Thailand aims to become high income country in the next ten years

[Thai at Heart]

Absolutely, perfectly on track.

1% of the population consisting of the heads of the Junta, the RTP and others at the trough will be fabulously wealthy.

The rest of the population will be scratching around in the dirt looking for the money to buy fertilizer for their next rice crop.

Developed countries are distinguished from third world countries because of the size of their middle classes.

From what I have seen in the last year, the middle class Thai business owners I know are having their financial interests decimated.

On its current path Thailand is heading back to the stone age.

Of course, the middle class has got the junta it wanted. However, the middle class, I. E. 2000 GBP per month in Thailand is incredibly small and has been dragged into opposing populism by wearing a shirt, when in reality isn't populism but continued concentration of extreme wealth I to the hands of very few.

Very smart by the pad to turn the modestly wealthy on the phrai, but actually disgusting politics. They divided the very modestly off and turned them on the poor.

The minimum wage can afford to go up since there is low inflation due to oil prices. Business can afford it. But that would be populism right?

There is still no convulsive evidence that minimum wages increase significantly raise inflation. And it has been studied all over the place.

Edited September 15, 2015 by Thai at Heart

[BeefSlapper]

.......and then alarm rang and they all woke up

[FredNL]

I think the big big big soap bubble will explode later this year !!!

Real estate 10x overprised !!!

If they really think that they will have high income, it will ruin the export.

Maybe 0,00001 % will gain high income !!!

It is a 3rd world country and it will stay a 3rd world country for the next 1,000 years

Edited September 15, 2015 by FredNL

[colonialboy]

They are talking about BIB n Military becoming top earners the same as they are now

[soomak]

Seen a lot of negative comments in this thread, but let's try to make a real evaluation of this statement:

1. "High Income Country" is a term that refers to a country with a nominal GNI (Gross National Income) per capita of US$ 12,735 or above.

This threshhold changes every year, according to the inflation in a few major economies.

2. You can see the list of countries by GNI per capita here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GNI_%28nominal,_Atlas_method%29_per_capita

3. Thailand currently has a GNI per capita of US$ 5,410, which puts it in the "Upper-middle-income" group

4. In order to reach the threshhold of US$ 12,735, the Thai GNI per capita in US$ needs to grow by 135% (((12,735 / 5,410) - 1) x 100)

5. How long would it take?

If the GNI per capita grows by 3% per year (quite fast, but achievable), it would take Thailand 29 years to reach the "High Income Country" threshhold.

If the GNI per capita grows by 5% per year (very unlikely), it would take Thailand 18 years to reach the "High Income Country" threshhold.

Personally, I think a 3% per year growth rate is much more realistic than 5%. It may be even lower, at 2-2.5%.

If I had to make a bet on this, I would put it at 35-40 years (so around the year 2050/55).

You assume a stable GNI in the West. What makes you so sure that Western GNIs will not decline?

The "High income" threshhold will not go down, but it may go up due to inflation in US and Europe.

And BTW almost all western countries have a GNI of above US$ 30K per capita, so Thailand would not catch up with them in the next 60 years. We would all be dead by then...

[inwardglee]

On the positive side, if the economy screws up then the exchange rate for foreign currency gets better in our favour.

Have you may be noticed that prices do the inverse of the valuation of a currency?

[inwardglee]

On the positive side, if the economy screws up then the exchange rate for foreign currency gets better in our favour.

Have you may be noticed that prices do the inverse of the valuation of a currency?

[digibum]

If you look at somewhere like Singapore that dragged itself from the dirt to be a thriving leading example of how things can be done, with the type of government they had, in a very small geographical space, and that it took a few decades to get there, yet still considered a success story....

Then look at Thailand which is substantially larger, and it's agricultural base more than service or manufacturing, and a 'different' level of education. I would expect that to achieve this would even with optimism, be a multi-generational endeavour.

I would suggest the pursuit of happiness rather than maximum baht in pocket.

I concur on the difficulties, however it's a good goal to have if they can stick to it. One of Thailand's biggest problems, as evidenced recently, is that they have very little domestic demand. Thailand's economy is almost entirely export focused (other than tourism). They've extended as much credit as the people can possibly swallow and Thai people simply don't earn enough in order to spur any sort of great domestic demand.

If they want to modernize the Thai economy people need to earn more. They need to make enough to make substantial purchases.

It will not be an easy road though and that's why I would have reservations on betting on that outcome.

[NOC]

The hookers are going to raise their prices again?

[tomacht8]

The hookers are going to raise their prices again?

No, definitely not in the near future.

The recent price increases have yet contributed to a marked slowdown in demand.

The supply side has increased slightly again and meets here on a fairly slightly declining demand.

