Rebranding Thaksinomics

[jpatokal]

Interesting editorial from The Economist (http://economist.com/world/asia/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8521976):

Judged by the sufficiency theory's own tenets, the five-year government of Thaksin Shinawatra, the deposed prime minister, was wondrous. His “30-baht health plan”, offering treatments for less than a dollar, helped cut poverty sharply. Yet his government ran a surplus most years (the new one plans a deficit), cut public debt and built big currency reserves. There were extensive programmes to help rural villagers find new sources of income.

However, the UNDP report goes out of its way not to mention the Thaksin government or its policies. There is no discussion of how the new “sufficiency” policies will differ from Mr Thaksin's—just an uncritical lauding of the new government's five-year plan as “the biggest shift in Thailand's economic orientation in over two decades” and much praise for royal projects.

The sufficiency theory talks of “immunising” the national economy against shocks. So far, the military government only seems to be creating shocks...

[Scuba22]

Interesting indeed. The artcile talks about 30-B health care and how Thaksin ran a surplus while the present gov't is in deficit, yet neglects to mention that Thaksin deliberately kept many of his handout progams off the government budget by loading them onto state-owned banks and such; and that part of the reason of the present deficit is that programs like 30-B health care were not solvent and now these losses have been made transparent through including them in the official budget.

Apparently the Economist's Thailand correspondent feels that it's better to hide reality under the rug so long as it makes people feel good. Unsurprising - their last reporter out here was covering all of Southeast Asia for a 3-year stint. How much can you really learn about any place in 3 years, much less a place as opaque and misleading as Thailand? Then again, just about every Thaksin supporter I've ever spoken to or read makes the same errors in their analyses. To date, I've not found one clear-thinking person deeply familiar with Thaksin's policies who support them.

It's articles like this that make me wonder about the credibility of the Economist in areas I know nothing about.

Scuba