How to save the Thai economy: Opinion

[godden]

Stopping all the BS would be a good start.

[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.

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.

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

Read my post again, slowly and try harder to understand what was written.

[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.

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."

Post # 86 suggests it, last line, there;s more to this thread and topic than just your opinion and the Original Post and more posters than just you, get used to it!

[NOC]

Just a thought to all poster who are wasting their time commenting on a topic that will never be publicly appreciated.

If the Thais used collective intelligence, rather than comparative scenarios, to base their future actions, we would all be better off.

It's not about this one country, over that one country.

It's about best practices for all.

Please return to your regularly scheduled programming....

[HenryB]

You omit the larger ones, Minor Group and CP Group.

Minor group is owned by an American turned Thai so I didn't count that.

Heinecke moved here when he was 14 years old and founded the group thereafter, American by parentage and that's about all!

Heinecke was an American citizen till he got rich in Thailand and gave up his American citizenship in 1991.

Did Heinecke get his start from his rich father?

[chiang mai]

Minor group is owned by an American turned Thai so I didn't count that.

Heinecke moved here when he was 14 years old and founded the group thereafter, American by parentage and that's about all!

Heinecke was an American citizen till he got rich in Thailand and gave up his American citizenship in 1991.

Did Heinecke get his start from his rich father?

No, his parents were military on postings in Asia.

[chiang mai]

Just a thought to all poster who are wasting their time commenting on a topic that will never be publicly appreciated.

If the Thais used collective intelligence, rather than comparative scenarios, to base their future actions, we would all be better off.

It's not about this one country, over that one country.

It's about best practices for all.

Please return to your regularly scheduled programming....

Agreed, but it is interesting to see what proposals and concepts the collective intelligence of mostly western posters on this forum can come up with. As far as I can tell they mostly include a return to past corrupt regime or the adoption of western style measures, far too late in the day, surely a sign that far too many people just don't get it, even if they say and think they do.

[Prbkk]

Minor group is owned by an American turned Thai so I didn't count that.

Heinecke moved here when he was 14 years old and founded the group thereafter, American by parentage and that's about all!

Heinecke was an American citizen till he got rich in Thailand and gave up his American citizenship in 1991.

Did Heinecke get his start from his rich father?

No, his parents were military on postings in Asia.

And no one would begrudge his success...he has not been the recipient of protectionism, patronage, monopoly, slave labour , price fixing, cartel arrangements, discriminatory policies...

[glenmohr]

To Mr Build,

What I want for you Mr Build is freedom of speech and assembly, something the Thai people do not have.

What I want for the Thai people is for them to be able to choose their own leaders from among the civilian population, be it Abhisit, Yingluck or whoever they choose.

I submit that a civilian leader would better reflect the economic needs of all the Thai people. It is the Thai people who should decide not you and I.

[chiang mai]

The people, for the most part, are not capable of deciding such a thing effectively. That's why past governments have been so ineffective at governing because the populace could be bought for a few thousand baht each and that's why corruption was allowed to run rampant. This democracy thing, it isn't for everyone.

[krdowney]

A leveraged buy-out of Thailand by Singapore...

Edited September 12, 2015 by krdowney

[lostoday]

Just a thought to all poster who are wasting their time commenting on a topic that will never be publicly appreciated.

If the Thais used collective intelligence, rather than comparative scenarios, to base their future actions, we would all be better off.

It's not about this one country, over that one country.

It's about best practices for all.

Please return to your regularly scheduled programming....

Agreed, but it is interesting to see what proposals and concepts the collective intelligence of mostly western posters on this forum can come up with. As far as I can tell they mostly include a return to past corrupt regime or the adoption of western style measures, far too late in the day, surely a sign that far too many people just don't get it, even if they say and think they do.

The basic proposals of this thread are spelled out in 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.

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."

It is easy to read and not amateur ideas. The above are from the OP and written by:

Dr. Forrest E. Cookson

* Ph.D. ABT, Economics, Georgetown University, 1961

* M.A., Ph.D. ABT, Physics, Princeton University, 1957

* B.S. Physics and Mathematics, Clemson University, 1953

Teaching Experience

* Georgetown University, Washington D.C.

