Future govts ‘will be wary of populist policies’ after action against ex-PM

[rooster59]

Future govts ‘will be wary of populist policies’ after action against ex-PM

By THE SUNDAY NATION

 

 

HARSH legal actions against former prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra and her ex-ministers over her government’s rice-pledging scheme is likely to discourage future administrations from formulating such a large-scale populist policy, an economist has predicted.

 

Meanwhile, the local stock market is bracing for possible adverse impacts from the high-court verdict in the case against the ex-PM. The bourse’s management has assured that any effect on the financial markets will be short-term. 

 

Nada Chunsom, dean of the School of Development Economics at the National Institute of Development Administration (Nida), said a guilty verdict in the legal case against Yingluck could adversely impact the next government’s policy on farm products. 

 

Yingluck is accused of negligence for irregularities stemming from her government’s project. The Supreme Court’s Criminal Division on Political Office Holders is scheduled to read its verdict on August 25. Her former commerce minister and his deputy are among those indicted in another case also stemming from the project.

 

“I think the next government would be more careful on policy choices regarding the farm sector,” Nada said.

 

She noted that the next administration might |not opt for a large-scale populist policy similar to |the rice-pledging scheme, while a short-term market intervention may be still needed. 

 

The cost of the Yingluck administration’s price-shoring scheme was estimated to be about Bt500 billion. The Pheu Thai Party has countered that it could be much lower had the current government smartly managed a rice auction from the government stockpile of 18 million tonnes. 

 

Nada said that future policy might focus on farm insurance against weather factors such as flooding and drought rather than against volatility of market prices. The current government has laid out a 20-year strategy that emphasises fiscal discipline by future governments after the general election next year. 

 

The academic, however, was cautious that the next elected government might need to take into account demand from their political constituents, and that no one knows how politics would play out. 

 

Meanwhile, Stock Exchange of Thailand president Kesara Manchusree said yesterday that the Thai capital market was protected from any shock that might happen as a result of the verdict in Yingluck’s case.

 

Kesara said the stock market had been through many political upheavals in the past. Investors were now more mature and the stock market had tools to deal with the issue, she said. 

 

Foreign investors viewed the Thai capital market as attractive for long-term investment. Regardless of the court outcome, rumours or speculation would have only a short-term impact on the market, she said.

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/politics/30321529

 

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2017-07-23

[Samui Bodoh]

Thailand, as a country that has huge wealth inequalities, needs a few populist policies to assist the poor.

 

The issue isn't whether the country needs policies aimed at poverty-reduction, but whether the Powers That Be in Bangkok will allow for it. And if it is not allowed, then it is likely that the troubles will continue into the future, despite the military. If you are on a farm in Issan, and you see the gleaming towers of Bangkok on the Net, it is a natural question to wonder why you are being excluded.

 

Populism is a label. 'Populist' policies are happening now (see rubber policy for Southerners). And populist policies will continue.

 

The question is who will benefit from them. And that is the continuing dispute.

[candide]

Rice farmers should be ready to tighten their belts.....

[Thailand]

The current ptb will also be on the block sometime in the future when the self given amnesties are revoked, not much changes here.

[Ricardo]

I'd hope that one result of the negligence-case might be, that future governments will monitor these schemes more-closely, and react to reports of corruption more-rapidly, so that less public money is wasted on populist schemes which fail to help the people they're aimed-out ?

 

I'd also hope that with experience, Thai voters will become slightly-more cynical, when politicians  (of any party)  come making extravagant promises pre-election, about how much they will give away  ...  as those promises are not-often delivered-upon after the election.

 

The rice-scheme didn't help the poorest-farmers so much, not all graduates got B15k/month, the self-employed or employees of small family enterprises didn't all get B300/day, most students didn't get "a laptop just like mine", rubber-farmers still suffer from low world-prices, not all Thais became rich after six-months, many Thais failed to keep-up the payments & lost their car-subsidies, land-rights & even citizenship remain unconfirmed or undocumented, and so on.

 

Future governments should become more wary of making un-affordable promises, and should work harder to ensure that policies are delivered, that might help the poor more than bread-and-circuses or cynical 'pre-election promises'.

[robblok]

3 hours ago, candide said:

Rice farmers should be ready to tighten their belts.....

All farmers should be ready to either change or tighten their belt. Change hurts but in the long run benefits farmers. You can't keep pumping money in things that don't work. The farmers only wanted money, they were too set in their ways to change.