In such market conditions, the scope for price increases is here quite limited.

The only way out is here for the operators to offer better product quality or to try on customer loyalty instruments to enhance the total return.

Edited September 15, 2015 by tomacht8

[maewang99]

this is sell side b.s. don't you get it? for decades.... fly to USA stay a few weeks, pass a drivers test or get any kind of local ID and open a bank account. but there's a New Deal in town called FATCA still just beginning to kick in. some folks figure it's just to get nasty with drug dealers and Kim Jung Un? and little guys! haha! many long held securities such as Thai bonds and equities are aggregated and registered in the name of nominees... when and always when a US bank or broker initiated the transaction.... KYC then means the US bank is known... but the actual human beneficial account holder? no. never has been. the closest they ever get named is when a nominee name is accompanied by the phrase "held for the benefit of customers"... that's as close as it got....but as higher agreement levels in the FATCA regime kick in the disclosures will become reciprocal with names of security holders sent to Thailand rather than only Thai info flowing to the USA.... so would it be a surprise the last 2 years that hot money has been playing hot chairs? and even still continues to need to sell off but some good sounding bs such as 'digital economy' and 'get in ahead of the Fed rate rise because after it is a done deal we will spike up again for sure' (yeah right).... so there are still some knuckleheads around to take the other side of all these trades.. on the buy side! yes????

Edited September 15, 2015 by maewang99

[RubbaJohnny]

Almost too ludicrous to deserve a comment.

The gent that said April 1st has come and gone said it the best.

Hub

alert

[NOC]

The hookers are going to raise their prices again?

No, definitely not in the near future.

The recent price increases have yet contributed to a marked slowdown in demand.

The supply side has increased slightly again and meets here on a fairly slightly declining demand.

In such market conditions, the scope for price increases is here quite limited.

The only way out is here for the operators to offer better product quality or to try on customer loyalty instruments to enhance the total return.

Correct me if I'm wrong. These number things always seem to get me.

So, the recent supply-side increase combined with a reduction in market demand, has led to a stagnation?

To stimulate growth, retailers should offer either a GF experience or two pops? Did I get that correct?

Edited September 15, 2015 by NOC

[tomacht8]

The hookers are going to raise their prices again?

No, definitely not in the near future.

The recent price increases have yet contributed to a marked slowdown in demand.

The supply side has increased slightly again and meets here on a fairly slightly declining demand.

In such market conditions, the scope for price increases is here quite limited.

The only way out is here for the operators to offer better product quality or to try on customer loyalty instruments to enhance the total return.

Correct me if I'm wrong. These number things always seem to get me.

So, the recent supply-side increase combined with a reduction in market demand, has led to a stagnation?

To stimulate growth, retailers should offer either a GF experience or two pops? Did I get that correct?

Simplified in general yes.

It should be remembered that the demand market is not infinitely elastic with respect to prices.

If the market price would be completely elastic, and an increase in supply and a fall in demand would lead to a price reduction.

But that is, in this particular market segment, not the case.

Price stagnation is correct.

[timewilltell]

Thailand has a pathetic legal system run by corrupt lawyers and judges who have no understanding of the basic principles of law together with a xenophobic attitude to all people foreign added to which the laws on foreign ownership of pretty much everything is beyond restrictive. With those foundations Thailand does not have any hope of garnering the foreign investment needed to 'catapult' anything.

It has a disfunctional political system and spends years designing constitutions that are so detailed they can never stand the test of time. Mired in detail when what is needed is a visionary statement of principles to which all future and present laws are tested. It should be possible for people to agree basic principles of the society they want but they cannot see the wood for the trees and everyone has different agendas.

They have a population who are brainwashed that everything Thai is wonderful where the reality is the opposite and so the population believes there is no need to learn because they are already superior - when the reality is that the majority are ignorant and pretty much incapable of anything outside repetitive tasks - the sort of tasks that machines are pretty good at doing far more effectively.

The corruption in the country infects every sector of society so the most corrupt and incompetent and criminal people are in positions of power providing no benefit whatsover to the country.

No one pays the proper tax and that is openly evident from the VAT that most shops ask if you want to pay. Even if you report someone for tax evasion - no one is interested unless it is a foreigner they can abuse and persecute.

There is no hope whatsoever that Thailand will advance until these issues are tackled - at the moment you are not even allowed to openly discuss them in depth for the most part. I am sorry to say the whole country is under a false illusion as to its importance in the world and in total self denial for the evidence is openly plain for all to see. Thailand is going to sink below its neighbours through its own delusion of grandeur and lack of education.

It really is rather sad.

[ozyjon]

I still don't believe it.

