Rice scheme simply toxic

EDITORIAL

Published: 11 Jan 2013 at 00.00
Newspaper section: News

This is a fact; governments are simply too bogged down by the seemingly endless political emergencies which pop up anew every day to pay attention to the real issues that, if not attended to, can make or break our society.

Worse, these structural problems are often aggravated by governments' short-term political and economic gains. A case in point is the rice pledging policy and the harm it is causing to the environment.

The Pheu Thai-led government argues that buying rice directly from farmers for a much higher price than the market value can quickly improve the livelihoods of rice farmers and invigorate the economy with their improved purchasing power.

This article is older than 60 days, which we reserve for our premium members only.You can subscribe to our premium member subscription, here.

Forum

Your comments

oldairman
Post : 733
Send message

Discussion 22 : 12 Jan 2013 at 07.3322
Post this to my Facebook
D16 Rice is like any other business. In this case the faremrs grow it and pledge (sell) the product onto a wholesaler and get paid (ignore the amount. The whole saler (the middlemen) in turn sell it on and get paid. So far so good. The buyer then has to sell the product on or store it. If you are doing this on borrowed money as the government is then UNTIL you sell the product you are losing money as you have to pay to store it. If you then sell it for less than you paid for it, it is a LOSS. If you CANNOT sell it, it is a much BIGGER LOSS. If your product degrades during storage and you have to throw it away, it is a TOTAL LOSS.
Like dislike 1 people liked / 0 people disliked this comment
ringmaster
Post : 745
Send message

Discussion 21 : 11 Jan 2013 at 22.4121
Post this to my Facebook
Rice pledging scheme or not, it doesn't matter. Farmers will always try to optimize their crop yields. The better the yield, the better the income. So if you are interested in stopping the use of dangerous pesticides then pass environmental laws and enforce them. I don't particularly like the rice pledging scheme but environmental protection has absolutely nothing to do with it.
Like dislike 3 people liked / 2 people disliked this comment
brilliant
Post : 1,450
Send message

Discussion 20 : 11 Jan 2013 at 21.5520
Post this to my Facebook
The problem is, at least in the rice scheme, that Thai farmers will use any means including toxic chemicals to increase their yield. When the government offers to pay 40 - 50% over market price, it encourages this.
I will say, that programs like the rice scheme may encourage this behavior, it also happens in other farming segments such as the orange tree market in the North. 10 years ago or so when influential people were snapping up land and clear cutting land like there was no tomorrow to plant orange groves, the environment went to heck.
Like dislike 3 people liked / 2 people disliked this comment
ggh
Post : 683
Send message

Discussion 19 : 11 Jan 2013 at 21.4219
Post this to my Facebook
Dis 5 – So are you saying big business predatory practice and government regulation are the sole reason for the financial crisis in the US? If so, how would this compare directly to the circumstances surrounding the rice pledging scheme, in particular the predatory practices?
Like dislike 0 people liked / 1 people disliked this comment
englishbob
Post : 2,340
Send message

Discussion 18 : 11 Jan 2013 at 19.5618
Post this to my Facebook
Disc16 Genii - Perhaps you can explain to us under what circumstances will the government MAKE money as opposed to lose money with this scheme?
Like dislike 6 people liked / 5 people disliked this comment
felixqui
Post : 630
Send message

Discussion 17 : 11 Jan 2013 at 19.0017
Post this to my Facebook
"The result is an aggravation of health and environmental problems caused by chemical herbicides, pesticides, fungicides and fertilisers."

Really?

On the whole, we are much better off for the green revolution and chemicals - people are not starving to death quite so much. The land looked OK the last time I was out there.

Perhaps a few solid statistics would have made that wild call a little more plausible?

But then as others have pointed out, what has that got to do with the idiot rice pledging scheme, which is as toxic as subsidising the cost of oil?
Like dislike 6 people liked / 3 people disliked this comment
genii
Post : 753
Send message

Discussion 16 : 11 Jan 2013 at 18.1916
Post this to my Facebook
Very misleading article. I agree the chemicals should be stopped and I also am surprised someone is not making a lot of noise about it but as for the rice pledging scheme what does it have to do with chemicals. I can assure you farmers will use chemicals available with or without a rice scheme. Critics are always declaring cost of the scheme, corruption, and loss of money but have not shown any proof. You don't loose money until you sell the product.
Like dislike 5 people liked / 6 people disliked this comment
boons
Post : 662
Send message

Discussion 15 : 11 Jan 2013 at 15.5215
Post this to my Facebook
D8: How would that make less traffic in Bangkok? The logical leap you just took is giving me vertigo.
Like dislike 2 people liked / 4 people disliked this comment
dao
Post : 4,638
Send message

Discussion 14 : 11 Jan 2013 at 14.5514
Post this to my Facebook
I agree with renaissance .The chemicals and fertilizers also dictate what seed people now have to use which of course raises the price negating any extra money they would ever make .Stop with all the chemicals and spray .
Like dislike 10 people liked / 2 people disliked this comment
dao
Post : 4,638
Send message

Discussion 13 : 11 Jan 2013 at 14.0213
Post this to my Facebook
Giving people what they want isnt usually whats best for them .
Like dislike 8 people liked / 2 people disliked this comment

1 2 3 Next Last

Rice scheme simply toxic | Bangkok Post: opinion