* Thammassat University, Thailand

* North-South University, Bangladesh

Others

1. President, American Chamber of Commerce in Bangladesh 1992-2001

2. Occasional lecturer, economics, North-South University 2000- continuing

3. Vice-President, American Bangladesh Economic Forum 1988, 1990- 1992

4. Member, Board of Director, MIDAS [Non-banking financial institution], 1995- 2002

5. Member, Board of American Alumni Association, Bangladesh 1998- 2007

6. Board Member, Institute of Management Consultants Bangladesh 1998- 2007

7. Member, Advisory Board on Change in Rural Thailand (ARPA), 1969- 1970

8. Member, Scientific Advisory Group, Advanced Research Project Agency (ARPA), U.S. Department of Defense, Thailand 1967- 1970

As you can see he has both excellent education credentials and experience from the West and Thailand.

Edited September 12, 2015 by lostoday

[billd766]

Interesting to point out that a group of posters have just tried to take over the thread with a series of off topic posts that have nothing to do with the OP. I'm going to sleep perhaps some other conscientious person will take on the job of stopping them from changing the topic which is a very good article from the NYT about saving the Thai economy.

If you have a problem with posts that you believe are off topic then simply report them to the moderators. I am sure that all the posters will accept the moderators words rather than yours.

Most of the posts are in response to other posts. Do you think it is wrong for posters to reply to them?

Edited September 12, 2015 by billd766

[lostoday]

Interesting to point out that a group of posters have just tried to take over the thread with a series of off topic posts that have nothing to do with the OP. I'm going to sleep perhaps some other conscientious person will take on the job of stopping them from changing the topic which is a very good article from the NYT about saving the Thai economy.

If you have a problem with posts that you believe are off topic that report them to the moderators. I am sure that all the posters will accept the moderators words rather than yours.

Most of the posts are in response to other posts. Do you think it is wrong for posters to reply to them?

On topic responses to on topic posts are on topic.

From 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."

[billd766]

To Mr Build,

What I want for you Mr Build is freedom of speech and assembly, something the Thai people do not have.

What I want for the Thai people is for them to be able to choose their own leaders from among the civilian population, be it Abhisit, Yingluck or whoever they choose.

I submit that a civilian leader would better reflect the economic needs of all the Thai people. It is the Thai people who should decide not you and I.

What you, I or anybody here wants or would like to see is meaningless.

It is what the Thai people want that matters. It is all down to them on one side or the other, rich or poor, military or civilian, honest persons or thieves.

It is their problem to solve in their own way and there is very little that any of us farangs can do to affect it. In a local context we may be able to convince our families and friends but that will only be a microcosm of what WE think is needed and who is to say if we are right or wrong?

[lostoday]

To Mr Build,

What I want for you Mr Build is freedom of speech and assembly, something the Thai people do not have.

What I want for the Thai people is for them to be able to choose their own leaders from among the civilian population, be it Abhisit, Yingluck or whoever they choose.

I submit that a civilian leader would better reflect the economic needs of all the Thai people. It is the Thai people who should decide not you and I.

What you, I or anybody here wants or would like to see is meaningless.

It is what the Thai people want that matters. It is all down to them on one side or the other, rich or poor, military or civilian, honest persons or thieves.

It is their problem to solve in their own way and there is very little that any of us farangs can do to affect it. In a local context we may be able to convince our families and friends but that will only be a microcosm of what WE think is needed and who is to say if we are right or wrong?

I would look to a qualified economist to say if the proposals for example in this OP are right or wrong. Dr. Forrest E. Cookson is eminently qualified to advise on Thailand economics and the current government would do well to listen to him.

[glenmohr]

To Mr Build,

What I want for you Mr Build is freedom of speech and assembly, something the Thai people do not have.

What I want for the Thai people is for them to be able to choose their own leaders from among the civilian population, be it Abhisit, Yingluck or whoever they choose.

I submit that a civilian leader would better reflect the economic needs of all the Thai people. It is the Thai people who should decide not you and I.

What you, I or anybody here wants or would like to see is meaningless.

It is what the Thai people want that matters. It is all down to them on one side or the other, rich or poor, military or civilian, honest persons or thieves.

