Prayut blames political leaders for problems

[baboon]

""They should use the power according to the intentions of people who voted for them. The people trust them to run the country and bring an improved standard of living to the people"

That's opposed to "thanks for voting, please go home now"

If that had truly been the government's attitude it would have paid for it in the next election, assuming there had been a next election.

Absolutely!

The previous government had paid for it and was willing to pay more again for it. Taxpayer's money though.

500 billion Baht RPPS, first car ownership, tabletPcs, first home owners, and amnesty for all politically motivated crimes.

The previous governments being the only ones in Thai history to spend/waste taxpayers' money of course: A concept completely unheard of anywhere else in the world.

[ldiablo]

Too many posters here adopt the simple-minded "logic" that since the elected governments had many problems, a military government must be a good thing.

Can anyone name 1 government run by a military that has been successful in anything.

A military government is never a good thing.

[heybruce]

Right, taxpayer money being spent all over the country. Before Thaksin the taxpayer money was almost entirely spent in Bangkok, which still gets a ridiculously large share.

Absolutely!

Before money was spend on Bangkok and with Thaksin just spent. No wonder Prayut blames political leaders and the odd criminal fugitive.

Prayut blames others, but hasn't improved things regarding government spending or anything else.

If you say so, it must be regarded with an open, questioning mind.

Anyway, I guess you dislike the infra structure project with the double track higher speed link from Bangkok to NongKai? That would open up the NorthEast and help getting more investments there. Makes more sense than the priority on Bangkok - ChiangMai with a real high spped link as the previous government wanted. They even had a Minister state that lots of commuters were waiting for such link. Even lunch boxes were properly defined for those commuters.

You mean one of those proposed projects? Where are they on turning proposals into reality? Have they defined their requirements and called for competitive bids?

Oh wait, does this government do open, transparent, competitive bidding on projects? Or does that make it too difficult to make sure the "quality people" get their piece of the action?

Are they seriously defining the box lunches the commuters can have? That strikes me as weird, in a control freak sort of way.

[rubl]

""They should use the power according to the intentions of people who voted for them. The people trust them to run the country and bring an improved standard of living to the people"

That's opposed to "thanks for voting, please go home now"

If that had truly been the government's attitude it would have paid for it in the next election, assuming there had been a next election.

Absolutely!

The previous government had paid for it and was willing to pay more again for it. Taxpayer's money though.

500 billion Baht RPPS, first car ownership, tabletPcs, first home owners, and amnesty for all politically motivated crimes.

The previous governments being the only ones in Thai history to spend/waste taxpayers' money of course: A concept completely unheard of anywhere else in the world.

How many of those previous governments had 'self-financing' schemes ?

Anyway, no wonder Prayut blames politicians.

[rubl]

Absolutely!

Before money was spend on Bangkok and with Thaksin just spent. No wonder Prayut blames political leaders and the odd criminal fugitive.

Prayut blames others, but hasn't improved things regarding government spending or anything else.

If you say so, it must be regarded with an open, questioning mind.

Anyway, I guess you dislike the infra structure project with the double track higher speed link from Bangkok to NongKai? That would open up the NorthEast and help getting more investments there. Makes more sense than the priority on Bangkok - ChiangMai with a real high spped link as the previous government wanted. They even had a Minister state that lots of commuters were waiting for such link. Even lunch boxes were properly defined for those commuters.

You mean one of those proposed projects? Where are they on turning proposals into reality? Have they defined their requirements and called for competitive bids?

Oh wait, does this government do open, transparent, competitive bidding on projects? Or does that make it too difficult to make sure the "quality people" get their piece of the action?

Are they seriously defining the box lunches the commuters can have? That strikes me as weird, in a control freak sort of way.

What's next, you asking for the government to wave a magic wand to skip those delaying "Environment Impact studies", telling the local population they should just be happy?

Anyway, since this government can't get local financers, just like previous government, they have looked for and found countries who will finance under condition of building and repay either stretched out or through operation.

PS ask Ms. Yingluck about the lunch boxes. It was said they're were so nice, cute in a Thai way, they should be sold in the airports as well to promote Thainess.

PPS what happened with your interesting "Right, taxpayer money being spent all over the country. Before Thaksin the taxpayer money was almost entirely spent in Bangkok, which still gets a ridiculously large share."? Now you complain about delay and implicitly non-spending.

Edited September 28, 2015 by rubl

[Inn Between]

"betrayal of the voters' trust"

okok Mr. Perfect

It's looking like the General has a solution for that problem -- just eliminate the electoral process and there are no more voters -- nobody to betray. It's just so darned easy sometimes.

[heybruce]

Prayut blames others, but hasn't improved things regarding government spending or anything else.

If you say so, it must be regarded with an open, questioning mind.

Anyway, I guess you dislike the infra structure project with the double track higher speed link from Bangkok to NongKai? That would open up the NorthEast and help getting more investments there. Makes more sense than the priority on Bangkok - ChiangMai with a real high spped link as the previous government wanted. They even had a Minister state that lots of commuters were waiting for such link. Even lunch boxes were properly defined for those commuters.

You mean one of those proposed projects? Where are they on turning proposals into reality? Have they defined their requirements and called for competitive bids?

Oh wait, does this government do open, transparent, competitive bidding on projects? Or does that make it too difficult to make sure the "quality people" get their piece of the action?

Are they seriously defining the box lunches the commuters can have? That strikes me as weird, in a control freak sort of way.

What's next, you asking for the government to wave a magic wand to skip those delaying "Environment Impact studies", telling the local population they should just be happy?

Anyway, since this government can't get local financers, just like previous government, they have looked for and found countries who will finance under condition of building and repay either stretched out or through operation.

PS ask Ms. Yingluck about the lunch boxes. It was said they're were so nice, cute in a Thai way, they should be sold in the airports as well to promote Thainess.

PPS what happened with your interesting "Right, taxpayer money being spent all over the country. Before Thaksin the taxpayer money was almost entirely spent in Bangkok, which still gets a ridiculously large share."? Now you complain about delay and implicitly non-spending.

My point is that Thailand has proposals out the wazoo. The junta is adding to the list. Actual development doesn't seem to be happening.

My concern with financing has to do with lots of rich generals who don't like people to ask questions and aren't implementing transparency.

Your and/or the government's obsession with box lunches puzzles me.

Improving transportation links to Bangkok, if it ever happens, does spend some money outside of Bangkok, but it still serves the purposes of Bangkok. I'd be more impressed with a government that tried to lower student/teacher ratios in the rest of Thailand to the level they are in Bangkok, but I have concerns about letting the Orwellian junta get involved in education.

[rubl]

You mean one of those proposed projects? Where are they on turning proposals into reality? Have they defined their requirements and called for competitive bids?

Oh wait, does this government do open, transparent, competitive bidding on projects? Or does that make it too difficult to make sure the "quality people" get their piece of the action?

Are they seriously defining the box lunches the commuters can have? That strikes me as weird, in a control freak sort of way.

What's next, you asking for the government to wave a magic wand to skip those delaying "Environment Impact studies", telling the local population they should just be happy?

