Thai politics by Andrew Spooner

[opebo]

This guy Spooner is some red-shirt sympathizing democracy-believing foreigner writing for the 'Asian Correspondent'.  Of course I oppose precisely what he supports, but I don't deny he has an accurate view of the situation.  Just two examples, he has many many anti-Thai articles:

Is Thailand headed for another coup? – Council of Foreign Relations
Why Thailand’s sexpat community hates Thaksin Shinawatra

By that of course I meant anti-Thai-ruling-class.  His support for 'democracy', the 'people', and suchlike ideas (and apparent distaste for personal freedom - see the 'sexpat' article) knows no bounds.  I only include his writing here as yet another interesting source and point of view for those forum members interested in Thai politics.

(I must also admit I am quaking in my flip-flops, because the new government is almost certain to destroy the fun and send Thailand reeling even further towards horrible modernity, Westernization, and americanization.. and not coincidentally castration)

[minionofmidas]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Okay, now I have to ask. Have you tried? And what does "ajarn" mean?

[opebo]

Okay, now I have to ask. Have you tried? And what does "ajarn" mean?

Ajarn means Professor - like 'Sensei' in Japan I guess, its actually a term of greater respect than 'professor' in the West.  Of course I haven't tried, I'm not interested in that. I like prostitutes only.

[opebo]

By the way here's the quotation from that story that got my goat:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

It is disturbing how these anti-sex Western supposed egalitarians love to harp on the fact that most sexpats are far from wealthy, or that they are often average working-class men with middling education levels.  By contrast to this elitist I find that the relatively humble nature of many sexpats is what makes their relationships with bar-girls often work quite well - they're really quite equal (though it is true the simple men are often unaware of this).  The clueless commentator assumes that some how it is the sexpat who is 'taking advantage of' the girls, but the vast majority of Thais would describe the situation as just the opposite.

That said,it is certainly true that most Thais dislike foreigners and the sex industry, so the unfortunate return to democracy recently will likely doom my fun.

[Beet]

This thread is a nice admission that one's own position is morally bankrupt, but trademark of opebo's redeeming frankness, and also somewhat informative, so thank you. I'll have to say that the linked piece did raise my esteem of Thaksin.

[opebo]

This thread is a nice admission that one's own position is morally bankrupt, but trademark of opebo's redeeming frankness, and also somewhat informative, so thank you. I'll have to say that the linked piece did raise my esteem of Thaksin.

But only because you believe in 'morality', which is irrational, Beet.  THough I suppose you as a far-removed onlooker can judge the two sides by any silly method you like, from 'which one is cuter' to 'moralty' - they have the same validity.

I suspect that among those actually involved in any particular struggle, the vast majority judge based on their own interests rather than 'morality' or other fantasies.  However it is an interesting question, particularly in light of the fog of delusion under which most people labor  - perhaps some do base their politics upon 'morality'.

[Gustaf]

Seemed like an amusingly accurate description of Opebo (apart from the modest means, I guess). It can hardly be surprising that exploiters fear the people getting a voice (even if the voice is corrupt).

[opebo]

Seemed like an amusingly accurate description of Opebo (apart from the modest means, I guess). It can hardly be surprising that exploiters fear the people getting a voice (even if the voice is corrupt).

Dude, Americans are just as exploited as Thais - democracy doesn't eliminate capitalism.  It just means you can't have any personal freedoms anymore.  (well I guess you could in some forms of democracy, its the female suffrage that puts the nail in the coffin).

Oh and btw, my means are terribly modest - I have less money per month than almost anyone described in that article.  A typical pensioner from Western Europe or the US (the vast majority here are British, German, Dutch, Scandinavia - only a few americans, because they're poorer) lives on something like nearly double my salary.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

What's your wage - roughly?

[opebo]

What's your wage - roughly?

About $1,400/month.  However I'll be the first to admit that I spend about $2,000/month.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

What's your wage - roughly?

About $1,400/month.  However I'll be the first to admit that I spend about $2,000/month.

And how far does that stretch in Thailand? In terms of everyday items, I mean.

[opebo]

What's your wage - roughly?

