Marc Faber On Thaksin’s “Getting Hold Of The Money Pot”
Investment guru Marc Faber needs no introduction. He predicted the Japan bust and saw the gold boom arrive in time. Marc’s a regular on CNBC, Bloomberg TV and the likes. Faber has a reputation for being a contrarian investor and has been called “Doctor Doom” for a number of years. His Gloom Boom & Doom Report is mandatory reading if you want to stay ahead of the game.
Marc’s success has many enviers, still, I haven’t met anyone yet who’s able to prove him more wrong than right. What Marc says is sound and of value. You’re a fool if you call this man biased. He’s never an ideologist, but an observer and based on his analysis he makes his money. Lots of it. His analyses actually consider the interwoven financial and political systems as a cyclic process that started with the Dutch tulip mania of 1637, history’s first large economic bubble.
He rose to fame while working in and from Hong Kong. Since a few years Marc is a resident of Chiang Mai where he built his own beautiful place, he, this enfant terrible among the worlds financial gurus. Marc’s an uncomfortable character, many don’t like his straightforwardness, but they all listen to what he has to say. Let’s hear what he says about the Thai crisis.
What about the reds’ promised redistribution of wealth? Well, Marc talks about more than only Thailand. What to do with your money in these trying corrective times? Here is Marc Faber talking with Bloomberg’s U.S.-centric Tom Keene and Ken Prewitt:
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by BKKDan, Pim Pimlapas. Pim Pimlapas said: RT @BangkokDan: (BLOG) Marc Faber On Thaksin’s “Getting Hold Of The Money Pot” http://bit.ly/8XFBE0 [...]
His Dow support level is blown out already but I like his take on investment generally and I really like Tom Keene’s interviews. The Thailand bit was carefully vague and self censored and lacked detail but that was what his ill-equipped to understand audience required (the CNN effect perhaps).
I thought the most interesting reference was to Kaplan’s Foreign Affairs article which I am now going to register for. I suspect that Keene was attempting to lead Faber towards some speculation on the influence of China on recent events. As the China Daily’s coverage has been supportive of the government, official China’s policy would be an interesting subject to explore. I listened to a very interesting talk in the FCCT a few years ago about China’s diplomats and their impressive professionalism when dealing with developing countries. Is it all about the money here? It’s obvious that China is the important export market now and that the influence of the U.S. is waning here. But they are coming the other way too. In some sectors Chinese imports have all but wiped out local manufacturers. Particularly at the low end of the market the Chinese are now consolidating impressive market shares but a recent upsurge in the marketing of Chinese branded cars and 4 wheel drives suggests that no part of Thai manufacturing will be safe from low cost Chinese competition. Then there’s those fascinating Burma stats I read recently. While China dominates their imports but Thailand is still the most important export market. Chinese owned businesses are everywhere in Burma these days and as the military are patrons of Burma business the cooperation between the two states must be getting closer all the time. An overland route that bypasses the Straits of Malacca has been suggested as part of Burma’s supposed strategic potential but what about the Kra Isthmus canal scheme and those rumours of Chinese interest?
And speaking of major waterways what about what’s happening to the Mekong? Between the water levels dropping, the pollution (particularly heavy metals) coming downstream, and the concerted attempts by the downstream nations to jointly administer the river, China can’t be seen as such a good partner surely?
Can anybody put some of the pieces together? I have so many questions. Are there prospective military sales? Pridi was the most famous Thai exile in residence but what are the more recent high level connections? Has a Chinese preference been expressed for a particular leader present, past or future? Today Bangkok Pundit described the adoption here of the practice of “fen qing.” What other Chinese innovations are appearing in Thailand? Is there anything out there that’s current on China and Thailand? The assumption has always been that Thailand, over time continue to drift in a westerly political direction. But if the future is going to be dominated by the Chinese is there still a strong incentive for Thailand to do this?
An intriguing concept indeed, Pundit’s fen qing.
