Thread: Thaksin: I’m not a terrorist and never support terrorism

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

I saw the unemployment figures were 400,000 people which equals 1.2%. That's the current rate, as in now, it has come down from 800,000, which owns Beadle utterly.

Not trying to make a political point, but with the village/ moobahn system here, the 'official' unemployment figures are representative of very little.
Basically, you have a vast Provincial pool of itinerant/casual labour in the cash economy. Whether they are working or not, they do not figure in the statistics.
You could probably get a more accurate figure of 'How things are' by Polling a sample group of them, and seeing how the availability of jobs are at a given point in time.
The 'Official' figures really only track those 'officially' employed- everybody else is assumed to be working the Paddies.

Originally Posted by sabang

Not trying to make a political point, but with the village/ moobahn system here, the 'official' unemployment figures are representative of very little.
Basically, you have a vast Provincial pool of itinerant/casual labour in the cash economy. Whether they are working or not, they do not figure in the statistics.

good point, employment figures are always suspicious no matter the country. It's a very political number, so great "care" is taken to compute it.

Originally Posted by sabang

You could probably get a more accurate figure of 'How things are' by Polling a sample group of them, and seeing how the availability of jobs are at a given point in time.

it would probably be a better estimate,

Originally Posted by sabang

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

I saw the unemployment figures were 400,000 people which equals 1.2%. That's the current rate, as in now, it has come down from 800,000, which owns Beadle utterly.

Not trying to make a political point, but with the village/ moobahn system here, the 'official' unemployment figures are representative of very little.
Basically, you have a vast Provincial pool of itinerant/casual labour in the cash economy. Whether they are working or not, they do not figure in the statistics.
You could probably get a more accurate figure of 'How things are' by Polling a sample group of them, and seeing how the availability of jobs are at a given point in time.
The 'Official' figures really only track those 'officially' employed- everybody else is assumed to be working the Paddies.

Absolutely right. Thailand is essentially perilously close to being ungovernable, and probably always has been because the level of petty and serious lawlessness is huge, and the government is completely unable to control the grey and cash economies.


The plain fact is I doubt the government has any conception of the real unemployment figure, and can only base its stats and projections on the quite narrow sector that it does know about.


Essentially the government is no better at managing the macro-economy than it is at preventing corruption, so any and all numbers from Thai governments should be regarded with extreme scepticism. Since corruption feeds and thrives on rubbery numbers, there is almost no prospect at all that they will become less rubbery. Too many people with their noses in the trough for that to happen.

^ Exactly. Which begs the question: why do Moody's et al rate this country's economics so high; what set of books exactly are they all looking at?

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

......Added this too, so you can see how badly Abhisit's government have been doing. How many slices of humble pie would you care for? Pissed it away....you are hilarious.

Thai exports up 35 pct in April

Thai exports up 35 pct in April

Thai exports exports rose for the sixth straight month in April of this year despite the violent political unrest.

Thai exports in April surged 35.2 per cent from a year ago to USD14.1 billion, compared to 40.9 per cent last month, according to the Commerce Ministry.

Thailand's imports rose 46 per cent in April, the fifth consecutive month of gains on strong demand for raw materials and consumer goods.

Thailand posted USD266 million trade deficit in April of this year compared to the USD1.16 billion surplus reported last month.

The Nation

While I have no evidence apart from my own experiences that lying is an acceptable mode of operation in Thailand, coupled with The Nation's propensity for er, yellowed journalism, I would seriously doubt these figures.

Originally Posted by Butterfly

you have to be careful when quoting PR or newpaper article about economic numbers, they have the stupid MO to annualize numbers based on a single quarter or single period, misleading the whole economic reality, just so they can make a nice story about it. Is it 12% annualized based on 1 quarter ? or is that year on year actual ? 12% would definitely not be on year on year, and for this year they expect less than 6%

Cheers.

Originally Posted by Beadle

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Pissed it away....you are hilarious.

My point, which you have conveniently ignored, is we had an unprecedented period of stability, growth and national unity under Thaksin. Six years.

We simply haven't had that since his tenure and posting nonsense and throwing insults doesn't change the facts.

