Jump to content
Technical Difficulties Read more... ×
BANGKOK 13 December 2018 06:30
webfact

Yingluck plans to make her own closing statement

Recommended Posts

If personal money is used to pay to farmers under this irresponsible rice scheme then its ok but in fact it's taxpayer money. How come taxpayer money was spent like that. It is a complete idiocy. How come mortgage price is so much higher than market price. In fact this moronic scheme should have been nipped in the bud. Why it had been allowed to create huge damage to the country budget.


Sent from my VIE-L29 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/7/2017 at 3:53 PM, Bluespunk said:

It was stupid. 

 

Even I saw why it wouldn't work from the get go. 

I doubt it  was  ever intended  to "work". It  seems  overlooked  that the  rice  store  stock  was in the  majority   so old and  deteriorated. What  about  the   new  season  rice?  That  went sideways  on the   bs  govt to  govt.  scam. Store  stock  bolstered  by  adding  cheap  old  rice  from  anywhere possible. Not  negligence.  Fraud.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/9/2017 at 0:43 AM, Bluespunk said:

Suicides occurred because of this failure under pt's mismanagement of their poorly conceived rice scheme. 

At the risk of appearing callous, we don't really know that. Every year, sadly some farmers, housewives, garbage collectors, soldiers and politicians (and so on) kill themselves. We may have the proximate reasons (rice money, relationship breakdowns, depression etc). But unless we have comparative year by year figures that show a spike in suicides in a particular year (which I haven't seen for farmers) we can't even begin to make the sort of correlations and causations between the rice scheme and farmer suicides which have been made. Recklessly in my view. I'd be interested if someone has this sort of data.I haven't seen it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/7/2017 at 1:43 PM, Eric Loh said:

Let me ask you.

 

Is attempt to control price a crime? If so, OPEC and other cartels will be in serious trouble. 

 

So you feel that the she was held responsible because of rampant corruption and incompetence. Then I like to ask you whether the police chief should be charge for malfeasance because of rampant corruption in his force and his incompetence.

 

If you said it wasn't a subsidy, do tell me what should this be called as all the information on public domain called the scheme a subsidy program. 

Have you not followed what was going on. It was never intended to be a subsidy but was sold to the public as a self financing scheme. Please read up on the history of the rice scheme then you will be better placed to make an inteligent comment

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/7/2017 at 3:52 PM, Bluespunk said:

Those who benefited were lucky. 

 

Many weren't. 

Poor farmers did not benefit from the scheme. it was the middle and wealthy farmers that benifited and the mill owners that defrauded the people and the Government.

I defy anyone to show me one POOR farmer trhat benefited. Poor farmers did not qualify under the scheme.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/7/2017 at 3:26 PM, Grubster said:

She was elected PM wasn't she?

If you call buying votes "elected"

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, ResandePohm said:

Have you not followed what was going on. It was never intended to be a subsidy but was sold to the public as a self financing scheme. Please read up on the history of the rice scheme then you will be better placed to make an inteligent comment

That is not part of the job description.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/7/2017 at 4:50 PM, Eric Loh said:

Please please find me a definition of subsidy with the mode of funding. I am waiting.

"A subsidy is money given as part of the cost of something, to help orencourage it to happen"

 

That is the Cambridge Dictionary definition. It was never intended to give money to support the scheme. It was stated and sold to the public as a self financing scheme not a subsidy.

 

Now you show me a definition where a self financing scheme is a subsidy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/7/2017 at 5:02 PM, Eric Loh said:

Answer a question with a question. :sleepy: Classic avoidance. Just a simple reply to say you made a mistake will do. Thank you. 

Deflection

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/8/2017 at 5:53 PM, Prbkk said:

No, she made mistakes, she adopted and pursued bad policy. That doesn't make her criminally liable or negligent, any more than the current mob for their even more abysmal policies and extravagances.

This was more than a mistake. This was blatant negligence so dont try and water it down to being a mistake. She was totally incompitent to fill the PM role.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, ResandePohm said:

If you call buying votes "elected"

 

Do you not know how democracy works?  One candidate promises to do this and that for the people with the peoples money and the other promises to do something else with the money, then the majority wins, very simple and the same in all democracies. Yes in effect it is buying votes.  Nobody is standing behind you watching you vote, most can and will tell both candidates that they will vote for them, but must decide when they vote.

          The fact that the farmers and other rural people are the majority in Thailand means that the rich people from the cities will have to do things for the farmers to win, or else have a coup. This fact really gives the upper class the shits doesn't it?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/8/2017 at 8:55 PM, Grubster said:

As far as I know all the farmers got paid for their rice until and maybe after the coup. The west has big subsidies and they are at 100% loss to the taxpayer every time, nobody going to jail for that.

You are correct the west has subsidies. When will you ands Prbkk understand that this was never a subsidy but a self financing scheme or are you having difficulty understanding the difference.

Subsidies are planned and budgeted for. There was no planned financing for this scheme. So stop trying to sell this as a subsidy which it was blatantly not.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ResandePohm said:

You are correct the west has subsidies. When will you ands Prbkk understand that this was never a subsidy but a self financing scheme or are you having difficulty understanding the difference.

Subsidies are planned and budgeted for. There was no planned financing for this scheme. So stop trying to sell this as a subsidy which it was blatantly not.

 

This was a subsidy and as with all subsidies the money you spend on them is a gift and never comes back. Just because they claimed they might make money on it was a pipe dream at best. Will they make money on the useless military equipment they are spending billions on? No and a lot of it will never even be used, but the big kick backs have been paid and those getting the kick backs have deemed themselves immune to prosecution for anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ResandePohm said:

Have you not followed what was going on. It was never intended to be a subsidy but was sold to the public as a self financing scheme. Please read up on the history of the rice scheme then you will be better placed to make an inteligent comment

 

...intelligent on topic comment...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

Sponsors
×