I’d assume though the loss of common sense is related to something much closer to home: running amok, derived from the Malay/Indonesian/Tagalog word amuk, meaning “mad with uncontrollable rage.”
In parts it was a controlled rage on Bangkok’s Black May 19th, 2010, so the concept of fen qing certainly is worth a closer study. With fen qing looking like the more romantic side of amok.
Marc’s certainly aware of both concepts with his China background. His office in Hong Kong was a living museum full of Mao stickers, pins and regalia. Not because he’s a Maoist, but because of his obsessive urge to be part of it to understand what’s going on.
To pinpoint a China factor in current Thailand a holistic approach is certainly recommended, but then again, isn’t Thailand already a Chinese colony.
BangkokDan
Same opinon here, as Marc. Funny so long abroad, and still this funny Swiss-lish … ha ha.
Nice updates recently Dan. Swinging completely with your opinions in last few months. Keep up the good work.
Fab-isimo
(BD: Didn’t particularly “swing,” but as Thaksin outed himself as a hysterical dangerous man one would better take this into account and adjust positions.)
Fair enough to post this as investment news, but as a commentator on Thai politics he’s a joke.
He ignores the pre coup elections, the court “directives” (how easily everyone forgets the Jakrapob leaking of that taped conversation), then he dismisses a military coup & tearing up of a constitution as no big deal, ignores a military imposed constitution, the post coup election results, PAD terrorism, judicial double standards, and interference from military.
(And let’s not forget the Abhisit reconciliation double speak, and complete reversal of position from when he was opposition leader.)
I know its old ground, so won’t go on, other than to say that before he comments further on Thai politics, I would recommend the guru step out of his mansion on the Ping, and spend some time down at the Warorot Grand Palace intersection talking to the people he summarily dismisses as being paid.
Hopefully it was just hi-so ignorance, and he’s not a Stephen Young type, saying what’s required to protect his privileges/vested interests and to ingratiate himself with the ruling establishment.
Hobby dear:
One could easily counter how everyone easily forgets:
- Supinya
- Krue Se
- Tak Bai
- lawyer Somchai
- money paid for votes
- Suvarnabhumi runway cracks
- “privatization” of police
- iTV
- Thaksin’s hiding of his assets as an “honest mistake”
- the threatening of doctors to not report bird flu
- selective monopolizations
- birth of a Thaksin oligarchy
- drug war
- etc., etc.
With your denial of Mr. Faber’s knowledge you fall into the exactly same trap of what reds promise: a society without leaders and intelligentsia. Brave new world. The survival of the fittest. Pure Darwinism. Me thought we’ve learned something since.
BangkokDan
Must read: Democracy in danger from Prospect:
http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/2010/05/democracy-in-danger/
I am sorry that I keep talking off topic but when I find something interesting to read I feel the urge to pass it on.
Hobby, you have my sincere sympathy but at this stage I’d say you are wasting your time trying to fight the spin. The government’s version may be a pack of lies but then the leadership of the other side is equally cavalier with the truth. For expats like me and perhaps Dan too, it’s not really of much consequence now to debate the merits of the various parties in this conflict. Until some kind of stability returns to Thailand most of us will be operating on fear. Sure that’s what the authoritarians need to get their way but, let’s face it, they’ve got what they need anyway and they are going to get their way for the moment at least. When things calm down a bit, or when the nasty fascist supporters of the government (or its opponents) tip their hand, you’ll find a more receptive audience to your views. But for now, I’d suggest that far too many people are too shocked to listen.
Rumsfeld’s pre-Afghan invasion quote again if you missed the previous comment.