Yes, and a coup and several governments might explain why imbecile.

It is mind bogglingly dumb to say things were stable under Thaksin without looking at the reality/antecedents. Then to say things haven't been so good since without looking at the reality/antecedents is also just as dumb. I've posted facts to counter your ignorance. Suck it up. You got owned. Now learn. I'm sick of dealing with brain dead idiots who don't remember when they were wrong.

Here's a hint, when shown to be wrong, learn from it. It is the most basic requirement indicating intelligence. Children do it via trial and error. Why don't you?

Originally Posted by ataloss

^ Exactly. Which begs the question: why do Moody's et al rate this country's economics so high; what set of books exactly are they all looking at?

Seems like a good question, to which the answer "I don't really know but I could hazard a guess" seems the only appropriate response.


My guess is that there is a convention that people like Moody's agree to accept the numbers from a government as being correct. If they are found not to be, then the credit rating goes down, but nobody looks very hard at a banana republic like Thailand for fear of what they would find, and because it isn't really very important because there is bugger all liquidity in the THB FX.


In short Thailand just isn't that important except for its (now twilighting) strategic importance as a base in SE Asia for USA, which by all accounts they are smuggling up to the Indonesians because they know their own strategic future in Thailand is short term.


Coupled with this is the fact that the international money markets are not exactly socialist, neither are they averse to a bit of exploitation so long as its not in their face too much and the bleeding heart liberal WASPs in USA don't make too much of a fuss about poverty, exploitation and child labour.


Some may have wondered why there are no world-class businesses outside of Thailand, and I believe the reason is that business is only successful in Thailand because of the low wages bill. The education is shithouse, the management is shithouse, the corporate culture is shithouse, the productivity is shithouse, in fact just about everything that makes a corporate good in the west is shithouse in Thailand.

But the cost of labour is just great.

Thai business would simply go broke if it had to pay European or American rates of pay.

So Thailand thrives once again on the back of exploitation and repression. Now the powers-that-be in Thailand know this very well, and it has made them very nicely rich thank you. Small wonder they want to keep it that way by keeping the unwashed red hordes down and in their place.

Just speculation but I suspect it is pretty close to the mark and may well be a significant part of the story.

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Yes, and a coup and several governments might explain why imbecile.

So despite all the misdirection and bluster you actually agree with my point then.

When you can debate without resorting to childish insults and petty one-upmanship then you might be able to get your points across better.

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Oh and just to prove what a total retard you are, you do this....

Thaksin: I’m not a... 27-05-2010 01:47 AM Beadle clutching at straws I'm afraid

So, you aren't even capable of recognising when you are wrong.

Wow, you are a whole new level of fuckwit.

Oh, this seems to be standard operating procedure for Beadle -- I consider it to be the Beadle Stamp of Approval, as it's the best demonstration that he has nothing else, and doesn't want to agree that you are right. Got a couple myself. I wear 'em proudly.

I think that they are 'red' and coming from him, just adds to the effect

Originally Posted by Beadle

Originally Posted by DaffyDuck

So, what you are trying to say : "Never Before" = "Not Since Thaksin"

Media censorship has never been this bad before. Not even under Thaksin's tenure.

It's getting boring to throw counter-proof to your statements (I won't call them 'arguments') in your face, as your "I won't look at it, and it's fake anyway" attitude is getting sadly boring.

...and, of course, when prompted for examples or illustrations of media censorship under Abhisit, you will fail to do so as well.

Go ahead, send me another Red with accompanying ad hominem as a response. Stabbing from the shadows seems more like your style, ain't it?

Originally Posted by Beadle

When you can debate without resorting to childish insults and petty one-upmanship then you might be able to get your points across better.

Can you? Judging by the Reds you dish out for the 'crime' of pointing out inconsistencies and inaccuracies in your arguments, I doubt you can discuss issues maturely, like an adult.

[quote=DaffyDuck;1448002]

Originally Posted by Beadle

Originally Posted by DaffyDuck

So, what you are trying to say : "Never Before" = "Not Since Thaksin"

Media censorship has never been this bad before. Not even under Thaksin's tenure.

