Rice scheme was worthy, well-planned, Kittiratt says

[slapout]

If ever there was a individual who should be placed at the disposal of the people, he took part in screwing, he is crowding the top of the list. There were so many illegal cock ups in the program and people involved. that ranged from rice from outside Thailand, non existent warehouses, etc, that the group should be confined with no bail or appeal allowed.

 

Another Thai politician who someone one described as having lower morals than whale poop at the bottom of the ocean.

[473geo]

4 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

 

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. 

You are getting carried away, throughout this thread I have accepted the cost to the government was not recovered - what I dispute is the fact so often stated by the lesser informed that there were no benefits to the 'rice farmers' and the wider economy.

[473geo]

14 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

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.

 

 

When that was blocked....

[Bluespunk]

5 minutes ago, 473geo said:

You are getting carried away, throughout this thread I have accepted the cost to the government was not recovered - what I dispute is the fact so often stated by the lesser informed that there were no benefits to the 'rice farmers' and the wider economy.

The lesser informed recall too clearly the farmers who had their rice taken away and then got no money in return for it.

 

 

As to the wider community...as no doubt you mean the whole of the country... how did this catastrophic failure benefit the country?

[Baerboxer]

11 minutes ago, 473geo said:

You are getting carried away, throughout this thread I have accepted the cost to the government was not recovered - what I dispute is the fact so often stated by the lesser informed that there were no benefits to the 'rice farmers' and the wider economy.

Not carried away at all.

 

Just the same old nonsense from the Shin apologists.

 

No one knows who benefited, or by how much, because PTP have kept that information secret. That might suggest that although some rice farmers benefited, as my family did, others benefited by a whole lot more. And for their own reasons, they'd rather keep those details unknown.

 

It would be interesting to know how all the money used was accounted for. But, that isn't likely to ever be released.

[Baerboxer]

14 minutes ago, 473geo said:

When that was blocked....

 

When they tried to ram through, without following due process, an amended Amnesty Bill to benefit their party owner, leader and dictator which brought down their government.

[473geo]

10 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

The lesser informed recall too clearly the farmers who had their rice taken away and then got no money in return for it.

 

 

As to the wider community...as no doubt you mean the whole of the country... how did this catastrophic failure benefit the country?

Exactly the same way of the current rice subsidy and payment to the poor - sustaining the wider economy

[Bluespunk]

1 minute ago, 473geo said:

Exactly the same way of the current rice subsidy and payment to the poor - sustaining the wider economy

No, I don't think so.

 

That catastrophic failure left a lot of debt, unpaid farmers and damaged Thailand's rice exporting industry.

 

The only ones who benefited were those who gained power through their support of an unworkable and disastrous scheme.

[473geo]

1 minute ago, Bluespunk said:

No, I don't think so.

 

That catastrophic failure left a lot of debt, unpaid farmers and damaged Thailand's rice exporting industry.

 

The only ones who benefited were those who gained power through their support of an unworkable and disastrous scheme.

Nothing like the debt that would have been in place if the rice price of 5-6 baht had remained this year, good on the current government for their prompt action!! I agree the exporting industry was damaged

 

When the rice scheme was in place I personally witnessed the improvement in the lives of rural farmers, and communities, I do not believe the scheme increased debt, other than perhaps enabling increased borrowing amounts for larger projects such as house build/improvements/upgrades, and, yes, the truck purchases, tractors, perhaps buying more fertiliser, all of which of course benefit the wider economy.

[trogers]

45 minutes ago, 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!!

 

The basement fire was successfully put out, by demolishing the Hoover Dam. Yes, someone benefited...

[Wilsonandson]

"Liar, liar, pants on fire."

[Bluespunk]

14 minutes ago, 473geo said:

Nothing like the debt that would have been in place if the rice price of 5-6 baht had remained this year, good on the current government for their prompt action!! I agree the exporting industry was damaged

 

When the rice scheme was in place I personally witnessed the improvement in the lives of rural farmers, and communities, I do not believe the scheme increased debt, other than perhaps enabling increased borrowing amounts for larger projects such as house build/improvements/upgrades, and, yes, the truck purchases, tractors, perhaps buying more fertiliser, all of which of course benefit the wider economy.

Really no debt?

 

How much did this failure cost the country again? 

 

If as you claim farmers benefited why the suicides over debt by the end of the scheme?

 

Oh wait I remember, rice was taken and payment not made. 

 

Why no payments? 

 

Hmm, oh yes, the govt lost so much first time round there was no money to pay for it. 

 

Yet they still took the farmers rice. 

 

Go figure..,

[473geo]

13 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Really no debt?

 

How much did this failure cost the country again? 

 

If as you claim farmers benefited why the suicides over debt by the end of the scheme?

 

Oh wait I remember, rice was taken and payment not made. 

 

Why no payments? 

 

Hmm, oh yes, the govt lost so much first time round there was no money to pay for it. 

 

Yet they still took the farmers rice. 