Even at this stage some of those known unknowns are obvious and they are scaring people who have long lived in denial of the Thai reality. Of course they are resisting engaging with the ugly truths that have been clearly demonstrated, and given their emotional states at the moment that’s perfectly understandable. But, thanks to censorship and state control of the mainstream media, unless you have some seriously high level access to information, neither you nor I can know what the true gravity of the situation is so their fear is my fear also. Ironically it’s those unknown unknowns that are going to determine the course of future events. I counsel patience. The conflict at the top still has some way to run before its resolved. Eventually, the chances are these people will be forced to break cover, no matter how much censorship is in place. The rumors going around in hi-so Thai circles are already quite extraordinary. In the meantime there is still a lot we can legally talk about without it becoming a question of which side you support or what shirt you wear. You don’t have to pretend to believe the government story to engage in constructive criticism in debate. Just ignore the party lines and beaver away at breaking down the ignorance around those things that can be discussed without attracting the censors. That’s the productive approach.
It’s not giving up. The process of revealing how power is used and abused in this country is not going to take place overnight.
BTW, “great service” was a reference to the plight of the dark skinned Moor and his manipulation by the whiter skinned, devious elitist in the background. It’s actually “some service” but my memory let me down again.
Thanks Jaded. I don’t really see it as picking sides, because I’m on the side of the people.
(Any rational analysis of the last 80 years in Thailand (uncensored) leaves no doubt on which side one should be on (if they are with the mass of Thai people.)
Agree about the unknowns, and that’s why I don’t get bogged down in the nitty gritty of analyzing each minute detail of the violence – what’s the point when no one hardly bats an eyelid at someone being shot by sniper in the street whilst giving interviews to foreign press. There have been 80 deaths in the last month, yet the PM and all ministers are still in place – compare that to the fallout from the 7th Oct 2008 faulty tear gas canister incident and you get a clear picture of the extent of the Thai double standard.
(I could mention airport invasions, detention camps and other such things, but …)
I’d say one “known” is that there is much more going on than just a feudal elite being overthrown.
Forget the Finland Plot, my latest theory is that the reds are being pushed into a trap – everyone knows that injustice breeds violence, but how many violent revolutions are successful in this day and age?
In addition to your Rumsfield reference, I would point readers to the Sri Lankan example, where the Tamils’ cause was just, but look how it ends. It may not be a coincidence that Thai authorities have such close links with Sri Lanka.
Currently, I see the biggest challenge for the red shirts is to stop the inevitable slide into guerilla war, because once that happens they (and the Thai people) have lost – an endless state of emergency is exactly what Abhisit, Korn, Prem & Prayuth want.
Jaded also raised a good point about self-interest – Dan certainly knows on which side his bread is buttered, and has picked his side.
BTW, Dan, I note you persist in bringing up Tak Bai and Krue Se again, even though you know that neither were Thaksin’s fault, and in the Krue Se incident, the military went against his ministers specific order to resolve the situation peacefully.
Talk about stirring up a hornets’ nest. Sri Lanka? Maniac LTTE supremo Prabhakaran? Child soldiers? Extortion of the diaspora? Leaders using refugee camps as human shields? A just cause gone terribly astray.
If you give me the choice Hobby between a) change induced by a policy of hatred with a clear option on civil war and b) a less than perfect society, well which one would I prefer. And please, call me full of selfish self-interest.
Regarding Tak Bai I do recall Thaksin blaming the young men for their own deaths. Hey it happened during Ramadan, they were Muslims and fasting, therefore weak, that’s why they died so easily, said Thaksin.
BangkokDan
Dan, if you’ve got Tak Bai on one side then you’ve got the Rohingyas on the other. I suspect neither had much to do with the politicians in charge, and a lot more to do with a state within a state functioning by its own particular rules of morality.
Agree about just causes going astray – that’s why I’m speaking out!
If it’s a choice of only those two options, I would agree with you, but I’m about trying to avoid both your (a) and (b).
I aready agreed on the other thread about Thaksin’s handling of the Tak Bai incident, after the military did their usual trick.
(I put it in the same category as Abhisit & Rohingya.)
What really irks me though is anyone believing Abhisit & Co. want reconciliation – there is absolutely NO evidence that is the case, and people should be in no doubt about the real reason the road map talks collapsed.