 

There is a reason why the Thai neighbors have more yield per rai and lower costs.. because they had too change and were not constantly helped out. Its how things work you adapt of you go out of business it works that way for all businesses why not farmers. Why allow them to just hold their hand up and never change. I am all for helping farmers set up cooperatives, education and soft loans to change things in their farms (not to buy pickups in a good year and have no money for them the next year).

 

I feel farmers and everyone else should be subjected to market forces, if you deny that you will blow up your country in the end. Your citizen will be forced to buy stuff at higher prices because the high import taxes to help protect a failing internal market. 

[YetAnother]

4 hours ago, rooster59 said:

The Pheu Thai Party has countered that it could be much lower had the current government smartly managed a rice auction from the government stockpile of 18 million tonnes. 

typical deflection strategy; such an excess would not exist had the initial policy not been so flawed

[worgeordie]

Future Governments will not be able to help themselves,rolling out more 

populist policies,as they know it wins votes and puts them in Government,

and they don't have to use their own money to buy votes,as has been done

in the past,before Thaksin started the populist policies,they use the taxpayers money. 

 

Its a win ,win for them,its the country that suffers from too many populist policies,

as they are usually a massive waste of money,maybe it does not go to those that

really need help,but to those that are friends of what ever Government is in power,

 

Thaksin knew he only had to pander to the poor of Issan,and the North,get their

votes and he would win election after election,the rest of the country did not matter,

so started the populist policies,now they are going to be extremely hard to stop,as

Politicians are afraid to do anything that turns the voters against them,even if its

the right thing to do.

regards Worgeordie

[Denim]

The next government will have little chance at populist policies if they are anything to do with money as the current government is consuming the countries cash reserves at an alarming rate. Come the handover the cupboard will be empty.

[Ricardo]

15 minutes ago, YetAnother said:

typical deflection strategy; such an excess would not exist had the initial policy not been so flawed

Agreed, if that was so easy, then why didn't PTP organise more auctions themselves, when still in-power ? 

 

The answer is that world-supply had risen, prices had fallen, and the losses would have ocurred anyway, just sooner.

 

I can understand PTP being reluctant to crystallise the losses, and have their scheme be seen to have failed, while still in-power  ...  better to leave it as a problem for the next government.  But it would at least have helped their cashflow problem.

[JHolmesJr]

wow the poor dear has really aged….must be the prospect of losing all that money.

[mfd101]

59 minutes ago, Ricardo said:

I'd also hope that with experience, Thai voters will become slightly-more cynical, when politicians  (of any party)  come making extravagant promises pre-election, about how much they will give away  ...  as those promises are not-often delivered-upon after the election.

 

Current experience in The West (Usofa, UK, Poland, Hungary ... ) doesn't give much cause for optimism. Why should Thai peasants be more rational & better informed than their Western 'superiors'?

[Ricardo]

6 minutes ago, Denim said:

The next government will have little chance at populist policies if they are anything to do with money as the current government is consuming the countries cash reserves at an alarming rate. Come the handover the cupboard will be empty.

 

Sorry, but Thai governments of all types have actually been running fiscal-deficits for the past decade, so not just the current regime.

 

https://tradingeconomics.com/thailand/government-budget

 

But they can of course continue to borrow & spend more, the question is whether it will go into productive-investments like Swampy or (perhaps) the rail-infrastructure or industrial-estates, or be wasted on submarines (instead of cheaper patrol-boats) and rice/rubber-schemes (instead of reform & productivity-improvements).

 

Keynsian-stimulation (or call it Taksinomics if you will) assumes that eventually the increased-spending will produce higher GDP & profits, which are then used to repay the extra debt which has been taken-on, plus interest.  But that doesn't work if the money is just blown, ask the UK why debt is still rising, after several years of austerity.

 

 

 

[Ricardo]

2 minutes ago, mfd101 said:

Current experience in The West (Usofa, UK, Poland, Hungary ... ) doesn't give much cause for optimism. Why should Thai peasants be more rational & better informed than their Western 'superiors'?

 

Yes, which is why I said "hope" , and not "expect". 

[ddavidovsky]

35 minutes ago, robblok said:

I feel farmers and everyone else should be subjected to market forces, if you deny that you will blow up your country in the end. Your citizen will be forced to buy stuff at higher prices because the high import taxes to help protect a failing internal market. 

