide the details.

[NOC]

Wow, how arrogant is that, one suspects self serving also.

You may not like the degree to which Thailand has developed and you may wish it were at a future point that was closer to that of your home country, but making changes that suit the foreigner and make his/her life easier/better doesn't really help the 35 million rural nationals who are native to Thailand.

It rather basic; they will learn over time through osmosis.

In no way to I wish it were like 'my home country'. I just wish it were more fair, logical and intelligent, for them as much as for me/others.

I think a lot of people from the west make the same mistake, they look at the country and the way it operates and think, my goodness, it doesn't make sense, so much is broken. But what's really being said is that they don't understand what they're seeing and that's quite reasonable. Most of the comments on this subject, ways to improve the Thai economy, are ways that might improve a western economy and don't necessarily fit here since most of them involve a complete make over everything here and that of course is an impossible task, not least of all because of the time involved, not to mention the cultural barriers.

I get it. I've traveled, and see from more than one side. Thailand is an island, and a cash cow to those in power. Ignorance is still, however, not bliss.