(BD: There’s ample evidence Hobby, even from within the red leadership, but I’m tired of repeating the same again and again specifically for you. Blame the government for many failures, but not for your own unwillingness to see things as they are.)
Of course PM Abhisit wants a reconciliation, and he asked the reds’ leadership to seriously negotiate towards a reconciliation road map. But Hobby again is living on another planet.
PM Abhisit offered a definite Nov. 14th election date and to dissolve the house … exactly the main goal of the red shirts on why they made the long march to Bangkok.
But Hobby could not admit that the red shirts’ leadership was merely following orders from Thaksin Shinawatra and all along had Thaksin’s agenda as their no. 1 goal, and the thousands of red protesters were just for “bargaining chips” and “cannon fodder” to create a situation for a civil war (which was General Khattiya’s agenda as instructed by Thaksin).
Where is the evidence?
Dan &/or Vichai, please compile a list, and I will respond accordingly.
(Remember, Abhisit has been talking reconciliation since he came to power in December 2008.)
BTW, if you include statements by Abhisit on your list, then please back them up with evidence of any actions that coincide with his statements.
Just to mention Veera’s absence and this unbiased source:
WSJ – Thaksin Still Stands Amid Thai Turmoil (“exiled opposition leader intervened to thwart peace talks”)
Just because you don’t read the evidence in the bible doesn’t mean it cannot be true. Get serious.
Listen to the latest Thaksin interview. Come on. Now he’s blaming the government for torching down Central World, his people would never do that:
! ABC – Thaksin Speaks to Lateline (“we never, never engage in violence” … “reds are not sophisticated enough to burn the whole building down” …)
Get real Hobby. You’re a nice guy, but no more denying the undeniable. If you want to hijack other blogs, so be it, but spare yourself the effort of writing the same old tit-for-tat responses stuck in the past on this site here. They’ll land directly in the spam bin.
BangkokDan
Dan’s right. There are lots of places for tit-for-tat. ThaiVisa is a great place to pick fights if that’s your thing. And there are obviously very strict limits on absolutelyBangkok but these are beyond Dan’s control. Free ranging discussion is a legal as well as an emotional issue and impossible to facilitate in these ciircumstances. I like reading your stuff but tit-for-tat isn’t really in the spirit of the kind of discussion Dan is trying to facilitate. It’s inevitable that there will be some squabling but it can’t just be about that … There have to be limits here. Dan’s limits … Head over to Political Prisoners or New Mandala if you want to enjoy free speech. But remember thought crime is a serious business!
(BD: Just for the record, 99.99% of comments here are not “controlled.” There’s a limit to patience as well.)
Funny “yokkie” would commend New Mandala.
Personally I found New Mandala as a website encouraging, and with a very strong, anti-Thai establishment slant. New Mandala is anti-Abhisit, anti-monarchy, pro-Thaksin and 99% pro-Thai red shirts.
To this day, I have yet to find a New Mandala blogger, including New Mandala founders Andrew Walker and Nick Farrelly, condemn the Black May 2010 arson rampage by the violent red shirts.
Abhisit talks/has talked about reconciliation on publicly stated issues like wealth gap and upward mobility, he talks about welfare state, taxation, access to land, funds, education etc – issues that, to stress it again, are publicly stated as underlying reasons for the red protests.
I, on the other hand, have always thought that these issues are only a false pretext, the red movement is not really concerned with any of them and addressing them won’t bring about any kind of reconciliation – this is exactly what Hobby is witnessing, and rightly so, for reconciliation from the red point of view means making concessions to Thaksin and amnesty to his minions.
From that point of view it is true that Abhisit never has done. said or promised anything (initially there was amnesty to politicians proposal in his latest roadmap but it was immediately dropped).
When Bangkok Post ran “Thaksin charged with terrorism” front-page headline some people, bloggers and commentators immediately charged Abhisit with subverting his reconciliation promise.