Odd that you believe in market forces but yet approve of disenfranchising the Thai people completely.

 

Anyway, the rest of the world disagrees, because agricultural subsidies are the norm.

The rest of the world also disagrees, because control over such a thing is democratic, not the opinions of a few self-elected elites forcing it down everyone else's throat.
 

You want to see more industrialisation in Thai farming - ie. more done with fewer people. I'm sure the current regime and its supporters would like to do away with the peasantry completely and replace them with their own landed gentry - then the process would be easy. You have to know first what to do with the millions who are going to be suddenly displaced. The current plan is simply to keep them weak, for purposes of political control.

 

Personally, I almost agree with you. Food should be much more expensive - but that's because I advocate population control and economic contraction, not because I want market forces to help churn out food more efficiently, or subsidies to keep food cheap. And then, I don't force my opinion on anyone.

[robblok]

3 minutes ago, ddavidovsky said:

Odd that you believe in market forces but yet approve of disenfranchising the Thai people completely.

 

Anyway, the rest of the world disagrees, because agricultural subsidies are the norm.

The rest of the world also disagrees, because control over such a thing is democratic, not the opinions of a few self-elected elites forcing it down everyone else's throat.
 

You want to see more industrialisation in Thai farming - ie. more done with fewer people. I'm sure the current regime and its supporters would like to do away with the peasantry completely and replace them with their own landed gentry - then the process would be easy. You have to know first what to do with the millions who are going to be suddenly displaced. The current plan is simply to keep them weak, for purposes of political control.

 

Personally, I almost agree with you. Food should be much more expensive - but that's because I advocate population control and economic contraction, not because I want market forces to help churn out food more efficiently, or subsidies to keep food cheap. And then, I don't force my opinion on anyone.

I don't want food to be more expensive, by doing it with less people it gets cheaper. In Vietnam and other countries they got more rice per rai and lower cost. That means Thailand is doing it wrong. (cost could be because of prices there but volume has to do with methods used)

 

Agricultural subsidies are a way to change things in my country they use it to steer the direction of agriculture not give out free money with no thought behind it (besides buying votes to get in power). I still find it a waste as all other companies are subjected to market forces but farmers are not. Food is important but I doubt that we can change how we are dependent on each-other. (countries among each-other). 

 

Yes the current and previous mob always kept them weak.. never doing something that would really change their position just keeping them under control with some handouts. I don't feel that is the right way to go, changing what they grow, how they grow it and education is. You don't need to give people fish if you have taught them how to fish.  Implement policies to make them self sustaining, not dependent on a handout. 

 

Population control, I get you there there are too many people on this planet though I don't see this changing. 

[LannaGuy]

Yup let's have 'unpopular policies' great thinking by the BIG

 

The tide will turn once the dinosaurs have died out but it won't be for 10/15 years and Yingluck will go down as a heroine for her stoic calm and true bravery in the face of wolves

[tomwct]

I don't understand why everyone feels sorry for the rice farmers. I understand why the politicians do because of the number of farmer voters. Farmers have chosen their careers and most love farming. My wife's family has 18 rai. They have farmed mostly rice, but also have had different types of vegetables. They had 5 children only one wants to farm, so now the land is rented out for rice and little cash.

One daughter stayed behind and opened a successful restaurant. She earns about 60-75K a month with her 2 sons. My wife is the 2nd oldest went and got her undergraduate degree and scored number two in Isan for a Civil Service job, she's now C-7. Her youngest sister got her undergraduate degree and works in Admissions at a large university. They did most of this without any government handouts

except some student loans. MY wife went on and got an MBA in the evenings and weekends and is the only person who speaks English in her large government office. This is before we met. I met her because she was the only person who spoke English. Most Thais don't need any handouts, but they will take them when they are available. Thai's problems are they sell their votes to the highest bidder not

knowing this person will get their money back one way or another, which has created huge Corruption problems within Thailand. If Thai's would vote for the best person and not for the amount of money they receive, Thailand would be a much better country today.The Politicians steal money, the Police steal money and buy their promotions and the same in the Armed Forces. Amazing Thailand!

 

 

Edited July 23, 2017 by tomwct

[Pridilives]

2 hours ago, Ricardo said:

I'd hope that one result of the negligence-case might be, that future governments will monitor these schemes more-closely, and react to reports of corruption more-rapidly, so that less public money is wasted on populist schemes which fail to help the people they're aimed-out ?