It is their problem to solve in their own way and there is very little that any of us farangs can do to affect it. In a local context we may be able to convince our families and friends but that will only be a microcosm of what WE think is needed and who is to say if we are right or wrong?

I agree with you

[glenmohr]

The people, for the most part, are not capable of deciding such a thing effectively. That's why past governments have been so ineffective at governing because the populace could be bought for a few thousand baht each and that's why corruption was allowed to run rampant. This democracy thing, it isn't for everyone.

Your post saddens me.

Go out and meet some rice farmers or corn growers.You will find they are very decent people, specially in the North.

This yellow shirt concept that they do not wash is pure propaganda which you have fallen for.

Democracy does not work anywhere, but it comes closer to reflecting the aspirations of the people than any other form of government.

The fact that you are so dismissive of your fellow humans is dismaying. And yes the rural Thai are human beings.

In all democratic societies votes are bought but in some cases it is called advertising. I concede in some cases the money promised is not paid.

But at the end of the day the people should decide no matter how many faults and weaknesses you and the general thinks they possess.

When you look down on other people, just remember " He who casts the first stone... "

[Thai at Heart]

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.

So the solution is to pump money to the poor because of their higher propensity to consume. There is no mysticism in how people handle money, when they are poor.

That's the wonder of economics. People all have similar basic needs and wants.

This is part of the laugh of commenting on Thailand and the way it's run. They say corruption is bad, they say they want to stop it, and they achieve virtually nothing in trying to stop it.

Why? Because they believe the universal rules don't apply to them. But, when eventually this corruption gets to be so serious it causes a problem (look at the fact a bomber bribed his way in, or the fish will be banned) they get all shocked about it, and spring to action.

It's a study in social sciences and perpetual procrastination.

[lostoday]

The people, for the most part, are not capable of deciding such a thing effectively. That's why past governments have been so ineffective at governing because the populace could be bought for a few thousand baht each and that's why corruption was allowed to run rampant. This democracy thing, it isn't for everyone.

Your post saddens me.

Go out and meet some rice farmers or corn growers.You will find they are very decent people, specially in the North.

This yellow shirt concept that they do not wash is pure propaganda which you have fallen for.

Democracy does not work anywhere, but it comes closer to reflecting the aspirations of the people than any other form of government.

The fact that you are so dismissive of your fellow humans is dismaying. And yes the rural Thai are human beings.

In all democratic societies votes are bought but in some cases it is called advertising. I concede in some cases the money promised is not paid.

But at the end of the day the people should decide no matter how many faults and weaknesses you and the general thinks they possess.

When you look down on other people, just remember " He who casts the first stone... "

It makes little difference who decides what. Singapore is not a democracy and they have a good economy. The Junta can decide to make Thailand a successful economy or the people by a vote can decide to make Thailand a successful democracy. The old saying, "it's the economy stupid" is very appropriate to Thailand as well as many other countries. That's why this thread is so interesting as it proposes concrete ways to save the Thai economy.

[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.

So the solution is to pump money to the poor because of their higher propensity to consume. There is no mysticism in how people handle money, when they are poor.

That's the wonder of economics. People all have similar basic needs and wants.

This is part of the laugh of commenting on Thailand and the way it's run. They say corruption is bad, they say they want to stop it, and they achieve virtually nothing in trying to stop it.

Why? Because they believe the universal rules don't apply to them. But, when eventually this corruption gets to be so serious it causes a problem (look at the fact a bomber bribed his way in, or the fish will be banned) they get all shocked about it, and spring to action.

It's a study in social sciences and perpetual procrastination.

I don't agree, from the OP, "Gen. Prayuth seems finally to have realized these mistakes, and that the economy is his government’s Achilles’ heel. He sacked his economic team last month, replacing its head, Pridiyathorn Devakula, a former central bank governor from the conservative policy establishment, with Somkid Jatusripitak, the architect of many progressive social and economic policies when he was finance minister under Thaksin Shinawatra, the populist former prime minister and brother of Ms. Yingluck. Gen. Prayuth’s government also recently set up a national savings fund long in the making, which aims to help up to 30 million Thais without pensions."

[Thai at Heart]

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.

So the solution is to pump money to the poor because of their higher propensity to consume. There is no mysticism in how people handle money, when they are poor.

That's the wonder of economics. People all have similar basic needs and wants.

