rooster59 Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 Rice scheme was worthy, well-planned, Kittiratt says By The Nation FORMER MINISTER TELLS COURT THERE WAS NO MISMANAGEMENT BY YINGLUCK FORMER Finance minister Kittiratt Na-Ranong has strongly defended former premier Yingluck Shinawatra’s implementation of the controversial rice-pledging scheme before the Supreme Court’s criminal division for holders of political office. Kittiratt told the court the scheme was well-planned in terms of its economic worthiness and there was no fiscal mismanagement as alleged by the public |prosecutors. Full story: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/news/national/30305643 -- © Copyright The Nation 2017-02-04 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thian Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 So it was good procedure to import a lot of rice from neighbouring countries? And have hollow piles of ricebags in the warehouses? And to not pay the farmers in time? And who cares about the missing ricebags in the warehouses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PatOngo Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 Rice scheme was worthy, well-planned, Kittiratt says There may be some that disagree. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigt3365 Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 Is this another one of Kittiratt's "white lies" LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Misterwhisper Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 36 minutes ago, Thian said: So it was good procedure to import a lot of rice from neighbouring countries? And have hollow piles of ricebags in the warehouses? And to not pay the farmers in time? And who cares about the missing ricebags in the warehouses? I guess what Kittirat meant by "economic worthiness" was that the rice scheme was "economically worthy" for quite a lot of people - just not the ones who should've reaped the benefits. Kittirat has disseminated "white lies" before. As they say: Once a liar, always a liar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SABloke Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 Every economist I've spoken to says it was a terrible idea. I take their word over K's, because they have no links to Thailand and don't lean either way politically. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keeniau96 Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 Rephrasing Clausewitz, plans rarely survive the first contact with the opposition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sweatalot Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 (edited) Rice scheme was worthy, well-planned, Kittiratt says History has shown that this is true. Not? Edited February 4, 2017 by sweatalot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canopus1969 Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 "He would say that, wouldn't he" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jollyhangmon Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 < Kittiratt told the court the scheme was well-planned in terms of its economic worthiness ... > Sure it was, with that really minor glitch that it did't work out from A to Z ... Another oxygen-thief, plain and simple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluespunk Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 Thanks for publishing this item TV. Its going to keep me me laughing all weekend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leeneeds Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 who stole the cookie from the cookie jar ? being caught sometimes is a bitch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
473geo Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 It would appear focus is directed to one warehouse with a hollow pile? One prosecution for importing rice into the scheme? One allegedly fake govt to govt deal? Not the millions of farmers who gained real benefit from the higher margins, not the associated workforce that made money as farmers improved the quality of their dwellings, not the other associated industries and the economy which also benefitted from farmers having more spending power. Although the scheme cannot be described as a self financing success, as a subsidy, there was real benefit to the economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
worgeordie Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 He should be done for perjury,lying to the court in such a blatant manner, well planned,yes to syphon funds to the rice millers,those in power,that's why it was a complete cock up and lost so much money for the Thai taxpayer. someone needs to be punished for this,in the hope that in the future Politicians will think twice before robbing the public again . regards Worgeordie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wakeupplease Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 Who Owns those rice mills then? answer that and you will have the scammers, many are connected to one source Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ratcatcher Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 When I see this great man I hear ancient music . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluespunk Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 1 hour ago, 473geo said: It would appear focus is directed to one warehouse with a hollow pile? One prosecution for importing rice into the scheme? One allegedly fake govt to govt deal? Not the millions of farmers who gained real benefit from the higher margins, not the associated workforce that made money as farmers improved the quality of their dwellings, not the other associated industries and the economy which also benefitted from farmers having more spending power. Although the scheme cannot be described as a self financing success, as a subsidy, there was real benefit to the economy. It was a catastrophic failure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
473geo Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 15 minutes ago, Bluespunk said: It was a catastrophic failure. Was a success if the fact that the government did not recover it's outlay is set aside Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gabruce Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 So if it was well planned, and failed so badly, then it must have been the execution and management of the plan at fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
473geo Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 2 minutes ago, gabruce said: So if it was well planned, and failed so badly, then it must have been the execution and management of the plan at fault. You need to read up more on the external influences Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluespunk Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 12 minutes ago, 473geo said: Was a success if the fact that the government did not recover it's outlay is set aside Buying at a loss? Failing to pay the farmers for their rice after taking it away? Allowing a lot of it to rot because there was nowhere to store it? Complete failure. Except of course it did get the puppet elected and gave her a chance to enforce PT's number one policy goal - give thaksin whatever he wants... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