 

I'd also hope that with experience, Thai voters will become slightly-more cynical, when politicians  (of any party)  come making extravagant promises pre-election, about how much they will give away  ...  as those promises are not-often delivered-upon after the election.

 

The rice-scheme didn't help the poorest-farmers so much, not all graduates got B15k/month, the self-employed or employees of small family enterprises didn't all get B300/day, most students didn't get "a laptop just like mine", rubber-farmers still suffer from low world-prices, not all Thais became rich after six-months, many Thais failed to keep-up the payments & lost their car-subsidies, land-rights & even citizenship remain unconfirmed or undocumented, and so on.

 

Future governments should become more wary of making un-affordable promises, and should work harder to ensure that policies are delivered, that might help the poor more than bread-and-circuses or cynical 'pre-election promises'.

What Thai voter already cynical about is elite who say poor can be happy if live sufficiently while rich just indulgent. Thai voter know what is best for themselves. Thailand need government policy to narrow inequality. This case just show trial. 

[Pridilives]

1 hour ago, robblok said:

I don't want food to be more expensive, by doing it with less people it gets cheaper. In Vietnam and other countries they got more rice per rai and lower cost. That means Thailand is doing it wrong. (cost could be because of prices there but volume has to do with methods used)

 

Agricultural subsidies are a way to change things in my country they use it to steer the direction of agriculture not give out free money with no thought behind it (besides buying votes to get in power). I still find it a waste as all other companies are subjected to market forces but farmers are not. Food is important but I doubt that we can change how we are dependent on each-other. (countries among each-other). 

 

Yes the current and previous mob always kept them weak.. never doing something that would really change their position just keeping them under control with some handouts. I don't feel that is the right way to go, changing what they grow, how they grow it and education is. You don't need to give people fish if you have taught them how to fish.  Implement policies to make them self sustaining, not dependent on a handout. 

 

Population control, I get you there there are too many people on this planet though I don't see this changing. 

How people can fish if not have money for buy fishing pole? Rice scheme put money in rural economy so rural economy can grow and diversify. 

 

http://grist.org/food/our-crazy-farm-subsidies-explained/

[robblok]

7 minutes ago, Father Fintan Stack said:

This is inevitable.

 

Thaksin is a political genius and is playing a longer game than the generals have time (or the intelligence) for.

Thaksin has been outplayed.. he is on the run in Dubai, with these new laws the other serious cases against him can go to court. The guy is done for the big criminal in Dubai will pay for his crimes or has to stay playing with sand over there. His influence has been gradually removed time after time blow after blow. 

 

I know you like to think your hero is some sort of genius.. if he was he would never have put himself in the amnesty, that is what brought it all down. 

[Pridilives]

3 minutes ago, robblok said:

Thaksin has been outplayed.. he is on the run in Dubai, with these new laws the other serious cases against him can go to court. The guy is done for the big criminal in Dubai will pay for his crimes or has to stay playing with sand over there. His influence has been gradually removed time after time blow after blow. 

 

I know you like to think your hero is some sort of genius.. if he was he would never have put himself in the amnesty, that is what brought it all down. 

Thaksin influence still biggest in all Thailand. That's why no election. obvious and cannot deny. Thaksin not hero but clearly he far and away smartest PM Thailand ever have. 

[LannaGuy]

19 minutes ago, robblok said:

Thaksin has been outplayed.. he is on the run in Dubai, with these new laws the other serious cases against him can go to court. The guy is done for the big criminal in Dubai will pay for his crimes or has to stay playing with sand over there. His influence has been gradually removed time after time blow after blow. 

 

I know you like to think your hero is some sort of genius.. if he was he would never have put himself in the amnesty, that is what brought it all down. 

Not sure he will come back or not but the Thais I know lament those 'good days' when he was in charge and people were far happier. I do think Yingluck has played this brilliantly and history will treat her very generously as she stood up to the bully Boys In Green (BIG)

Edited July 23, 2017 by LannaGuy

[robblok]

Just now, LannaGuy said:

Not sure he will come back or not but the Thais I know lament those 'good days' when he was in charge and people were far happier. I do think Yingluck has played this brilliantly and history will treat her very generously as she stood up to the bully Boys In Green (BIG)

You and I have a different version of how we look at things. I am pretty sure Thaksin won't come back. He has committed too many crimes that can't be swept under the carpet. Once the serious cases against him are going to trail then he is done for. I feel no pity for the guy nor do i feel his rights are violated, if he wants to defend himself he can do so by video conference and send out lawyers. He has money enough to make it happen. 