This is part of the laugh of commenting on Thailand and the way it's run. They say corruption is bad, they say they want to stop it, and they achieve virtually nothing in trying to stop it.

Why? Because they believe the universal rules don't apply to them. But, when eventually this corruption gets to be so serious it causes a problem (look at the fact a bomber bribed his way in, or the fish will be banned) they get all shocked about it, and spring to action.

It's a study in social sciences and perpetual procrastination.

I don't agree, from the OP, "Gen. Prayuth seems finally to have realized these mistakes, and that the economy is his government’s Achilles’ heel. He sacked his economic team last month, replacing its head, Pridiyathorn Devakula, a former central bank governor from the conservative policy establishment, with Somkid Jatusripitak, the architect of many progressive social and economic policies when he was finance minister under Thaksin Shinawatra, the populist former prime minister and brother of Ms. Yingluck. Gen. Prayuth’s government also recently set up a national savings fund long in the making, which aims to help up to 30 million Thais without pensions."

Yes, he originally he Piryathorn because he is blue blooded as they come and the go to man who is a complete numpty.

Massive massive error.

Now they have Somkid who is rolling out precisely the same ideas he had before. Situation is completely different than it was I'm trt time. Somkids policies are not some wonderful new discovery.

They have been used and accepted the world over for rural development. Of course thailand now owns them as thaksinomics or blatant populism depending on your politics.

Whilst Thailand continues to try and reinvent the wheels, the world is turning and people are innovating all over the world without having to ask permission from a pooyai. Thailand is neither exceptional or unique.

People are people, u just need to understand by which rules they are playing the game...

[lostoday]

Yes, he originally he Piryathorn because he is blue blooded as they come and the go to man who is a complete numpty.

Massive massive error.

Now they have Somkid who is rolling out precisely the same ideas he had before. Situation is completely different than it was I'm trt time. Somkids policies are not some wonderful new discovery.

They have been used and accepted the world over for rural development. Of course thailand now owns them as thaksinomics or blatant populism depending on your politics.

Whilst Thailand continues to try and reinvent the wheels, the world is turning and people are innovating all over the world without having to ask permission from a pooyai. Thailand is neither exceptional or unique.

People are people, u just need to understand by which rules they are playing the game...

Yes, from the OP, "Gen. Prayuth seems finally to have realized these mistakes, and that the economy is his government’s Achilles’ heel."

[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.

So the solution is to pump money to the poor because of their higher propensity to consume. There is no mysticism in how people handle money, when they are poor.

That's the wonder of economics. People all have similar basic needs and wants.

This is part of the laugh of commenting on Thailand and the way it's run. They say corruption is bad, they say they want to stop it, and they achieve virtually nothing in trying to stop it.

Why? Because they believe the universal rules don't apply to them. But, when eventually this corruption gets to be so serious it causes a problem (look at the fact a bomber bribed his way in, or the fish will be banned) they get all shocked about it, and spring to action.

It's a study in social sciences and perpetual procrastination.

No, that's not the solution but with such a large population of rural poor it's something that has to be done whilst a solution is being implemented For example, lower interest rates and restricted lending means some people will suffer because they can't borrow and those people need supporting.

[NOC]

Yes, he originally he Piryathorn because he is blue blooded as they come and the go to man who is a complete numpty.

Massive massive error.

Now they have Somkid who is rolling out precisely the same ideas he had before. Situation is completely different than it was I'm trt time. Somkids policies are not some wonderful new discovery.

They have been used and accepted the world over for rural development. Of course thailand now owns them as thaksinomics or blatant populism depending on your politics.

Whilst Thailand continues to try and reinvent the wheels, the world is turning and people are innovating all over the world without having to ask permission from a pooyai. Thailand is neither exceptional or unique.

People are people, u just need to understand by which rules they are playing the game...

Yes, from the OP, "Gen. Prayuth seems finally to have realized these mistakes, and that the economy is his government’s Achilles’ heel."

umm, hey Lostaday, is it possible for you to compose an original thought? All this copy and paste propaganda make you look like you lost a day...

[chiang mai]

To Mr Build,

What I want for you Mr Build is freedom of speech and assembly, something the Thai people do not have.