Anyway, since this government can't get local financers, just like previous government, they have looked for and found countries who will finance under condition of building and repay either stretched out or through operation.

PS ask Ms. Yingluck about the lunch boxes. It was said they're were so nice, cute in a Thai way, they should be sold in the airports as well to promote Thainess.

PPS what happened with your interesting "Right, taxpayer money being spent all over the country. Before Thaksin the taxpayer money was almost entirely spent in Bangkok, which still gets a ridiculously large share."? Now you complain about delay and implicitly non-spending.

My point is that Thailand has proposals out the wazoo. The junta is adding to the list. Actual development doesn't seem to be happening.

My concern with financing has to do with lots of rich generals who don't like people to ask questions and aren't implementing transparency.

Your and/or the government's obsession with box lunches puzzles me.

Improving transportation links to Bangkok, if it ever happens, does spend some money outside of Bangkok, but it still serves the purposes of Bangkok. I'd be more impressed with a government that tried to lower student/teacher ratios in the rest of Thailand to the level they are in Bangkok, but I have concerns about letting the Orwellian junta get involved in education.

Oh come on, Brucy. your point was

"Right, taxpayer money being spent all over the country. Before Thaksin the taxpayer money was almost entirely spent in Bangkok, which still gets a ridiculously large share."

As for the lunch boxes, only you seem obsessed. Neither the junta nor I care about Ms. Yingluck's lunch boxes (as long as they're not used to 'influence' people).

BTW regarding education hop over to the topic on

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/858881-thai-universities-struggling-to-climb-up-world-rankings-and-be-profitable/

We may even agree on the need to make education up to higher levels much more accessable and of higher quality for all rather than having some universities making a nice profit. But let's use the right topic for such.

Edited September 28, 2015 by rubl

[phycokiller]

section 44 but he cant name names?

[heybruce]

You mean one of those proposed projects? Where are they on turning proposals into reality? Have they defined their requirements and called for competitive bids?

Oh wait, does this government do open, transparent, competitive bidding on projects? Or does that make it too difficult to make sure the "quality people" get their piece of the action?

Are they seriously defining the box lunches the commuters can have? That strikes me as weird, in a control freak sort of way.

What's next, you asking for the government to wave a magic wand to skip those delaying "Environment Impact studies", telling the local population they should just be happy?

Anyway, since this government can't get local financers, just like previous government, they have looked for and found countries who will finance under condition of building and repay either stretched out or through operation.

PS ask Ms. Yingluck about the lunch boxes. It was said they're were so nice, cute in a Thai way, they should be sold in the airports as well to promote Thainess.

PPS what happened with your interesting "Right, taxpayer money being spent all over the country. Before Thaksin the taxpayer money was almost entirely spent in Bangkok, which still gets a ridiculously large share."? Now you complain about delay and implicitly non-spending.

My point is that Thailand has proposals out the wazoo. The junta is adding to the list. Actual development doesn't seem to be happening.

My concern with financing has to do with lots of rich generals who don't like people to ask questions and aren't implementing transparency.

Your and/or the government's obsession with box lunches puzzles me.

Improving transportation links to Bangkok, if it ever happens, does spend some money outside of Bangkok, but it still serves the purposes of Bangkok. I'd be more impressed with a government that tried to lower student/teacher ratios in the rest of Thailand to the level they are in Bangkok, but I have concerns about letting the Orwellian junta get involved in education.

Oh come on, Brucy. your point was

"Right, taxpayer money being spent all over the country. Before Thaksin the taxpayer money was almost entirely spent in Bangkok, which still gets a ridiculously large share."

As for the lunch boxes, only you seem obsessed. Neither the junta nor I care about Ms. Yingluck's lunch boxes (as long as they're not used to 'influence' people).

BTW regarding education hop over to the topic on

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/858881-thai-universities-struggling-to-climb-up-world-rankings-and-be-profitable/

We may even agree on the need to make education up to higher levels much more accessable and of higher quality for all rather than having some universities making a nice profit. But let's use the right topic for such.

"Oh come on, Brucy. your point was

"Right, taxpayer money being spent all over the country. Before Thaksin the taxpayer money was almost entirely spent in Bangkok, which still gets a ridiculously large share.""

That was one of my earlier points. However when you referred to a high speed rail project as if it were a reality instead of a proposal I corrected you.

"As for the lunch boxes, only you seem obsessed. Neither the junta nor I care about Ms. Yingluck's lunch boxes (as long as they're not used to 'influence' people)."

You are the one who introduced lunchboxes, I have only referred to the peculiarity of your repeatedly bringing the subject up.

Regarding staying on topic, you are also the one who brought government spending into this topic, and the subject of trains. Why didn't you take your train comments to an appropriate train thread?

I brought up education as a counter to your claim that spending money on improving rail links to Bangkok counts as spending that benefits the rest of Thailand. If done properly it does. In order to address your off-topic posts, I pointed out that of greater benefit to the majority of Thai people would be increasing investment in education throughout the country to Bangkok levels. The World Bank agrees with me on this:

"Service delivery disparities mirror expenditure disparities. In the health sector there are three times more doctors per capita in Bangkok than in other regions.

While in the education sector the teacher per student ratio is much lower in the North and the Northeast than Bangkok and the central region. These disparities are correlated to human development outcomes." http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2012/05/09/000333037_20120509003158/Rendered/PDF/685510ESW00PUB0y0Note0master0120501.pdf

Let's go back to your earlier comment:

"The previous government had paid for it and was willing to pay more again for it. Taxpayer's money though.

500 billion Baht RPPS, first car ownership, tabletPcs, first home owners, and amnesty for all politically motivated crimes."

The last part is rich--you conveniently overlook the fact that the junta has once again granted itself amnesty for staging another coup, an act considered treason in most of the world.

More to the current point, you seem to object to wasteful government spending. Would you agree that the logical place to start looking for such wasteful spending is where the majority of spending takes place? From the same source as above:

"Figure 3 shows that although Bangkok accounts for about 17 percent of population and 25.8 percent of GDP, it benefits from about 72.2 percent of total expenditures. This is in sharp contrast to the Northeast which accounts for about 34 percent of population and 11.5 percent of GDP, but received only 5.8 percent of expenditures."

People who object to unaffordable populism always give examples of spending that takes place outside of Bangkok. I suspect that when 17% of the population is getting 72% of government spending then the unaffordable spending is taking place in Bangkok.

Is the junta addressing this gross disparity in government investment? Not that I can see. The junta is simply blaming politicians for all of Thailand's ills and promising to hold onto power until all "divisions" end, a convenient pretext to hold onto power forever.

Have I sufficiently addressed your off-topic posts on government spending, trains and lunch boxes?

[rubl]

You are the one who introduced lunchboxes, I have only referred to the peculiarity of your repeatedly bringing the subject up.

Regarding staying on topic, you are also the one who brought government spending into this topic, and the subject of trains. Why didn't you take your train comments to an appropriate train thread?