 

YL, was just a puppet nothing more, but again you see her differently then I do. Its funny how people can see events totally different, guess that is why there will always be war and strife in the world. 

[Pridilives]

6 minutes ago, robblok said:

You and I have a different version of how we look at things. I am pretty sure Thaksin won't come back. He has committed too many crimes that can't be swept under the carpet. Once the serious cases against him are going to trail then he is done for. I feel no pity for the guy nor do i feel his rights are violated, if he wants to defend himself he can do so by video conference and send out lawyers. He has money enough to make it happen. 

 

YL, was just a puppet nothing more, but again you see her differently then I do. Its funny how people can see events totally different, guess that is why there will always be war and strife in the world. 

All it takes for 2 people to see same event totally differently is for 1 person to completely ignore facts and just be guide by prejudice. Lana guy not ignore facts, this mean............

Edited July 23, 2017 by Pridilives

[LannaGuy]

2 minutes ago, robblok said:

You and I have a different version of how we look at things. I am pretty sure Thaksin won't come back. He has committed too many crimes that can't be swept under the carpet. Once the serious cases against him are going to trail then he is done for. I feel no pity for the guy nor do i feel his rights are violated, if he wants to defend himself he can do so by video conference and send out lawyers. He has money enough to make it happen. 

 

YL, was just a puppet nothing more, but again you see her differently then I do. Its funny how people can see events totally different, guess that is why there will always be war and strife in the world. 

Yes it's strange... I am astounded and very impressed with her quiet dignity against the mighty Junta and the Thais I meet and casually talk to are horrified at how she's been treated.  If she was not a martyr before she sure is now.

[jaywalker]

6 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

Thailand, as a country that has huge wealth inequalities, needs a few populist policies to assist the poor.

 

The issue isn't whether the country needs policies aimed at poverty-reduction, but whether the Powers That Be in Bangkok will allow for it. And if it is not allowed, then it is likely that the troubles will continue into the future, despite the military. If you are on a farm in Issan, and you see the gleaming towers of Bangkok on the Net, it is a natural question to wonder why you are being excluded.

 

Populism is a label. 'Populist' policies are happening now (see rubber policy for Southerners). And populist policies will continue.

 

The question is who will benefit from them. And that is the continuing dispute.

You make many good points.

 

It's socialism at its heart & soul.

 

Sounds fantastic on paper, & works for a bit, until you run out of other people's money.

 

A complete, total overhaul of the education system, would be a great start.

 

I blame corruption & graft for not allowing, nor wanting for it to happen.

 

General P. did bring an end to a lot of chaos, but aside from beach chairs etc has done precious little to move the country forward.

[robblok]

9 minutes ago, LannaGuy said:

Yes it's strange... I am astounded and very impressed with her quiet dignity against the mighty Junta and the Thais I meet and casually talk to are horrified at how she's been treated.  If she was not a martyr before she sure is now.

 

I have little pity for her she has so much money and she put herself in this position to benefit her family (see amnesty). I have far more empathy for real poor people in trouble. These politicians are in it for themselves and know the risks and have enough money to bail out when they want. 

 

My pity goes out to people like the parents from those that were killed by Jentrop and other unfairness in Thailand. People who don't have YL her means. She went here willingly to help her family and she lost. 

[jaywalker]

Just now, Father Fintan Stack said:

He is playing the long game. The junta cannot cling on to power forever. 

 

As soon as they are gone his party will win the election and the process of fixing what they have broken can begin again, just as it did in 2001 and 2008.

 

He is no hero of mine, but the Junta seem intent on making Yingluck a martyr while at the same time making another Shin backed government an inevitability with their rudderless mismanagement of the country. 

What's a rudder? Who needs rudders?

 

All we use our ships for is to pump water out of the Chaopraya.

[Pridilives]

1 minute ago, Father Fintan Stack said:

He is playing the long game. The junta cannot cling on to power forever. 

 

As soon as they are gone his party will win the election and the process of fixing what they have broken can begin again, just as it did in 2001 and 2008.

 

He is no hero of mine, but the Junta seem intent on making Yingluck a martyr while at the same time making another Shin backed government an inevitability with their rudderless mismanagement of the country. 

Quite an achievement by junta. Thaksin has moral high ground. He is clever for play long game.