About $1,400/month.  However I'll be the first to admit that I spend about $2,000/month.

And how far does that stretch in Thailand? In terms of everyday items, I mean.

Oh I live fairly well.  Rent is $100, food maybe $1-3 per meal.  Products like cars and so forth are the same cost as in the US though.

[Gustaf]

What's your wage - roughly?

About $1,400/month.  However I'll be the first to admit that I spend about $2,000/month.

And how far does that stretch in Thailand? In terms of everyday items, I mean.

Al, I've been over this with Opebo before. The per capita GDP in Thailand is $5 000. So he has roughly 40% of the Thai GDP per month. The British GDP is about $36 000, so this should be roughly equal to $14 000 per month in the UK. Which I think one could get by on, don't you?

[minionofmidas]

And I think we've been over the fact that (while he's obviously affluent by Thai standards, of course) you cannot do such comparisons this simplistically without looking perfectly clueless - for reasons Opebo hinted at in the post right above, of course - so I suggest you stop. Or at least add a caveat every time.

[Gustaf]

And I think we've been over the fact that (while he's obviously affluent by Thai standards, of course) you cannot do such comparisons this simplistically without looking perfectly clueless - for reasons Opebo hinted at in the post right above, of course - so I suggest you stop. Or at least add a caveat every time.

The comparison is simplistic, for obvious reasons. It's not supposed to convey all the specifics, but to give a rough idea. I'm not sure what reasons you're referring to here, specifically though? Is it the difference in price levels between locally produced goods and those that operate on a more international market? Or internal differences between the country?

I've spent quite a bit of time in China so I'm well aware of, say, the difference in price between a restaurant meal and a movie ticket (the former being like a tenth of the latter) or the difference in general between Shanghai (which is like a Western city in many respects) and a city like Chengdu.

I've had friends who lived abroad in Asian countrues, including Thailand, so I think I have a decent idea of how much money one needs there. And, obviously, any sum that could easily sustain one in a country like Sweden makes for a very good living in a country like Thailand.

[minionofmidas]

It's not supposed to convey all the specifics, but to give a rough idea.

But it doesn't. Well, no more than just not converting at all.
You seem to know that, anyways.

Anyways, nobody's claiming the Ope is starving. He's some ridiculous sort of professor, after all. But he's comparing himself with expats, not Thai farmers (and of course, using GDP calculations in countries with non-negligible subsistence farming is... out there, really. Not as bad in Thailand as in Africa, of course, but...) All he said is he earns a good bit less than someone on a Western pension who feels that pension to be sufficient to allow a life of modest luxury in Thailand will typically have. You think that's inaccurate? The "half as much" part may well be, yeah.

[opebo]

Thanks for the input Lewis, and of course you are right.  Gustaf's attempt to portray me as 'wealthy' is a bit absurd and shows how slim his grasp of 'facts' and economic analysis is, despite his self-portrayal as some kind of 'researcher' or 'expert'.  My lifestyle corresponds with a member of the Thai upper-middle class, but obviously not a wealthy person.  

Anyway the attempt to turn the discussion to me is derailing the earlier point, which is simply that most of these European, Australian, and to a less numerous extent American retirees have very comfortable incomes - at least $1,500-$2,500/month.  I'm not sure what this Andrew Spooner thinks is a 'modest' income.. its true these retirees are not really wealthy, and many are rather 'blue collar' in origin (being of a generation where such workers made decent incomes and received decent pensions), but they are also not somehow poor enough to have a negative effect on the Thai economy or society.

In point of fact I think that the legal requirement for a retirement visa in Thailand is about $2,000/month in proven income, or some rather large amount in reserve in the bank, so they already do preclude long-stays for those who are impecunious.

[Gustaf]

It's not supposed to convey all the specifics, but to give a rough idea.

But it doesn't. Well, no more than just not converting at all.
You seem to know that, anyways.