I brought up education as a counter to your claim that spending money on improving rail links to Bangkok counts as spending that benefits the rest of Thailand. If done properly it does. In order to address your off-topic posts, I pointed out that of greater benefit to the majority of Thai people would be increasing investment in education throughout the country to Bangkok levels. The World Bank agrees with me on this:

"Service delivery disparities mirror expenditure disparities. In the health sector there are three times more doctors per capita in Bangkok than in other regions.

While in the education sector the teacher per student ratio is much lower in the North and the Northeast than Bangkok and the central region. These disparities are correlated to human development outcomes." http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2012/05/09/000333037_20120509003158/Rendered/PDF/685510ESW00PUB0y0Note0master0120501.pdf

Let's go back to your earlier comment:

"The previous government had paid for it and was willing to pay more again for it. Taxpayer's money though.

500 billion Baht RPPS, first car ownership, tabletPcs, first home owners, and amnesty for all politically motivated crimes."

The last part is rich--you conveniently overlook the fact that the junta has once again granted itself amnesty for staging another coup, an act considered treason in most of the world.

More to the current point, you seem to object to wasteful government spending. Would you agree that the logical place to start looking for such wasteful spending is where the majority of spending takes place? From the same source as above:

"Figure 3 shows that although Bangkok accounts for about 17 percent of population and 25.8 percent of GDP, it benefits from about 72.2 percent of total expenditures. This is in sharp contrast to the Northeast which accounts for about 34 percent of population and 11.5 percent of GDP, but received only 5.8 percent of expenditures."

People who object to unaffordable populism always give examples of spending that takes place outside of Bangkok. I suspect that when 17% of the population is getting 72% of government spending then the unaffordable spending is taking place in Bangkok.

Is the junta addressing this gross disparity in government investment? Not that I can see. The junta is simply blaming politicians for all of Thailand's ills and promising to hold onto power until all "divisions" end, a convenient pretext to hold onto power forever.

Have I sufficiently addressed your off-topic posts on government spending, trains and lunch boxes?

To repeat

""Right, taxpayer money being spent all over the country. Before Thaksin the taxpayer money was almost entirely spent in Bangkok, which still gets a ridiculously large share."""

and following you complain the government sits still.

The rest is just your usual diversion, but don't worry, PM Prayut won't blame you.

[heybruce]

You are the one who introduced lunchboxes, I have only referred to the peculiarity of your repeatedly bringing the subject up.

Regarding staying on topic, you are also the one who brought government spending into this topic, and the subject of trains. Why didn't you take your train comments to an appropriate train thread?

I brought up education as a counter to your claim that spending money on improving rail links to Bangkok counts as spending that benefits the rest of Thailand. If done properly it does. In order to address your off-topic posts, I pointed out that of greater benefit to the majority of Thai people would be increasing investment in education throughout the country to Bangkok levels. The World Bank agrees with me on this:

"Service delivery disparities mirror expenditure disparities. In the health sector there are three times more doctors per capita in Bangkok than in other regions.

While in the education sector the teacher per student ratio is much lower in the North and the Northeast than Bangkok and the central region. These disparities are correlated to human development outcomes." http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2012/05/09/000333037_20120509003158/Rendered/PDF/685510ESW00PUB0y0Note0master0120501.pdf

Let's go back to your earlier comment:

"The previous government had paid for it and was willing to pay more again for it. Taxpayer's money though.

500 billion Baht RPPS, first car ownership, tabletPcs, first home owners, and amnesty for all politically motivated crimes."

The last part is rich--you conveniently overlook the fact that the junta has once again granted itself amnesty for staging another coup, an act considered treason in most of the world.

More to the current point, you seem to object to wasteful government spending. Would you agree that the logical place to start looking for such wasteful spending is where the majority of spending takes place? From the same source as above:

"Figure 3 shows that although Bangkok accounts for about 17 percent of population and 25.8 percent of GDP, it benefits from about 72.2 percent of total expenditures. This is in sharp contrast to the Northeast which accounts for about 34 percent of population and 11.5 percent of GDP, but received only 5.8 percent of expenditures."

People who object to unaffordable populism always give examples of spending that takes place outside of Bangkok. I suspect that when 17% of the population is getting 72% of government spending then the unaffordable spending is taking place in Bangkok.

Is the junta addressing this gross disparity in government investment? Not that I can see. The junta is simply blaming politicians for all of Thailand's ills and promising to hold onto power until all "divisions" end, a convenient pretext to hold onto power forever.

Have I sufficiently addressed your off-topic posts on government spending, trains and lunch boxes?

To repeat

""Right, taxpayer money being spent all over the country. Before Thaksin the taxpayer money was almost entirely spent in Bangkok, which still gets a ridiculously large share."""

and following you complain the government sits still.

The rest is just your usual diversion, but don't worry, PM Prayut won't blame you.

To repeat, government spending, trains and lunch boxes were your diversions. I merely addressed them

But yes, I do complain about a junta that offers plans for some unspecified time in the future without actually doing anything, talks endlessly about reforms without defining and implementing reforms, and blames all its problems on previous governments, Especially in view of how it came to power.

Edited September 29, 2015 by heybruce

[rubl]

You are the one who introduced lunchboxes, I have only referred to the peculiarity of your repeatedly bringing the subject up.

Regarding staying on topic, you are also the one who brought government spending into this topic, and the subject of trains. Why didn't you take your train comments to an appropriate train thread?

I brought up education as a counter to your claim that spending money on improving rail links to Bangkok counts as spending that benefits the rest of Thailand. If done properly it does. In order to address your off-topic posts, I pointed out that of greater benefit to the majority of Thai people would be increasing investment in education throughout the country to Bangkok levels. The World Bank agrees with me on this:

"Service delivery disparities mirror expenditure disparities. In the health sector there are three times more doctors per capita in Bangkok than in other regions.

While in the education sector the teacher per student ratio is much lower in the North and the Northeast than Bangkok and the central region. These disparities are correlated to human development outcomes." http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2012/05/09/000333037_20120509003158/Rendered/PDF/685510ESW00PUB0y0Note0master0120501.pdf

Let's go back to your earlier comment:

"The previous government had paid for it and was willing to pay more again for it. Taxpayer's money though.

500 billion Baht RPPS, first car ownership, tabletPcs, first home owners, and amnesty for all politically motivated crimes."

The last part is rich--you conveniently overlook the fact that the junta has once again granted itself amnesty for staging another coup, an act considered treason in most of the world.

More to the current point, you seem to object to wasteful government spending. Would you agree that the logical place to start looking for such wasteful spending is where the majority of spending takes place? From the same source as above:

"Figure 3 shows that although Bangkok accounts for about 17 percent of population and 25.8 percent of GDP, it benefits from about 72.2 percent of total expenditures. This is in sharp contrast to the Northeast which accounts for about 34 percent of population and 11.5 percent of GDP, but received only 5.8 percent of expenditures."

People who object to unaffordable populism always give examples of spending that takes place outside of Bangkok. I suspect that when 17% of the population is getting 72% of government spending then the unaffordable spending is taking place in Bangkok.