It's getting boring to throw counter-proof to your statements (I won't call them 'arguments') …


Not sure you could call anything you say an argument really, more like a statement which is then followed by abuse if the other person doesn't agree. But arguments they ain't.

...and, of course, when prompted for examples or illustrations of media censorship under Abhisit, you will fail to do so as well.

Go ahead, send me another Red with accompanying ad hominem as a response. Stabbing from the shadows seems more like your style, ain't it?

Well, live by the sword...

Originally Posted by Beadle

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Yes, and a coup and several governments might explain why imbecile.

So despite all the misdirection and bluster you actually agree with my point then.

When you can debate without resorting to childish insults and petty one-upmanship then you might be able to get your points across better.

Your original reply was this, where you argued that Thaksin was a good thing for Thailand....

Originally Posted by Beadle

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Because you really, truly and honesty believe that Thaksin is/was good for Thailand

You can't really argue that he wasn't, especially when comparing economic performance, stability, tourism, achievements (IMF loan, completion of several mega-projects etc), national unity (until Sondthi started)... just compare Thaksin's tenure to the subsequent years after the 2006 coup!

Even the stuff like the War on Drugs is remembered by some Thais as a positive of the Thaksin era! This government isn't going to be remembered as fondly, that I can absolutely, positively assure you.

I followed up by looking at your examples and discrediting your points.

That was your original contention, for which you have been shown to be wrong. He wasn't good for Thailand. End of.

Then you try to move the goalposts, by changing your original point...arguing that since Thaksin's demise Thailand has not been quite so good. However, this WAS NOT your original point.

Originally Posted by Beadle

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Pissed it away....you are hilarious.

My point, which you have conveniently ignored, is we had an unprecedented period of stability, growth and national unity under Thaksin. Six years.

We simply haven't had that since his tenure and posting nonsense and throwing insults doesn't change the facts.

I'd already argued this point a long time before. Thaksin wasn't good for Thailand. See my original reply. You are totally deluded. The man was an utterly corrupt despot who seeks absolute control of this nation. He abused his power, feathered his own nest, changed laws to suit his own interests, caused conflict, created and fostered division, controlled the media, appointed family and friends to positions of power, oversaw the start of the war in the south and did nothing to resolve it, had 2,500 people executed without charge or proof of guilt, abused human rights (Tai Bak) etc etc etc...

And as I said before, he came to power in a period of unprecedented global economic growth, which would've meant Thailand's economy would've prospered regardless.

Where are the good bits?

As to your other exceptionally disingenuous point...

Since the coup there have been several proxy governments of Thaksin's and then conflict caused as a direct result of his machinations.

Yes, he's simply great for this country. He abuses his power and then when he loses it does his absolute best to cause as much strife, division and loss as possible.

You didn't understand this point it seems.....here's where you lost it....

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Originally Posted by Beadle

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Pissed it away....you are hilarious.

My point, which you have conveniently ignored, is we had an unprecedented period of stability, growth and national unity under Thaksin. Six years.

We simply haven't had that since his tenure and posting nonsense and throwing insults doesn't change the facts.

Yes, and a coup and several governments might explain why imbecile.

He is the reason for all of this shit. All of it. The coup was not his responsibility, obviously, but his reaction to it and what he's done since was. His proxy governments were as a direct consequence of his actions. Somchai is a member of his family for gods sake! The entire red shirt movement is because he's used his influence to create a hornets nest.

So, yes, since 2006 we've had a period of instability, but that is largely due to Thaksin and his constant shit stirring. And Thaksin is GOOD for Thailand???????????????????

Cause and effect again. Got it?

Your original point that he was/is good for Thailand is just so utterly wrong that it is mind numbing that a human being could believe it.

It was you who added the point of instability since 2006, that was not what the original discussion was about. I addressed aspects of this by pointing out that his record is on a par with this current administration, which is also bloody awful.

Now, here's some friendly advice, when debating try and stick to your original point. Deviating away from it just shows you up as a lying shit, who can't stand losing, like some child at primary school.