Anyways, nobody's claiming the Ope is starving. He's some ridiculous sort of professor, after all. But he's comparing himself with expats, not Thai farmers (and of course, using GDP calculations in countries with non-negligible subsistence farming is... out there, really. Not as bad in Thailand as in Africa, of course, but...) All he said is he earns a good bit less than someone on a Western pension who feels that pension to be sufficient to allow a life of modest luxury in Thailand will typically have. You think that's inaccurate? The "half as much" part may well be, yeah.

I'm not comparing him to  the ex-pats though. Of course, anyone who has, say, worked a life-time and draws out a decent retirement (and perhaps works a bit on the side in Thailand, teaching English) is going to earn more than Opebo. A Western wage/benefit will always go a long way in a poor country.

But that's like the subrubanite with the smallest mansion complaining abuot the others being rich. I know that's commonly done and all, but living in a poor country as one of the richest people in itshould carry with it at least the respect to admit that fact.

I'm honestly not sure what it is exactly that you're complaining about with my statistics here? I think GDP will tend to be strongly correlated with price and wage levels, for obvious reasons, and this putting a wage in relation to GDP per capita should be a decent approximation if we want to say something about it. Of course, lots of caveats and refinements could be made, but that's hardly worth the effort.

Since Thailand has a level of inequality similar to that of the US and Opebo, as I've understood it, lives in a more rural region and not in Bangkok and doesn't buy any durables (and certainly none of that horrible Western stuff that capitalism has brought with it) it would seem to me that if anything this calculation should make him look poorer than he actually is?

[opebo]

...Since Thailand has a level of inequality similar to that of the US and Opebo, as I've understood it, lives in a more rural region and not in Bangkok and doesn't buy any durables (and certainly none of that horrible Western stuff that capitalism has brought with it) it would seem to me that if anything this calculation should make him look poorer than he actually is?

Actually just the opposite - if I did have to buy things - like new cars or a house to live in - I would appear pretty poor even here.  In fact I live like a college student, and this is the only reason I can spend all my money on the one hobby.

[Gustaf]

...Since Thailand has a level of inequality similar to that of the US and Opebo, as I've understood it, lives in a more rural region and not in Bangkok and doesn't buy any durables (and certainly none of that horrible Western stuff that capitalism has brought with it) it would seem to me that if anything this calculation should make him look poorer than he actually is?

Actually just the opposite - if I did have to buy things - like new cars or a house to live in - I would appear pretty poor even here.  In fact I live like a college student, and this is the only reason I can spend all my money on the one hobby.

Yes, that was my point. You also have no dependents, of course.

[minionofmidas]

I'm honestly not sure what it is exactly that you're complaining about with my statistics here? I think GDP will tend to be strongly correlated with price and wage levels, for obvious reasons,

It's not. Not really. Or only in countries with comparable economic setups.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, no. Not at all. US inequality might be bad compared to Swedish and worse than German, but it doesn't begin to compare with the Third World.* Getting worse once you do ridiculous nonsense like looking only at cash ressources rather than all ressources available to person x - which you're doing (and then some more silliness) when referring to GDP.

*We are talking about places where rich people keep live-in domestic servants. Yeah, I know, the practice actually exists in the West too to an extent. A not comparable extent.

...Since Thailand has a level of inequality similar to that of the US and Opebo, as I've understood it, lives in a more rural region and not in Bangkok and doesn't buy any durables (and certainly none of that horrible Western stuff that capitalism has brought with it) it would seem to me that if anything this calculation should make him look poorer than he actually is?

Actually just the opposite - if I did have to buy things - like new cars or a house to live in - I would appear pretty poor even here.  In fact I live like a college student, and this is the only reason I can spend all my money on the one hobby.

Yes, that was my point. You also have no dependents, of course.

The thing is, that one "hobby" is prized comparable to that horrible Western stuff. Normal people can't afford it (as a "hobby").

Oh, and he means an American (or filthy rich) college student here, not an average Thai college student:

...Since Thailand has a level of inequality similar to that of the US and Opebo, as I've understood it, lives in a more rural region and not in Bangkok and doesn't buy any durables (and certainly none of that horrible Western stuff that capitalism has brought with it) it would seem to me that if anything this calculation should make him look poorer than he actually is?