Is the junta addressing this gross disparity in government investment? Not that I can see. The junta is simply blaming politicians for all of Thailand's ills and promising to hold onto power until all "divisions" end, a convenient pretext to hold onto power forever.

Have I sufficiently addressed your off-topic posts on government spending, trains and lunch boxes?

To repeat

""Right, taxpayer money being spent all over the country. Before Thaksin the taxpayer money was almost entirely spent in Bangkok, which still gets a ridiculously large share."""

and following you complain the government sits still.

The rest is just your usual diversion, but don't worry, PM Prayut won't blame you.

To repeat, government spending, trains and lunch boxes were your diversions. I merely addressed them

But yes, I do complain about a junta that offers plans for some unspecified time in the future without actually doing anything, talks endlessly about reforms without defining and implementing reforms, and blames all its problems on previous governments, Especially in view of how it came to power.

No, you addressed my

"""They should use the power according to the intentions of people who voted for them. The people trust them to run the country and bring an improved standard of living to the people"

That's opposed to "thanks for voting, please go home now""

replying

"If that had truly been the government's attitude it would have paid for it in the next election, assuming there had been a next election."

and me saying

"Absolutely!

The previous government had paid for it and was willing to pay more again for it. Taxpayer's money though.

500 billion Baht RPPS, first car ownership, tabletPcs, first home owners, and amnesty for all politically motivated crimes."

Next you started with "but before Thaksin" and it went downhill after.

Now you start the normal rant on junta this, junta that. What's next?

Anyway, PM Prayut blames politicians. Strictly speaking he implicitly blames the electorate for electing such appalling bunch of politicians. Coffers empty? Well, who elected the politicians who emptied the coffers? Self-financing scheme losing 500++ billion Baht and 'elected' government trying to avoid it responsibility by pushing through a blanket amnesty bill which covered their own first two years in office? No wonder PM Prayut blames politicians. He had to make reservations in the National Budgets for two years now to repay and five more years to follow. At the same time some seem to wonder why the current government doesn't spent more to help the economy.

Edited September 29, 2015 by rubl

[wprime]

Isn't Prayut the political leader?

[GinBoy2]

So, once again playmates, all of you zealots explain to this numbnuts, how exactly have any of the military, appointed, or elected have exactly excelled in governing this country?

Remember the military or their designates have been in power for 50% of the past 40 years, and the 'elected' who are essentially the same tribe, two sides of the same coin.

You might also want to reflect on the fact that Korea made it's dramatic rise as it transitioned to a true, free and democratic society.

[heybruce]

You are the one who introduced lunchboxes, I have only referred to the peculiarity of your repeatedly bringing the subject up.

Regarding staying on topic, you are also the one who brought government spending into this topic, and the subject of trains. Why didn't you take your train comments to an appropriate train thread?

I brought up education as a counter to your claim that spending money on improving rail links to Bangkok counts as spending that benefits the rest of Thailand. If done properly it does. In order to address your off-topic posts, I pointed out that of greater benefit to the majority of Thai people would be increasing investment in education throughout the country to Bangkok levels. The World Bank agrees with me on this:

"Service delivery disparities mirror expenditure disparities. In the health sector there are three times more doctors per capita in Bangkok than in other regions.

While in the education sector the teacher per student ratio is much lower in the North and the Northeast than Bangkok and the central region. These disparities are correlated to human development outcomes." http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2012/05/09/000333037_20120509003158/Rendered/PDF/685510ESW00PUB0y0Note0master0120501.pdf

Let's go back to your earlier comment:

"The previous government had paid for it and was willing to pay more again for it. Taxpayer's money though.

500 billion Baht RPPS, first car ownership, tabletPcs, first home owners, and amnesty for all politically motivated crimes."

The last part is rich--you conveniently overlook the fact that the junta has once again granted itself amnesty for staging another coup, an act considered treason in most of the world.

More to the current point, you seem to object to wasteful government spending. Would you agree that the logical place to start looking for such wasteful spending is where the majority of spending takes place? From the same source as above:

"Figure 3 shows that although Bangkok accounts for about 17 percent of population and 25.8 percent of GDP, it benefits from about 72.2 percent of total expenditures. This is in sharp contrast to the Northeast which accounts for about 34 percent of population and 11.5 percent of GDP, but received only 5.8 percent of expenditures."

People who object to unaffordable populism always give examples of spending that takes place outside of Bangkok. I suspect that when 17% of the population is getting 72% of government spending then the unaffordable spending is taking place in Bangkok.

Is the junta addressing this gross disparity in government investment? Not that I can see. The junta is simply blaming politicians for all of Thailand's ills and promising to hold onto power until all "divisions" end, a convenient pretext to hold onto power forever.

Have I sufficiently addressed your off-topic posts on government spending, trains and lunch boxes?

To repeat

""Right, taxpayer money being spent all over the country. Before Thaksin the taxpayer money was almost entirely spent in Bangkok, which still gets a ridiculously large share."""

and following you complain the government sits still.

The rest is just your usual diversion, but don't worry, PM Prayut won't blame you.

To repeat, government spending, trains and lunch boxes were your diversions. I merely addressed them

But yes, I do complain about a junta that offers plans for some unspecified time in the future without actually doing anything, talks endlessly about reforms without defining and implementing reforms, and blames all its problems on previous governments, Especially in view of how it came to power.

No, you addressed my

"""They should use the power according to the intentions of people who voted for them. The people trust them to run the country and bring an improved standard of living to the people"

That's opposed to "thanks for voting, please go home now""

replying

"If that had truly been the government's attitude it would have paid for it in the next election, assuming there had been a next election."

and me saying

"Absolutely!

The previous government had paid for it and was willing to pay more again for it. Taxpayer's money though.

500 billion Baht RPPS, first car ownership, tabletPcs, first home owners, and amnesty for all politically motivated crimes."

Next you started with "but before Thaksin" and it went downhill after.

Now you start the normal rant on junta this, junta that. What's next?

Anyway, PM Prayut blames politicians. Strictly speaking he implicitly blames the electorate for electing such appalling bunch of politicians. Coffers empty? Well, who elected the politicians who emptied the coffers? Self-financing scheme losing 500++ billion Baht and 'elected' government trying to avoid it responsibility by pushing through a blanket amnesty bill which covered their own first two years in office? No wonder PM Prayut blames politicians. He had to make reservations in the National Budgets for two years now to repay and five more years to follow. At the same time some seem to wonder why the current government doesn't spent more to help the economy.

Are you claiming to have difficulties with English again? When I wrote "If that had truly been the government's attitude it would have paid for it in the next election, assuming there had been a next election." I clearly meant the government would have paid for poor performance in office with poor election results. You brought up government use of taxpayer money after that.

Once again, you brought up government spending, trains and box lunches. I responded to your diversions. But if you insist, I'll also give you credit for your "but, but, but....Thaksin!" diversion.

[rubl]

No, you addressed my

"""They should use the power according to the intentions of people who voted for them. The people trust them to run the country and bring an improved standard of living to the people"

That's opposed to "thanks for voting, please go home now""

replying

"If that had truly been the government's attitude it would have paid for it in the next election, assuming there had been a next election."

and me saying

"Absolutely!