Oh and btw, let me remind you. You gave me a red....your response to one of my earlier posts in this thread. So please don't lecture me on how to debate. You resorted to pathetic tactics, not me.

Originally Posted by DaffyDuck

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

Oh and just to prove what a total retard you are, you do this....

Thaksin: I’m not a... 27-05-2010 01:47 AM Beadle clutching at straws I'm afraid

So, you aren't even capable of recognising when you are wrong.

Wow, you are a whole new level of fuckwit.

Oh, this seems to be standard operating procedure for Beadle -- I consider it to be the Beadle Stamp of Approval, as it's the best demonstration that he has nothing else, and doesn't want to agree that you are right. Got a couple myself. I wear 'em proudly.

I think that they are 'red' and coming from him, just adds to the effect

I got another from the equally ridiculous robuzo......

Thaksin: I’m not a... (Thaksin: I’m not a terrorist and never support terrorism) 27-05-2010 02:12 PM robuzo You made the guy's point without realizing it, silly boy. Grow up and stop making a fool of yourself.


He also displays an inability to follow a discussion, miss the point and then resort to redding people. Well done robuzo. You've proven yourself not only to be someone who clings to loyalties about an issue that has nothing directly to do with you, which is bizarre in itself, but also exceptionally stupid.

Congratulations.

A full house of crap.

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

He also displays an inability to follow a discussion, miss the point and then resort to redding people. Well done robuzo. You've proven yourself not only to be someone who clings to loyalties about an issue that has nothing directly to do with you, which is bizarre in itself, but also exceptionally stupid.

robuzo completely lost it, like Quack Quack, put everyone on ignore who doesn't agree with him. I think he is american, speaks volume about their sensitivity. He is also giving a bad name to lefties, with all his tin foil hat theories.

I put him at par with the right wing loonies like Quack Quack and Jet.

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

He is the reason for all of this shit. All of it. The coup was not his responsibility, obviously, but his reaction to it and what he's done since was. His proxy governments were as a direct consequence of his actions. Somchai is a member of his family for gods sake! The entire red shirt movement is because he's used his influence to create a hornets nest.

So, yes, since 2006 we've had a period of instability, but that is largely due to Thaksin and his constant shit stirring. And Thaksin is GOOD for Thailand???????????????????

Cause and effect again. Got it?

Don't waste your time on Beadle -- it requires intelligence to be able to read and understand, all of which are lacking in Beadle's case.

Originally Posted by StrontiumDog

He also displays an inability to follow a discussion, miss the point and then resort to redding people. Well done robuzo. You've proven yourself not only to be someone who clings to loyalties about an issue that has nothing directly to do with you, which is bizarre in itself, but also exceptionally stupid.

Seems like Robuzo is just playing the part of lapdog.

Originally Posted by Myofb

In short Thailand just isn't that important except for its (now twilighting) strategic importance as a base in SE Asia for USA

And perhaps, except for being the second largest economy in SE Asia......

duffy don't spread bullshit. you must be a republican lol you guys are good at lying lol.
Bin laden never denied or accepted responsibility for any terrorist action, except for the somalian situation, for which he claimed responsibility, while the experts of the matter say that his role was a minor one in somalia. ( these are conclusion of the prominent terrorism experts of which some work for american government )

As fo mr T lol i think it is a mistake to make the guy bigger than he is and possibly making him a hero for some, which he isn't. Making osama to the lonely guy who fights the greatest empire of the history has worked but for other reasons and extremely well planning and resources.
This case is in my opinion a bad choice, they could better ignore him. I don't think that they want him in thailand, as already metioned.

Originally Posted by aras

This case is in my opinion a bad choice, they could better ignore him. I don't think that they want him in thailand, as already metioned.

Confirming my earlier statement.

Originally Posted by Whiteshiva

Originally Posted by Myofb

In short Thailand just isn't that important except for its (now twilighting) strategic importance as a base in SE Asia for USA

And perhaps, except for being the second largest economy in SE Asia......

Well, the comment was made in the global context, if that wasn't clear then I apologise. SE Asian economies are just not important in the global context.