Actually just the opposite - if I did have to buy things - like new cars or a house to live in - I would appear pretty poor even here.  In fact I live like a college student, and this is the only reason I can spend all my money on the one hobby.

[Gustaf]

I'm honestly not sure what it is exactly that you're complaining about with my statistics here? I think GDP will tend to be strongly correlated with price and wage levels, for obvious reasons,

It's not. Not really. Or only in countries with comparable economic setups.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, no. Not at all. US inequality might be bad compared to Swedish and worse than German, but it doesn't begin to compare with the Third World.* Getting worse once you do ridiculous nonsense like looking only at cash ressources rather than all ressources available to person x - which you're doing (and then some more silliness) when referring to GDP.

*We are talking about places where rich people keep live-in domestic servants. Yeah, I know, the practice actually exists in the West too to an extent. A not comparable extent.

...Since Thailand has a level of inequality similar to that of the US and Opebo, as I've understood it, lives in a more rural region and not in Bangkok and doesn't buy any durables (and certainly none of that horrible Western stuff that capitalism has brought with it) it would seem to me that if anything this calculation should make him look poorer than he actually is?

Actually just the opposite - if I did have to buy things - like new cars or a house to live in - I would appear pretty poor even here.  In fact I live like a college student, and this is the only reason I can spend all my money on the one hobby.

Yes, that was my point. You also have no dependents, of course.

The thing is, that one "hobby" is prized comparable to that horrible Western stuff. Normal people can't afford it (as a "hobby").

Oh, and he means an American (or filthy rich) college student here, not an average Thai college student:

...Since Thailand has a level of inequality similar to that of the US and Opebo, as I've understood it, lives in a more rural region and not in Bangkok and doesn't buy any durables (and certainly none of that horrible Western stuff that capitalism has brought with it) it would seem to me that if anything this calculation should make him look poorer than he actually is?

Actually just the opposite - if I did have to buy things - like new cars or a house to live in - I would appear pretty poor even here.  In fact I live like a college student, and this is the only reason I can spend all my money on the one hobby.

Oh, I agree with you on inequality statistics. Then again, that's making an assumption which supports my argument but cannot be verified in the data. I try to avoid doing that, since it's bad practice.

And I understand he doesn't mean a Thai college student. Any Thai student with that sort of money would probably be getting an education abroad.

I'm still not precisely sure what point you're making. Is your argument that Thai GDP will be underestimated or overestimated? I suspect cases could be made for both sides there. That GDP does not capture the economy perfectly and does so less for less developed countries is hardly unknown. That doesn't mean that it's not a fairly strong indicator of various economic variables. But it's really hard for me to defend my argument if you don't specify what your problem with it is?

[minionofmidas]

Well, what's yours?

Al, I've been over this with Opebo before. (stupid stats that'll always get my goat, but nvm that now) Which I think one could get by on, don't you?

In answer to... da da da ching...

I live fairly well.

Looks like you came here only to troll. And like I took the bait.

Back to topic. Thai politics. -_-

[Gustaf]

Well, what's yours?

Al, I've been over this with Opebo before. (stupid stats that'll always get my goat, but nvm that now) Which I think one could get by on, don't you?

In answer to... da da da ching...

I live fairly well.

Looks like you came here only to troll. And like I took the bait.

Back to topic. Thai politics. -_-

My problem with my own argument isn't big enough to compel me not to make it, of course.

Al brought up that topic, not me, so I offered an answer to the question he posed. Opebo has a very limited understanding of economic realities so he usually tries to avoid the fact that he is very well off, by exploiting (as he would put it for anyone else) the poors in Thailand.

And I don't think I was trolling, since I didn't initiate. And the discussion was about ex-pats and their economic standard to begin with. And there it would seem to exist a bit of a disconnect. Obviously, even someone with a low income by Western standards would be fairly well-off in a poor country like Thailand. $2 000 a month is more than what most of my friends spend in a month, but of course it's still a low income by Swedish general standards. It'd still be a great deal of money in Thailand.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

It was the 'typical pensioner in Western Europe' bit that interested me, not any comparison to other ex-pats or to Thais. It's really only anywhere near close to true if you just look at exchange rates.