The previous government had paid for it and was willing to pay more again for it. Taxpayer's money though.

500 billion Baht RPPS, first car ownership, tabletPcs, first home owners, and amnesty for all politically motivated crimes."

Next you started with "but before Thaksin" and it went downhill after.

Now you start the normal rant on junta this, junta that. What's next?

Anyway, PM Prayut blames politicians. Strictly speaking he implicitly blames the electorate for electing such appalling bunch of politicians. Coffers empty? Well, who elected the politicians who emptied the coffers? Self-financing scheme losing 500++ billion Baht and 'elected' government trying to avoid it responsibility by pushing through a blanket amnesty bill which covered their own first two years in office? No wonder PM Prayut blames politicians. He had to make reservations in the National Budgets for two years now to repay and five more years to follow. At the same time some seem to wonder why the current government doesn't spent more to help the economy.

Are you claiming to have difficulties with English again? When I wrote "If that had truly been the government's attitude it would have paid for it in the next election, assuming there had been a next election." I clearly meant the government would have paid for poor performance in office with poor election results. You brought up government use of taxpayer money after that.

Once again, you brought up government spending, trains and box lunches. I responded to your diversions. But if you insist, I'll also give you credit for your "but, but, but....Thaksin!" diversion.

Are you unable to stop your nonsense?

You seem as obsessed with lunchboxes as the Shinawatra Family while ignoring the crazy previous government spending and still thinking that in Thailand elections solve problems.

Let see, topic PM Prayut blames politicians. Heybruce reaction "bad, bad junta" and anything else rejected as diversion of the "bad, bad junta".

So, blame politicians, especially those under control of criminal fugitives who are still peeved at not having their amnesty or police rank.

[heybruce]

No, you addressed my

"""They should use the power according to the intentions of people who voted for them. The people trust them to run the country and bring an improved standard of living to the people"

That's opposed to "thanks for voting, please go home now""

replying

"If that had truly been the government's attitude it would have paid for it in the next election, assuming there had been a next election."

and me saying

"Absolutely!

The previous government had paid for it and was willing to pay more again for it. Taxpayer's money though.

500 billion Baht RPPS, first car ownership, tabletPcs, first home owners, and amnesty for all politically motivated crimes."

Next you started with "but before Thaksin" and it went downhill after.

Now you start the normal rant on junta this, junta that. What's next?

Anyway, PM Prayut blames politicians. Strictly speaking he implicitly blames the electorate for electing such appalling bunch of politicians. Coffers empty? Well, who elected the politicians who emptied the coffers? Self-financing scheme losing 500++ billion Baht and 'elected' government trying to avoid it responsibility by pushing through a blanket amnesty bill which covered their own first two years in office? No wonder PM Prayut blames politicians. He had to make reservations in the National Budgets for two years now to repay and five more years to follow. At the same time some seem to wonder why the current government doesn't spent more to help the economy.

Are you claiming to have difficulties with English again? When I wrote "If that had truly been the government's attitude it would have paid for it in the next election, assuming there had been a next election." I clearly meant the government would have paid for poor performance in office with poor election results. You brought up government use of taxpayer money after that.

Once again, you brought up government spending, trains and box lunches. I responded to your diversions. But if you insist, I'll also give you credit for your "but, but, but....Thaksin!" diversion.

Are you unable to stop your nonsense?

You seem as obsessed with lunchboxes as the Shinawatra Family while ignoring the crazy previous government spending and still thinking that in Thailand elections solve problems.

Let see, topic PM Prayut blames politicians. Heybruce reaction "bad, bad junta" and anything else rejected as diversion of the "bad, bad junta".

So, blame politicians, especially those under control of criminal fugitives who are still peeved at not having their amnesty or police rank.

Are you unable to concede the obvious?

You are the one who brought up government spending, trains and lunch boxes, after your off-topic "bad, bad, Thaksin" post. Also, I didn't ignore "the crazy government spending", I pointed out the insane injustice in how the government was spending much more comprehensively than you ever have. However I do think that elections provide a better long-term solution to problems than frequent military coups.

As to the junta being bad, I'll let the means by which it came to power, its means for staying in power, and its lack of accomplishments other than staying in power speak for itself.

The fact that the junta is once again casting blame elsewhere--"but, but, but....politicians!"--indicates that even the generals know their performance has been underwhelming.

Edited September 29, 2015 by heybruce

[Thai at Heart]

You mean one of those proposed projects? Where are they on turning proposals into reality? Have they defined their requirements and called for competitive bids?

Oh wait, does this government do open, transparent, competitive bidding on projects? Or does that make it too difficult to make sure the "quality people" get their piece of the action?

Are they seriously defining the box lunches the commuters can have? That strikes me as weird, in a control freak sort of way.

What's next, you asking for the government to wave a magic wand to skip those delaying "Environment Impact studies", telling the local population they should just be happy?

Anyway, since this government can't get local financers, just like previous government, they have looked for and found countries who will finance under condition of building and repay either stretched out or through operation.

PS ask Ms. Yingluck about the lunch boxes. It was said they're were so nice, cute in a Thai way, they should be sold in the airports as well to promote Thainess.

PPS what happened with your interesting "Right, taxpayer money being spent all over the country. Before Thaksin the taxpayer money was almost entirely spent in Bangkok, which still gets a ridiculously large share."? Now you complain about delay and implicitly non-spending.

My point is that Thailand has proposals out the wazoo. The junta is adding to the list. Actual development doesn't seem to be happening.

My concern with financing has to do with lots of rich generals who don't like people to ask questions and aren't implementing transparency.

Your and/or the government's obsession with box lunches puzzles me.

Improving transportation links to Bangkok, if it ever happens, does spend some money outside of Bangkok, but it still serves the purposes of Bangkok. I'd be more impressed with a government that tried to lower student/teacher ratios in the rest of Thailand to the level they are in Bangkok, but I have concerns about letting the Orwellian junta get involved in education.

Oh come on, Brucy. your point was

"Right, taxpayer money being spent all over the country. Before Thaksin the taxpayer money was almost entirely spent in Bangkok, which still gets a ridiculously large share."

As for the lunch boxes, only you seem obsessed. Neither the junta nor I care about Ms. Yingluck's lunch boxes (as long as they're not used to 'influence' people).

BTW regarding education hop over to the topic on

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/858881-thai-universities-struggling-to-climb-up-world-rankings-and-be-profitable/

We may even agree on the need to make education up to higher levels much more accessable and of higher quality for all rather than having some universities making a nice profit. But let's use the right topic for such.

"Oh come on, Brucy. your point was

"Right, taxpayer money being spent all over the country. Before Thaksin the taxpayer money was almost entirely spent in Bangkok, which still gets a ridiculously large share.""

That was one of my earlier points. However when you referred to a high speed rail project as if it were a reality instead of a proposal I corrected you.

"As for the lunch boxes, only you seem obsessed. Neither the junta nor I care about Ms. Yingluck's lunch boxes (as long as they're not used to 'influence' people)."