Makes it rather clear where reconciliation priorities lie for both sides.
Thailand managed to solve communist insurgency problem by issuing a wide spread amnesty and accepting the fighters back into the society.
It worked because those people honestly gave up their struggle, something you can not guarantee with red shirt guerrillas and can completely rule out with regard to Thaksin himself.
That kind of reconciliation is way off, it would become plausible only when reds themselves realize the futility of the armed struggle against the state. So far they only promising more attacks instead.
The red shirts could not be engaged into any meaningful discussions on any issue period. That has been my experience. And that has been the experience of many of my friends and associates who made the sincere effort thereof.
So I am resigned to take reds leadership (only Thaksin remains standing) at their word. After all when the reds leadership threatened to burn Bangkok if their demands were not met, they were good on their threats. Remaining leaders Thaksin and Chaturon now warns that reds followers are going underground, and I believe them, and I believe they are serious about organizing an insurgency for their “democracy” cause.
StanG had pinpointed the reds cause as nothing more than Thaksin’s cause. That makes the reds’ insurgency even more probable considering that Thaksin is hell bent on taking his followers literally to hell.
I expect that PM Abhisit will announce a house dissolution date, then new elections, before the end of this year. But that “election” had never been the real objective of the reds shirts/Thaksin (inseparable if people still do not get this point); hence, there will a surge of reds violent attacks between now and that election date, because prophet Thaksin already made that call.
Dan’s blog; Dan’s rules. A completely unmoderated comments section will just lead people to write things like “you f-ing idiot” and to write insults directed at one family. For legal reasons and well to ensure that the comments don’t descend into a complete mess, moderation works better. The debate then is then on the level of moderation. Must say that if Dan was intending to censor all critics he is doing a bad job of it given that many of the comments here are critical of what he writes. Anyone can set up their own blog and then critique what Dan or anyone else writes.
Vichai N, Thaksin’s ability to set up a guerrilla movement is questionable. I mean the difference between running your operations from within a legitimate red base with legitimate peaceful red shirts cover and being all on your own is vast. It might work in the south and probably Isan, but not in Bangkok, and nobody would do it just for the money – it’s too dangerous.
Abhisit won’t call elections until he is fairly confident those guerrillas can’t make any difference. If he calls it soon, means the threat is really low.
bangkokpundit – well, that’s one way to screw up your post, most important part of it unintelligible. Incidentally, I just wrote a couple of paragraphs about your coverage of the red rally in comments to Hobby on my blog, you might want to check it out, it’s under “Who is missing in this chaos” entry.
Speaking of which – disappearance of red shirts is perhaps the most telling sign of how their rally has developed.
More likely, as StanG pointed out, any Thaksin-financed insurgency would be localized at the Isaan region.
Note: Over at New Mandala, Nicholas Farrelly has been cajoling his readers to post articles examining the “Isaan secession from Thailand” idea … just to nurture the ‘freedom-virus germ” to embolden would-be Isaan insurgents, I suppose.
I agree it is crazy and it is dangerous, and very stupid, for any disgruntled Isaan folk to even consider going underground to fight for secession. But both New Mandala and Thaksin, it seems, are of the same mind of that very crazy, very dangerous and very stupid idea.
On NM it’s a poster called Chris Beale who talks about Isaan breakaway practically nonstop.
Nicholas gave him an ultimatum once – write an article on the issue or stop peddling it without any evidence. Now he is calling on Chris again, there’s no other agenda, AFAIK.
- StanG
Yup I noticed Andrew Walker, FOR THE FIRST TIME, had issued a warning to NM readers to cease digressing or going off-track w/pet subjects such as “impending Isaan secession.” Encouraging eh?
I picked this comment below at the Economist:
http://www.economist.com/node/16216237/comments?page=2
krah wrote: Jun 1st 2010 7:02 GMT
Comments on Banyan: “Picking up the Pieces”
My sentiments exactly!