 

Go figure..,

There were regrettably suicides I don't know how many, and any suicide is regrettable and unfortunate for the families concerned......but let us say 10 suicides out of the 60% of Thai society linked to agriculture.... That would leave an rather large amount of the population that were not suicidal.........in fact your statement rather lends support for the scheme in that more people were indeed not driven to suicide!! Due to receiving payment at price that did leave a profit margin.

[hansnl]

4 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.

Now, who pays the subsidies into the state coffers?

And where did most of the subsidies go to?

Edited February 4, 2017 by hansnl

[Bluespunk]

56 minutes ago, 473geo said:

There were regrettably suicides I don't know how many, and any suicide is regrettable and unfortunate for the families concerned......but let us say 10 suicides out of the 60% of Thai society linked to agriculture.... That would leave an rather large amount of the population that were not suicidal.........in fact your statement rather lends support for the scheme in that more people were indeed not driven to suicide!! Due to receiving payment at price that did leave a profit margin.

No, my statement backs up my point that the scheme was a catastrophic failure on an economic and human level. 

Edited February 4, 2017 by Bluespunk

[473geo]

17 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

No, my statement backs up my point that the scheme was a catastrophic failure on an economic and human level. 

Would that be at the human level as in who blocked the payments?

Or the human level of the populous who are thankful for the good years when growing rice actually paid?

Or the human level today where the input to support the poor, and the rice price, by the current government, is welcomed?

[candide]

My contribution to make this debate based on facts rather than opinions: the figures of public debt to GDP and GDP growth.

 

[473geo]

28 minutes ago, hansnl said:

Now, who pays the subsidies into the state coffers?

And where did most of the subsidies go to?

The answer is there if you look hard enough - but it may not be the one you are expecting

[473geo]

Thanks Candide

 

It would appear some effort was required to stimulate growth in the GDP end of 2009

[Bluespunk]

24 minutes ago, 473geo said:

Would that be at the human level as in who blocked the payments?

Or the human level of the populous who are thankful for the good years when growing rice actually paid?

Or the human level today where the input to support the poor, and the rice price, by the current government, is welcomed?

The payments weren't blocked. Let's not resurect that myth. There was no money due to pt's ineptitude and the fact the scheme had failed. 

 

The one (or was it two) year/s year it was paid caused all the problems. To say it worked because at the start people were paid is like saying a Ponzi scheme worked because the first investors got their money back. 

 

The current subsidy works, as much as any subsidy works, because it is not based on the moronic concept that paying twice the market rate for something is OK, because you will get your money back by controlling the world price of a commodity available elsewhere at the market rate. 

 

 

Edited February 4, 2017 by Bluespunk

[473geo]

5 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

The payments weren't blocked. Let's not resurect that myth. There was no money due to pt's ineptitude and the fact the scheme had failed. 

 

The one (or was it two) year/s year it was paid caused all the problems. To say it worked because at the start people were paid is like saying a Ponzi scheme worked because the first investors got their money back. 

 

The current subsidy works, as much as any subsidy works, because it is not based on the moronic concept that paying twice the market rate for something is OK, because you will get your money back by controlling the world price of a commodity available elsewhere at the market rate. 

 

 

Actually if you check the current market rate and the price being paid by BAAC

[Bluespunk]

4 minutes ago, 473geo said:

Actually if you check the current market rate and the price being paid by BAAC

Is the current subsidy twice the world price?

Edited February 4, 2017 by Bluespunk

[473geo]

1 minute ago, Bluespunk said:

Is it twice the world price?

You mean you are just throwing out any old 'explanation' without knowing?

[473geo]

There is another part to this equation that needs to be taken into account - Debt is a profitable business

[Bluespunk]

7 minutes ago, 473geo said:

You mean you are just throwing out any old 'explanation' without knowing?

No I'm asking because as far as I'm aware it's not. If it is then it is equally moronic. 

 

And more importantly I'm explaining why PT's catastrophic scheme failed. 

Edited February 4, 2017 by Bluespunk

[onthesoi]

ohhh, TV getting to grips with some of the real details regarding Shinawatra's rice scam, who knows next week I might read a thread where people are talking about how it was used to buy votes and stay in power.

 

...baby steps!

[Bluespunk]

Just now, onthesoi said:

ohhh, TV getting to grips with some of the real details regarding Shinawatra's rice scam, who knows next week I might read a thread where people are talking about how it was used to buy votes and stay in power.

 

...baby steps!

Been there, done that. 

[spidermike007]

Just plain wrong. The rice, and cassava pledging scheme was as boneheaded, and corrupt as a policy could possibly be. It nearly bankrupted the nation. Have you driven north or south on Highway 4 between Surat Thani and Phetchaburi lately? All of that highway work is taking place now, because there was no money left to do it when it needed to be done. Noluck should have been jailed for that harebrained scheme. 300 billion baht is the figure that is being reported. What was the real amount? And I hear there was some cassava pledging, and if they had not been stopped, they were moving toward rubber pledging too. Dumb. Real, real dumb. 

Edited February 4, 2017 by spidermike007

[lemonjelly]

Stockpiling a degradable food  to raise market  prices without the foresight that neighboring countries would "fill the gap" in the market of said product that can be harvested up to 3 times per year...... what could possibly go wrong?

[Ulic]

The Thai version of alternative facts.