You are the one who introduced lunchboxes, I have only referred to the peculiarity of your repeatedly bringing the subject up.

Regarding staying on topic, you are also the one who brought government spending into this topic, and the subject of trains. Why didn't you take your train comments to an appropriate train thread?

I brought up education as a counter to your claim that spending money on improving rail links to Bangkok counts as spending that benefits the rest of Thailand. If done properly it does. In order to address your off-topic posts, I pointed out that of greater benefit to the majority of Thai people would be increasing investment in education throughout the country to Bangkok levels. The World Bank agrees with me on this:

"Service delivery disparities mirror expenditure disparities. In the health sector there are three times more doctors per capita in Bangkok than in other regions.

While in the education sector the teacher per student ratio is much lower in the North and the Northeast than Bangkok and the central region. These disparities are correlated to human development outcomes." http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2012/05/09/000333037_20120509003158/Rendered/PDF/685510ESW00PUB0y0Note0master0120501.pdf

Let's go back to your earlier comment:

"The previous government had paid for it and was willing to pay more again for it. Taxpayer's money though.

500 billion Baht RPPS, first car ownership, tabletPcs, first home owners, and amnesty for all politically motivated crimes."

The last part is rich--you conveniently overlook the fact that the junta has once again granted itself amnesty for staging another coup, an act considered treason in most of the world.

More to the current point, you seem to object to wasteful government spending. Would you agree that the logical place to start looking for such wasteful spending is where the majority of spending takes place? From the same source as above:

"Figure 3 shows that although Bangkok accounts for about 17 percent of population and 25.8 percent of GDP, it benefits from about 72.2 percent of total expenditures. This is in sharp contrast to the Northeast which accounts for about 34 percent of population and 11.5 percent of GDP, but received only 5.8 percent of expenditures."

People who object to unaffordable populism always give examples of spending that takes place outside of Bangkok. I suspect that when 17% of the population is getting 72% of government spending then the unaffordable spending is taking place in Bangkok.

Is the junta addressing this gross disparity in government investment? Not that I can see. The junta is simply blaming politicians for all of Thailand's ills and promising to hold onto power until all "divisions" end, a convenient pretext to hold onto power forever.

Have I sufficiently addressed your off-topic posts on government spending, trains and lunch boxes?

Also bear in mind that all of this business that apparently goes on in Bangkok represents where companies pay their taxes. Take the oil business, rayong has all the refineries but everything is conducted from head office. Sales, purchasing, payroll etc.

Thus everything is booked in Bangkok. This goes for just about every major business in Bangkok, then add on that vat is paid centrally.

Bangkok literally sucks all the wealth out of the country. The work occurs nationwide, but a much larger proportion than should be appears to occur in Bangkok when in reality it happens up country.

[Thai at Heart]

So, once again playmates, all of you zealots explain to this numbnuts, how exactly have any of the military, appointed, or elected have exactly excelled in governing this country?

Remember the military or their designates have been in power for 50% of the past 40 years, and the 'elected' who are essentially the same tribe, two sides of the same coin.

You might also want to reflect on the fact that Korea made it's dramatic rise as it transitioned to a true, free and democratic society.

Truly, Korea is a marvel. But then it has worked to squish corruption and has Korean companies owned by ethnic Koreans run by Korean governments trying to make Korea a better place.

Unlike Thailand which has largely been colonised by an ethnic immigrant group who treat the population as their chattels, not worthy of educating or any more than the position in which they were born.

[GinBoy2]

So, once again playmates, all of you zealots explain to this numbnuts, how exactly have any of the military, appointed, or elected have exactly excelled in governing this country?

Remember the military or their designates have been in power for 50% of the past 40 years, and the 'elected' who are essentially the same tribe, two sides of the same coin.

You might also want to reflect on the fact that Korea made it's dramatic rise as it transitioned to a true, free and democratic society.

Truly, Korea is a marvel. But then it has worked to squish corruption and has Korean companies owned by ethnic Koreans run by Korean governments trying to make Korea a better place.

Unlike Thailand which has largely been colonised by an ethnic immigrant group who treat the population as their chattels, not worthy of educating or any more than the position in which they were born.

Good, so once and for all we can agree that regardless of the color, red, yellow, green all of the 'leaders' of this country have essentially failed.

Sometimes reading the rhetoric that gets written here one could assume that there was a golden age of milk and honey, yet unfortunately for those TVF zealots, you probably haven't lived here that long, and the figures just don't support the zealotry.

Once you come to the realization that this isn't a western democracy or anything close, and that the ruling class, military or otherwise rule without any interest or concern for the people they rule, it's easier to rationalize.

There are many here that seem to think, or believe that one or the other side is good, bad or evil, what they fail to recognize is that all of them are different sides of the same coin.

Democracy , true democracy will only come to this country when the people themselves recognize that they need to be lead by people that look, feel, live like they do, not some fake prophet like Thaksin, Suthep, Prayuth, Abbhisit who inhabit a world so removed from the average Thai it's unbelievable

[rubl]

No, you addressed my

"""They should use the power according to the intentions of people who voted for them. The people trust them to run the country and bring an improved standard of living to the people"

That's opposed to "thanks for voting, please go home now""

replying

"If that had truly been the government's attitude it would have paid for it in the next election, assuming there had been a next election."

and me saying

"Absolutely!

The previous government had paid for it and was willing to pay more again for it. Taxpayer's money though.

500 billion Baht RPPS, first car ownership, tabletPcs, first home owners, and amnesty for all politically motivated crimes."

Next you started with "but before Thaksin" and it went downhill after.

Now you start the normal rant on junta this, junta that. What's next?

Anyway, PM Prayut blames politicians. Strictly speaking he implicitly blames the electorate for electing such appalling bunch of politicians. Coffers empty? Well, who elected the politicians who emptied the coffers? Self-financing scheme losing 500++ billion Baht and 'elected' government trying to avoid it responsibility by pushing through a blanket amnesty bill which covered their own first two years in office? No wonder PM Prayut blames politicians. He had to make reservations in the National Budgets for two years now to repay and five more years to follow. At the same time some seem to wonder why the current government doesn't spent more to help the economy.

Are you claiming to have difficulties with English again? When I wrote "If that had truly been the government's attitude it would have paid for it in the next election, assuming there had been a next election." I clearly meant the government would have paid for poor performance in office with poor election results. You brought up government use of taxpayer money after that.

Once again, you brought up government spending, trains and box lunches. I responded to your diversions. But if you insist, I'll also give you credit for your "but, but, but....Thaksin!" diversion.

Are you unable to stop your nonsense?

You seem as obsessed with lunchboxes as the Shinawatra Family while ignoring the crazy previous government spending and still thinking that in Thailand elections solve problems.

Let see, topic PM Prayut blames politicians. Heybruce reaction "bad, bad junta" and anything else rejected as diversion of the "bad, bad junta".

So, blame politicians, especially those under control of criminal fugitives who are still peeved at not having their amnesty or police rank.

Are you unable to concede the obvious?