[lkv]

Seen a lot of negative comments in this thread, but let's try to make a real evaluation of this statement:

1. "High Income Country" is a term that refers to a country with a nominal GNI (Gross National Income) per capita of US$ 12,735 or above.

This threshhold changes every year, according to the inflattion in a few major economies.

2. You can see the list of countries by GNI per capita here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GNI_%28nominal,_Atlas_method%29_per_capita

3. Thailand currently has a GNI per capita of US$ 5,410, which puts it in the "Upper-middle-income" group

4. In order to reach the threshhold of US$ 12,735, the Thai GNI per capita in US$ needs to grow by 135% (((12,735 / 5,410) - 1) x 100)

5. How long would it take?

If the GNI per capita grows by 3% per year (quite fast, but achievable), it would take Thailand 29 years to reach the "High Income Country" threshhold.

If the GNI per capita grows by 5% per year (very unlikely), it would take Thailand 18 years to reach the "High Income Country" threshhold.

Personally, I think a 3% per year growth rate is much more realistic than 5%. It may be even lower, at 2-2.5%.

If I had to make a bet on this, I would put it at 35-40 years (so around the year 2050/55).

However, as you have said, the threshold changes every year.

So assuming that the major economies (EU, etc) get out of the current state and back to the normal recommended level of inflation, which is 2-3% per year (the economists have decided that a functional economy has to have a 2-3% inflation), if Thailand grows 2-2.5% then it will NEVER reach the High Income Threshold, cause that threshold will increase every year according to inflation.

So Thailand will have to grow much faster to catch up with what will mean in 29 or 18 years a "High Income Country", which will be:

US 12,735 at 2% annual inflation capitalized or compounded over 18 years = US 18,188 new level. Or something like that. Forgive the math if wrong but you get my logic I hope.

So the point is it may never catch up. Or in longer than 18 or 29 years.

[Thai at Heart]

If you look at somewhere like Singapore that dragged itself from the dirt to be a thriving leading example of how things can be done, with the type of government they had, in a very small geographical space, and that it took a few decades to get there, yet still considered a success story....

Then look at Thailand which is substantially larger, and it's agricultural base more than service or manufacturing, and a 'different' level of education. I would expect that to achieve this would even with optimism, be a multi-generational endeavour.

I would suggest the pursuit of happiness rather than maximum baht in pocket.

I concur on the difficulties, however it's a good goal to have if they can stick to it. One of Thailand's biggest problems, as evidenced recently, is that they have very little domestic demand. Thailand's economy is almost entirely export focused (other than tourism). They've extended as much credit as the people can possibly swallow and Thai people simply don't earn enough in order to spur any sort of great domestic demand.

If they want to modernize the Thai economy people need to earn more. They need to make enough to make substantial purchases.

It will not be an easy road though and that's why I would have reservations on betting on that outcome.

To achieve this they need to liberalise markets and allow foreign capital in to add competition to consumer and labour markets.

Wages won't go up until there is an excess of demand for labour. The companies keep bidding down minimum wage and foreign businesses are put of entering by the rules.

[Thai at Heart]

Seen a lot of negative comments in this thread, but let's try to make a real evaluation of this statement:

1. "High Income Country" is a term that refers to a country with a nominal GNI (Gross National Income) per capita of US$ 12,735 or above.

This threshhold changes every year, according to the inflattion in a few major economies.

2. You can see the list of countries by GNI per capita here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GNI_%28nominal,_Atlas_method%29_per_capita

3. Thailand currently has a GNI per capita of US$ 5,410, which puts it in the "Upper-middle-income" group

4. In order to reach the threshhold of US$ 12,735, the Thai GNI per capita in US$ needs to grow by 135% (((12,735 / 5,410) - 1) x 100)

5. How long would it take?

If the GNI per capita grows by 3% per year (quite fast, but achievable), it would take Thailand 29 years to reach the "High Income Country" threshhold.

If the GNI per capita grows by 5% per year (very unlikely), it would take Thailand 18 years to reach the "High Income Country" threshhold.

Personally, I think a 3% per year growth rate is much more realistic than 5%. It may be even lower, at 2-2.5%.

If I had to make a bet on this, I would put it at 35-40 years (so around the year 2050/55).

However, as you have said, the threshold changes every year.

So assuming that the major economies (EU, etc) get out of the current state and back to the normal recommended level of inflation, which is 2-3% per year (the economists have decided that a functional economy has to have a 2-3% inflation), if Thailand grows 2-2.5% then it will NEVER reach the High Income Threshold, cause that threshold will increase every year according to inflation.

