THAI EDITORIAL: Breaking the vicious rice-subsidy cycle

[webfact]

Breaking the vicious rice-subsidy cycle
By The Nation

 

BANGKOK: -- Backed by consumers, farmers can take several steps to ensure they get fair pay without burdening the country.

 

The government has set aside a budget of more than Bt60 billion for measures aimed at curbing market supply and stabilising rice prices. The move came after a decline in the prices of the grain, which the government initially blamed on perceived collusion between politicians and rice millers.

With all the fuss surrounding the issue of tumbling rice prices, citizens might wonder why Thailand continues to subsidise the price more than three decades after the first such support programme was introduced by the government of Prem Tinsulanonda.

 

Trillions in taxpayers’ money has been spent in the ensuing 35 years to help prop up the price of rice, which seems to be in a perennial state of oversupply. 

 

Full story: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/news/opinion/today_editorial/30299596

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2016-11-10

[Srikcir]

4 hours ago, webfact said:

citizens might wonder why Thailand continues to subsidise the price more than three decades

POLITICS

[Eric Loh]

I don't think subsidies for rice is bad but it has to be transparent, targeted and carefully designed for implementation. I don't think there are enough serious attempts by every governments to understand the real effect of rice production. Maybe the governments want it to remain status quo for purpose of politics, propaganda and even maybe for dominance. Keep them poor and uneducated so they can be subjugated.  

 

Some serious empirical studies aimed at allocation of resources for rice production versus other crops and industrial development, fiscal benefits of subsidies, demography (there will be unlikely a next generation of farmers) and environmental issues ( water resources and consumption).

 

If there is a serious reform that the junta government is embarking, surely rice reform take center stage and not just concentrate towards targeting politicians. The truncated government tenures and the periodical coups are not helpful for long term projects like rice reform too.  Also not helpful is the lopsided budget for Bangkok and leaving too little for development in the rice provinces that can offer the farmers alternative job and skill opportunities.     

[Jonmarleesco]

4 hours ago, Srikcir said:

POLITICS

VOTES!! Except the current government doesn't need them.

[Jonmarleesco]

3 hours ago, Eric Loh said:

I don't think subsidies for rice is bad but it has to be transparent, targeted and carefully designed for implementation. I don't think there are enough serious attempts by every governments to understand the real effect of rice production. Maybe the governments want it to remain status quo for purpose of politics, propaganda and even maybe for dominance. Keep them poor and uneducated so they can be subjugated.  

 

Some serious empirical studies aimed at allocation of resources for rice production versus other crops and industrial development, fiscal benefits of subsidies, demography (there will be unlikely a next generation of farmers) and environmental issues ( water resources and consumption).

 

If there is a serious reform that the junta government is embarking, surely rice reform take center stage and not just concentrate towards targeting politicians. The truncated government tenures and the periodical coups are not helpful for long term projects like rice reform too.  Also not helpful is the lopsided budget for Bangkok and leaving too little for development in the rice provinces that can offer the farmers alternative job and skill opportunities.     

Subsidising a commodity that is in constant oversupply is economic lunacy. But it does save ministers coming up with a more lasting solution, which would involve the application of logic and intelligent thought, and the upsetting of some mollycoddled members of the community.

[ballpoint]

If you keep subsidising a large, poorly educated, group to continue to do something that is unprofitable you gain in two ways:

Firstly, you build a mentality, such that they come to worship those that give them the subsidy, even though that group is taking far more from them in the first place. This builds a loyalty to a family or political group that is very hard to break down. 

Secondly, you keep that large group of people in a state of never having enough money to break out of their poverty, but having just enough to survive where they are - giving them no real reason to better themselves.  Thus providing a pool of pawns to be conscripted into the army or given low paid work as a robot on an assembly line, while the remainder form an excellent source of protest fodder, having all the time on their hands to jump at the chance to earn a few baht, get a few free meals, and a trip to the big city when required by their masters.

[Brer Fox]

They could introduce a diminishing subsidy over a set time period while the rice industry goes through some organised transition.

The only catch would be the need to make sure no part of the subsidy ended up in the hip pocket of that element of rice grifters who live like leeches off the farmer's back. I suspect that might be an impossibility.

[Grubster]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. The first country to produce Hemp [ marijauna ] in a big way for all of its superior qualities in the manufacturing of many products including rope, plastics, textiles, etc. will be rewarded in spades. If Thailand does it first they will soon be importing cheap rice from elsewhere. They will also enjoy all the manufacturing that it will open up.  You will not get high from this type of hemp, but for the sake of argument legalizing the smokable type would only put them on level with Canada and a few others. 

     This is the strongest plant fibre in the world, it is very drought and flood resistant. only downside I can see is the roads would be plugged with the trucks hauling this at harvest time. Possibly the overcautious drivers that use the THC type.

    I guess like anything else other countries could jump on the bandwagon and bring prices down. But if Thailand could get the first brand names of Hats, Shirts, Pants, Shoes, Purses, and other products they would have a big leg up. I could see a brand like "Thai Stick" going wild in the west.   Google Hemp and see what you think.  Maybe I smoked too much not sure.

[Grubster]

42 minutes ago, Brer Fox said:

They could introduce a diminishing subsidy over a set time period while the rice industry goes through some organised transition.

The only catch would be the need to make sure no part of the subsidy ended up in the hip pocket of that element of rice grifters who live like leeches off the farmer's back. I suspect that might be an impossibility.

See my post above and let me know what you think.

[Brer Fox]

32 minutes ago, Grubster said:

See my post above and let me know what you think.

I believe what you say about hemp although I know little about it. The fact that you can't eat it would seem to be a disadvantage. But I think it's other attributes stand investigation. Using it as a raw material for production of fibre products and for medication sounds good. Getting it made legal for smoking is not likely a goer as there are too many people in dark corners at every level of society are making a lot of money from the weed.

[Grubster]

3 minutes ago, Brer Fox said:

I believe what you say about hemp although I know little about it. The fact that you can't eat it would seem to be a disadvantage. But I think it's other attributes stand investigation. Using it as a raw material for production of fibre products and for medication sounds good. Getting it made legal for smoking is not likely a goer as there are too many people in dark corners at every level of society are making a lot of money from the weed.

 

5 minutes ago, Brer Fox said:

I believe what you say about hemp although I know little about it. The fact that you can't eat it would seem to be a disadvantage. But I think it's other attributes stand investigation. Using it as a raw material for production of fibre products and for medication sounds good. Getting it made legal for smoking is not likely a goer as there are too many people in dark corners at every level of society are making a lot of money from the weed.

In the US many farmers have been ranting about not being able to grow it, that tells me there is something to it as these are corn growers who make a lot off of US subsidies. Maybe they are just blowing smoke as they usually do. The web sites about it sound convincing too though.

        I can't think of any other replacement crops except maybe sugarcane for making ethanol, it is the best crop to use for it, but I'm sure it would still require subsidies in the process. I know the US has big subsidies and use mandates to support corn ethanol.

       Maybe some of the small farmers need to just say screw it and live off the land, something that is not allowed in the west anymore as you have to have income to pay your land taxes. I hear those are coming here soon too.

[Srikcir]

16 hours ago, Jonmarleesco said:

VOTES!! Except the current government doesn't need them.

Politics are not just about votes. The Prayut government survives because of political support from the oligarchy that controls the means of wealth. Prayut must align his policies with the objectives and goals of the oligarchy (ie., preserve and increase wealth) if he wants to have a "free-hand" to wield his social and economic policies.