You are the one who brought up government spending, trains and lunch boxes, after your off-topic "bad, bad, Thaksin" post. Also, I didn't ignore "the crazy government spending", I pointed out the insane injustice in how the government was spending much more comprehensively than you ever have. However I do think that elections provide a better long-term solution to problems than frequent military coups.

As to the junta being bad, I'll let the means by which it came to power, its means for staying in power, and its lack of accomplishments other than staying in power speak for itself.

The fact that the junta is once again casting blame elsewhere--"but, but, but....politicians!"--indicates that even the generals know their performance has been underwhelming.

The topic is PM Prayut blaming politicians for abuse of power and betraying voters' trust. I merely indicate example of such betrayal (squander away money) and abuse (going for a blanket amnesty for own actions like squandering away taxpayers money).

As for underwhelming performance, up-to-a-point. There does seem to be a certain distraction, like the demand to behave as if they're a normal, democratically elected government while showing strength and push projects to speedy start (while keeping up with Environmental Impact Studies and the wishes of the local population of course). Requests to wave magic wands and requests not to do so. Requests for elections and no reforms progressed yet to ensure the result wouldn't be a return to 'buffet' governments again. Criminal fugitives telling his red-shirts to bide their time indicates nothing has changed yet. Both normal and criminal politicians still on edge to leap in and make a mess again.

[Rimmer]

A personal attack on another poster has been removed

[Thai at Heart]

So, once again playmates, all of you zealots explain to this numbnuts, how exactly have any of the military, appointed, or elected have exactly excelled in governing this country?

Remember the military or their designates have been in power for 50% of the past 40 years, and the 'elected' who are essentially the same tribe, two sides of the same coin.

You might also want to reflect on the fact that Korea made it's dramatic rise as it transitioned to a true, free and democratic society.

Truly, Korea is a marvel. But then it has worked to squish corruption and has Korean companies owned by ethnic Koreans run by Korean governments trying to make Korea a better place.

Unlike Thailand which has largely been colonised by an ethnic immigrant group who treat the population as their chattels, not worthy of educating or any more than the position in which they were born.

Good, so once and for all we can agree that regardless of the color, red, yellow, green all of the 'leaders' of this country have essentially failed.

Sometimes reading the rhetoric that gets written here one could assume that there was a golden age of milk and honey, yet unfortunately for those TVF zealots, you probably haven't lived here that long, and the figures just don't support the zealotry.

Once you come to the realization that this isn't a western democracy or anything close, and that the ruling class, military or otherwise rule without any interest or concern for the people they rule, it's easier to rationalize.

There are many here that seem to think, or believe that one or the other side is good, bad or evil, what they fail to recognize is that all of them are different sides of the same coin.

Democracy , true democracy will only come to this country when the people themselves recognize that they need to be lead by people that look, feel, live like they do, not some fake prophet like Thaksin, Suthep, Prayuth, Abbhisit who inhabit a world so removed from the average Thai it's unbelievable

There is a very entrenched status quo in Thailand that will not give it up for anything. They don't see any benefit in growing the wealth of the whole country, and they definitely don't want any possibility of their position ever being threatened. That is what this entire political mess has been about. Not corruption, not middle or lower class. Just old money versus new money trying to save their ass.

[heybruce]

Are you unable to stop your nonsense?

You seem as obsessed with lunchboxes as the Shinawatra Family while ignoring the crazy previous government spending and still thinking that in Thailand elections solve problems.

Let see, topic PM Prayut blames politicians. Heybruce reaction "bad, bad junta" and anything else rejected as diversion of the "bad, bad junta".

So, blame politicians, especially those under control of criminal fugitives who are still peeved at not having their amnesty or police rank.

Are you unable to concede the obvious?

You are the one who brought up government spending, trains and lunch boxes, after your off-topic "bad, bad, Thaksin" post. Also, I didn't ignore "the crazy government spending", I pointed out the insane injustice in how the government was spending much more comprehensively than you ever have. However I do think that elections provide a better long-term solution to problems than frequent military coups.

As to the junta being bad, I'll let the means by which it came to power, its means for staying in power, and its lack of accomplishments other than staying in power speak for itself.

The fact that the junta is once again casting blame elsewhere--"but, but, but....politicians!"--indicates that even the generals know their performance has been underwhelming.

The topic is PM Prayut blaming politicians for abuse of power and betraying voters' trust. I merely indicate example of such betrayal (squander away money) and abuse (going for a blanket amnesty for own actions like squandering away taxpayers money).

As for underwhelming performance, up-to-a-point. There does seem to be a certain distraction, like the demand to behave as if they're a normal, democratically elected government while showing strength and push projects to speedy start (while keeping up with Environmental Impact Studies and the wishes of the local population of course). Requests to wave magic wands and requests not to do so. Requests for elections and no reforms progressed yet to ensure the result wouldn't be a return to 'buffet' governments again. Criminal fugitives telling his red-shirts to bide their time indicates nothing has changed yet. Both normal and criminal politicians still on edge to leap in and make a mess again.

"I merely indicate example of such betrayal (squander away money) and abuse (going for a blanket amnesty for own actions like squandering away taxpayers money)."

Squander away money? Are you referring to the farmer subsidies and other actions that the PTP promised in their election campaign? If so, those issues should have been addressed in a new election campaign.

I will not allow you to derail the topic again with your "amnesty" nonsense, you have already made it clear that you don't think the amnesty bill could be properly killed except by a military coup, suspension of the constitution, dissolving of all democratic institutions, and the coup leaders granting themselves amnesty for action most would consider treason. Most don't hold this hypocritical view.

"As for underwhelming performance, up-to-a-point. There does seem to be a certain distraction, like the demand to behave as if they're a normal, democratically elected government while showing strength and push projects to speedy start (while keeping up with Environmental Impact Studies and the wishes of the local population of course)."

When has the junta in any way behaved like a democratically elected government? It is an Article 44-ship that bans free speech, free press, freedom of assembly, and rules by decree without checks and balances and any opposition. In spite of this they can't get anything done other than to stay in power, which is their primary objection. They routinely blame all ills on politicians of the past in an increasingly futile attempt to hide their own incompetence.

The rest of your off-topic nonsense--Thaksin the bogeyman and reference to mysterious and still undefined reforms-- I won't bother to reply to. I'd like to comment on your final foolishness about criminals making a mess of things, but it would run afoul of the censorship we have to deal with.

[rubl]

Are you unable to stop your nonsense?

You seem as obsessed with lunchboxes as the Shinawatra Family while ignoring the crazy previous government spending and still thinking that in Thailand elections solve problems.

Let see, topic PM Prayut blames politicians. Heybruce reaction "bad, bad junta" and anything else rejected as diversion of the "bad, bad junta".

So, blame politicians, especially those under control of criminal fugitives who are still peeved at not having their amnesty or police rank.

Are you unable to concede the obvious?

You are the one who brought up government spending, trains and lunch boxes, after your off-topic "bad, bad, Thaksin" post. Also, I didn't ignore "the crazy government spending", I pointed out the insane injustice in how the government was spending much more comprehensively than you ever have. However I do think that elections provide a better long-term solution to problems than frequent military coups.