473geo Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Bluespunk said: Buying at a loss? Failing to pay the farmers for their rice after taking it away? Allowing a lot of it to rot because there was nowhere to store it? Complete failure. Except of course it did get the puppet elected and gave her a chance to enforce PT's number one policy goal - give thaksin whatever he wants... 1) you need to understand the mechanism of the BAAC buying rice 2) you need to be honest with yourself about the timing and reasons for non payment 3) You are concentrating only at the down side and totally ignoring the upside Conclusion you are presenting a totally unbalanced view Edited February 4, 2017 by 473geo spelling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluespunk Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 Just now, 473geo said: 1) you need to understand the mechanism of the BAAC buying rice 2) you need to be honest with yourself about the timing and reason s for non payment 3) You are concentrating only at the down side and totally ignoring the upside Conclusion you are presenting a totally unbalanced view Nah, just the truth... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gunna Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 10 minutes ago, 473geo said: 1) you need to understand the mechanism of the BAAC buying rice 2) you need to be honest with yourself about the timing and reasons for non payment 3) You are concentrating only at the down side and totally ignoring the upside Conclusion you are presenting a totally unbalanced view Item #3 I and many others have searched for an upside for Thailand, but we can't find one. But it did make many people very rich. Unfortunately none of them were individual rice farmers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
473geo Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 2 minutes ago, Gunna said: Item #3 I and many others have searched for an upside for Thailand, but we can't find one. But it did make many people very rich. Unfortunately none of them were individual rice farmers Well how strange is that, because I saw with my own eyes the benefit to the rice farmers in my area How come you guys didn't experience this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baerboxer Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 2 hours ago, 473geo said: It would appear focus is directed to one warehouse with a hollow pile? One prosecution for importing rice into the scheme? One allegedly fake govt to govt deal? Not the millions of farmers who gained real benefit from the higher margins, not the associated workforce that made money as farmers improved the quality of their dwellings, not the other associated industries and the economy which also benefitted from farmers having more spending power. Although the scheme cannot be described as a self financing success, as a subsidy, there was real benefit to the economy. So you believe the self admitted white lies teller? Fair enough, that's your judgement. Perhaps he will release the detailed financial and management accounts for the scheme that so far have been kept ultra secret. Then everyone would no. Like who benefited from the transport contracts, warehouse contracts, etc - all the "costs" of the scheme should be transparent if, has he claims, the fiscal management was prudent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baerboxer Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 1 hour ago, 473geo said: Was a success if the fact that the government did not recover it's outlay is set aside Surely, you'd only know that if you knew how much money it cost the taxpayer, and where that money went to? Do you know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
473geo Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 2 minutes ago, Baerboxer said: Surely, you'd only know that if you knew how much money it cost the taxpayer, and where that money went to? Do you know? Well let us start with the circa 25 baht a kg for Jasmine paid by the BAAC direct to the rice farmers You guys can't even grasp the simple mechanics of these transactions - when you can, you have a starting point - but of course it totally undermines the rather ridiculous statements that the producers did not benefit!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baerboxer Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 43 minutes ago, 473geo said: 1) you need to understand the mechanism of the BAAC buying rice 2) you need to be honest with yourself about the timing and reasons for non payment 3) You are concentrating only at the down side and totally ignoring the upside Conclusion you are presenting a totally unbalanced view ref your point 2): PTP got into cash flow difficulties some 2-3 months before the Amnesty Bill fiasco cause mass protests. Yingluck, having promised never to dissolve parliament, then did exactly that. PTP hadn't bothered to ensure they had secured additional loans to meet their obligations under the rice scheme payments due before dissolving parliament and then discovered that caretaker governments cannot do that. Of course they preferred to say the banks and protesters all ganged up against them - only that doesn't explain why the were defaulting several months earlier; or why they needed more loans when Yingluck and the gentleman assured they didn't a few week before they tried; or why they didn't secure the loans before dissolving parliament. Their real plan was to obtain the 2.2 trillion ThB off budget loan and use some of that. When that was blocked they were in stuck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baerboxer Posted February 4, 2017 Share Posted February 4, 2017 Just now, 473geo said: Well let us start with the circa 25 baht a kg for Jasmine paid by the BAAC direct to the rice farmers You guys can't even grasp the simple mechanics of these transactions - when you can, you have a starting point - but of course it totally undermines the rather ridiculous statements that the producers did not benefit!! So clever cloggs, let's see your detailed guess at what the profit and loss and balance sheet of the scheme looks like then? Next you'll be claiming as Yingluck once did that it was a social scheme. She forgot about the self financing bit. But there again, as she never bothered actually attending the meetings she appointed herself to chair, that's hardly surprising. You can't seem to grasp the fact that they are known, self admitting liars who have produced absolutely no figures to explain anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now