What I want for the Thai people is for them to be able to choose their own leaders from among the civilian population, be it Abhisit, Yingluck or whoever they choose.

I submit that a civilian leader would better reflect the economic needs of all the Thai people. It is the Thai people who should decide not you and I.

What you, I or anybody here wants or would like to see is meaningless.

It is what the Thai people want that matters. It is all down to them on one side or the other, rich or poor, military or civilian, honest persons or thieves.

It is their problem to solve in their own way and there is very little that any of us farangs can do to affect it. In a local context we may be able to convince our families and friends but that will only be a microcosm of what WE think is needed and who is to say if we are right or wrong?

I would look to a qualified economist to say if the proposals for example in this OP are right or wrong. Dr. Forrest E. Cookson is eminently qualified to advise on Thailand economics and the current government would do well to listen to him.

All well and good with the qualified economist bit except, in Thailand you also need to pay close attention to the sociology part of the equation otherwise it will all blow up. In the past the economic tweaks that have been taken in consideration of the sociology, try and make major tweaks to it, without consideration for the masses of poor and boom.

[Thai at Heart]

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.

So the solution is to pump money to the poor because of their higher propensity to consume. There is no mysticism in how people handle money, when they are poor.

That's the wonder of economics. People all have similar basic needs and wants.

This is part of the laugh of commenting on Thailand and the way it's run. They say corruption is bad, they say they want to stop it, and they achieve virtually nothing in trying to stop it.

Why? Because they believe the universal rules don't apply to them. But, when eventually this corruption gets to be so serious it causes a problem (look at the fact a bomber bribed his way in, or the fish will be banned) they get all shocked about it, and spring to action.

It's a study in social sciences and perpetual procrastination.

No, that's not the solution but with such a large population of rural poor it's something that has to be done whilst a solution is being implemented For example, lower interest rates and restricted lending means some people will suffer because they can't borrow and those people need supporting.

Well there isn't one single solution anyway. Depending on the situation of the moment a country can need expansionary, or contractionary policies to save the whole economy.

Having polices for the rural poor is one part of the solution, but it isn't everything. But Somkid won't be allowed to touch things like investment policies too much.

That is off limits, a bit like corruption, until the problem gets so big it will have to be solved.

[Thai at Heart]

To Mr Build,

What I want for you Mr Build is freedom of speech and assembly, something the Thai people do not have.

What I want for the Thai people is for them to be able to choose their own leaders from among the civilian population, be it Abhisit, Yingluck or whoever they choose.

I submit that a civilian leader would better reflect the economic needs of all the Thai people. It is the Thai people who should decide not you and I.

What you, I or anybody here wants or would like to see is meaningless.

It is what the Thai people want that matters. It is all down to them on one side or the other, rich or poor, military or civilian, honest persons or thieves.

It is their problem to solve in their own way and there is very little that any of us farangs can do to affect it. In a local context we may be able to convince our families and friends but that will only be a microcosm of what WE think is needed and who is to say if we are right or wrong?

I would look to a qualified economist to say if the proposals for example in this OP are right or wrong. Dr. Forrest E. Cookson is eminently qualified to advise on Thailand economics and the current government would do well to listen to him.

All well and good with the qualified economist bit except, in Thailand you also need to pay close attention to the sociology part of the equation otherwise it will all blow up. In the past the economic tweaks that have been taken in consideration of the sociology, try and make major tweaks to it, without consideration for the masses of poor and boom.

Thaksins polices did nothing of the sort, and at the time were utterly mind blowing for Thailand. They didn't consider Thai societal norms.

Look where it got him.....

[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 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.

The figures came from the World Bank link provided. I don't think you'll find any first world country where 72% of public funds go to the 17% of the population that live in the capital, that's more of a third world thing.

[lostoday]

All well and good with the qualified economist bit except, in Thailand you also need to pay close attention to the sociology part of the equation otherwise it will all blow up. In the past the economic tweaks that have been taken in consideration of the sociology, try and make major tweaks to it, without consideration for the masses of poor and boom.

Thaksins polices did nothing of the sort, and at the time were utterly mind blowing for Thailand. They didn't consider Thai societal norms.

Look where it got him.....

From the OP, "In a time of prosperity (Thaksins times), 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.