As to the junta being bad, I'll let the means by which it came to power, its means for staying in power, and its lack of accomplishments other than staying in power speak for itself.

The fact that the junta is once again casting blame elsewhere--"but, but, but....politicians!"--indicates that even the generals know their performance has been underwhelming.

The topic is PM Prayut blaming politicians for abuse of power and betraying voters' trust. I merely indicate example of such betrayal (squander away money) and abuse (going for a blanket amnesty for own actions like squandering away taxpayers money).

As for underwhelming performance, up-to-a-point. There does seem to be a certain distraction, like the demand to behave as if they're a normal, democratically elected government while showing strength and push projects to speedy start (while keeping up with Environmental Impact Studies and the wishes of the local population of course). Requests to wave magic wands and requests not to do so. Requests for elections and no reforms progressed yet to ensure the result wouldn't be a return to 'buffet' governments again. Criminal fugitives telling his red-shirts to bide their time indicates nothing has changed yet. Both normal and criminal politicians still on edge to leap in and make a mess again.

"I merely indicate example of such betrayal (squander away money) and abuse (going for a blanket amnesty for own actions like squandering away taxpayers money)."

Squander away money? Are you referring to the farmer subsidies and other actions that the PTP promised in their election campaign? If so, those issues should have been addressed in a new election campaign.

I will not allow you to derail the topic again with your "amnesty" nonsense, you have already made it clear that you don't think the amnesty bill could be properly killed except by a military coup, suspension of the constitution, dissolving of all democratic institutions, and the coup leaders granting themselves amnesty for action most would consider treason. Most don't hold this hypocritical view.

"As for underwhelming performance, up-to-a-point. There does seem to be a certain distraction, like the demand to behave as if they're a normal, democratically elected government while showing strength and push projects to speedy start (while keeping up with Environmental Impact Studies and the wishes of the local population of course)."

When has the junta in any way behaved like a democratically elected government? It is an Article 44-ship that bans free speech, free press, freedom of assembly, and rules by decree without checks and balances and any opposition. In spite of this they can't get anything done other than to stay in power, which is their primary objection. They routinely blame all ills on politicians of the past in an increasingly futile attempt to hide their own incompetence.

The rest of your off-topic nonsense--Thaksin the bogeyman and reference to mysterious and still undefined reforms-- I won't bother to reply to. I'd like to comment on your final foolishness about criminals making a mess of things, but it would run afoul of the censorship we have to deal with.

So, Prayut blames politicians and others here blame Prayut. In another topic someone even suggested Ms. Yingluck had the voters mandate to lose 500++ billion Baht on her 'self-financing' RPPS. Some posters seem unwilling to accept that responsibility and accountability also applies to politicians.

Mind you unlike the defenders I'm a taxpayer here in Thailand who's rather see proper infrastructure build to open access to the outside parts of Thailand to allow work, capital, knowledge to flow in. Simple handout every few years don't add up much, only on State debts and turning expectation of handouts into a 'right to handouts'.

PS did you know that this week is "Banned Books Week"?

[lostoday]

So, Prayut blames politicians and others here blame Prayut. In another topic someone even suggested Ms. Yingluck had the voters mandate to lose 500++ billion Baht on her 'self-financing' RPPS. Some posters seem unwilling to accept that responsibility and accountability also applies to politicians.

Mind you unlike the defenders I'm a taxpayer here in Thailand who's rather see proper infrastructure build to open access to the outside parts of Thailand to allow work, capital, knowledge to flow in. Simple handout every few years don't add up much, only on State debts and turning expectation of handouts into a 'right to handouts'.

PS did you know that this week is "Banned Books Week"?

Do you think that's why they chose this week to break the story about the current government preventing free speech for all on the INTERNET?

[rubl]

So, Prayut blames politicians and others here blame Prayut. In another topic someone even suggested Ms. Yingluck had the voters mandate to lose 500++ billion Baht on her 'self-financing' RPPS. Some posters seem unwilling to accept that responsibility and accountability also applies to politicians.

Mind you unlike the defenders I'm a taxpayer here in Thailand who's rather see proper infrastructure build to open access to the outside parts of Thailand to allow work, capital, knowledge to flow in. Simple handout every few years don't add up much, only on State debts and turning expectation of handouts into a 'right to handouts'.

PS did you know that this week is "Banned Books Week"?

Do you think that's why they chose this week to break the story about the current government preventing free speech for all on the INTERNET?

I think that was just timed with USA Presidential Hopeful Carly Fiorina stating while CEO of a well-known Computer Company she helped the NSA with a rerouted shipment of servers so the NSA could start their Domestic Surveillance Program.

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/carly-fiorina-i-supplied-hp-servers-for-nsa-snooping

[lostoday]

So, Prayut blames politicians and others here blame Prayut. In another topic someone even suggested Ms. Yingluck had the voters mandate to lose 500++ billion Baht on her 'self-financing' RPPS. Some posters seem unwilling to accept that responsibility and accountability also applies to politicians.

Mind you unlike the defenders I'm a taxpayer here in Thailand who's rather see proper infrastructure build to open access to the outside parts of Thailand to allow work, capital, knowledge to flow in. Simple handout every few years don't add up much, only on State debts and turning expectation of handouts into a 'right to handouts'.

PS did you know that this week is "Banned Books Week"?

Do you think that's why they chose this week to break the story about the current government preventing free speech for all on the INTERNET?

I think that was just timed with USA Presidential Hopeful Carly Fiorina stating while CEO of a well-known Computer Company she helped the NSA with a rerouted shipment of servers so the NSA could start their Domestic Surveillance Program.

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/carly-fiorina-i-supplied-hp-servers-for-nsa-snooping

Why the two have nothing in common? Thailand wants to stop Free INTERNET access and NSA wants you all to talk more. Seems like the two are at least 180 degrees apart.

[rubl]

So, Prayut blames politicians and others here blame Prayut. In another topic someone even suggested Ms. Yingluck had the voters mandate to lose 500++ billion Baht on her 'self-financing' RPPS. Some posters seem unwilling to accept that responsibility and accountability also applies to politicians.

Mind you unlike the defenders I'm a taxpayer here in Thailand who's rather see proper infrastructure build to open access to the outside parts of Thailand to allow work, capital, knowledge to flow in. Simple handout every few years don't add up much, only on State debts and turning expectation of handouts into a 'right to handouts'.

PS did you know that this week is "Banned Books Week"?

Do you think that's why they chose this week to break the story about the current government preventing free speech for all on the INTERNET?

I think that was just timed with USA Presidential Hopeful Carly Fiorina stating while CEO of a well-known Computer Company she helped the NSA with a rerouted shipment of servers so the NSA could start their Domestic Surveillance Program.

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/carly-fiorina-i-supplied-hp-servers-for-nsa-snooping

Why the two have nothing in common? Thailand wants to stop Free INTERNET access and NSA wants you all to talk more. Seems like the two are at least 180 degrees apart.

... or one program wants you to stop chatting too much and go back to work and the other program wants to listen to what you say in 'private'?