So Thailand will have to grow much faster to catch up with what will mean in 29 or 18 years a "High Income Country", which will be:

US 12,735 at 2% annual inflation capitalized or compounded over 18 years = US 18,188 new level. Or something like that. Forgive the math if wrong but you get my logic I hope.

So the point is it may never catch up. Or in longer than 18 or 29 years.

First of all they have to realise that a business that relies on employing thousands of people at 300baht a day isn't worthy of protection or celebration.

Oligarchs earning bazillions whilst the majority have little isn't the way forward.

Of course, first they have to realise.....

[Friendly Stranger]

Stop it, stop it, I give up. Tapping my hand on the floor.

I see they're now using the TAT playbook.

[Cake Monster]

Does Thailand really believe that the G10 countries will allow them to try and interfere in world economics, and welfare by becomeing a " rich nation ".

Not today, Not tommorrow, not in 10 Years, and maybe never, will this be allowed by powers much higher up the food chain than Thailand.

[soomak]

Seen a lot of negative comments in this thread, but let's try to make a real evaluation of this statement:

1. "High Income Country" is a term that refers to a country with a nominal GNI (Gross National Income) per capita of US$ 12,735 or above.

This threshhold changes every year, according to the inflattion in a few major economies.

2. You can see the list of countries by GNI per capita here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GNI_%28nominal,_Atlas_method%29_per_capita

3. Thailand currently has a GNI per capita of US$ 5,410, which puts it in the "Upper-middle-income" group

4. In order to reach the threshhold of US$ 12,735, the Thai GNI per capita in US$ needs to grow by 135% (((12,735 / 5,410) - 1) x 100)

5. How long would it take?

If the GNI per capita grows by 3% per year (quite fast, but achievable), it would take Thailand 29 years to reach the "High Income Country" threshhold.

If the GNI per capita grows by 5% per year (very unlikely), it would take Thailand 18 years to reach the "High Income Country" threshhold.

Personally, I think a 3% per year growth rate is much more realistic than 5%. It may be even lower, at 2-2.5%.

If I had to make a bet on this, I would put it at 35-40 years (so around the year 2050/55).

However, as you have said, the threshold changes every year.

So assuming that the major economies (EU, etc) get out of the current state and back to the normal recommended level of inflation, which is 2-3% per year (the economists have decided that a functional economy has to have a 2-3% inflation), if Thailand grows 2-2.5% then it will NEVER reach the High Income Threshold, cause that threshold will increase every year according to inflation.

So Thailand will have to grow much faster to catch up with what will mean in 29 or 18 years a "High Income Country", which will be:

US 12,735 at 2% annual inflation capitalized or compounded over 18 years = US 18,188 new level. Or something like that. Forgive the math if wrong but you get my logic I hope.

So the point is it may never catch up. Or in longer than 18 or 29 years.

Yes the inflation changes the threshhold, but I believe the inflation in the major economies (at least EU and Japan), would most likely be very low. 1% per year on average, maybe lower.

Also the thb/$ exchange rate is important since the threshhold is $ based, but that's too difficult to predict anyway.

In any case, my bet is 35-40 years from now, not 29 and certainly not 18 years.

[fred Kubasa]

Just when I thought the " Stupidest Projections " contest had been awarded

to Hi speed rail along comes this doozie !

[Yme]

Utter clap trap and lies for the masses.

In 2010 the average Thai income was US$4,300, the same as China. However, by 2014, the average Chinese income had increased by 70 per cent to US$7,380 while for Thailand average income increased by only 25 per cent, to US$5,400 per annum.

<snip>

In the first half of 2015 Thailand received just nine per cent of all Asean in-bound foreign investment. The lion’s share went to Indonesia (31 per cent worth US$13.66 billion). This was almost double that poured into rapidly rising Vietnam (17 per cent / $7.53 billion) or Malaysia (16 per cent / $7.01 billion).

Even Thai businesses are choosing to invest outside of the country. Twelve per cent of all Asean foreign investment during 1H2015 being from Thai businesses.

Source: More Pain For Thailand's Economy As Junta's Reign Extended http://www.establishmentpost.com/pain-thailands-economy-juntas-reign-extended

[Nobb]

More government lip service. They said this 20 years ago. As long as there is turmoil in Thailand and no Democracy they have no chance to meet there goal. It will never happen with a junta government!

[maidee]

maybe if they allow legal casino's & openly drug dealing

[greenchair]

Omg , I just pissed my pants.

[happynthailand]

I think he was smoking something like this

Edited September 16, 2015 by happynthailand

[jmccarty]

You gotta aim high!

He would not gain popularity by saying Thailand will aim lower or to be the same, or let's just shoot from the hip!

We tend to get sarcastic about well meaning government speakers. Would you have them any other way?

[micmichd]

You have to aim high to get high