Poverty is not a political commodity

Poverty is not a political commodity

Welfare cardholders line up to withdraw the 500-baht cash handout given as a New Year gift by the Prayut Chan-o-cha government in December. Sarot Meksophawannakul
Welfare cardholders line up to withdraw the 500-baht cash handout given as a New Year gift by the Prayut Chan-o-cha government in December. Sarot Meksophawannakul

As the election is drawing near, most if not all political parties are making eradicating poverty and closing the economic gap their flagship policy, rolling out enticing populist programmes in the hope of winning the hearts and minds of voters.

Indeed, we have seen myriad anti-poverty schemes. But hardly do we see an improvement in the situation. On the contrary, we are trapped in the same cycle, as the problems are not going anywhere. This will continue to be the case as long as politicians view poverty as a "political commodity", something they can sell and still have customers.

Wichit Chantanusornsiri is a senior economics reporter, Bangkok Post.

When merchants trade commodities or goods, they have to know the needs of customers, and respond accordingly, in order to survive in trade. The same rule applies to politics. Once making poverty and the economic gap a commodity, politicians have to do the same in catering to their clients' needs so they can survive politically.

In practice, our politicians cater to those needs by making deals or offers that come in such outrageous policies known as extreme populism, like the rice-pledging scheme by the former Yingluck Shinawatra government, which offered unrealistically high pledging prices, instead of encouraging farmers to produce high-quality rice. The state also tends to give massive subsidies to rubber planters when prices plummet, without asking them to grow secondary plants that may help alleviate their hardship amid a price crisis.

But it's wrong to take poverty and the economic gap -- either in education or income -- as "goods" that politicians can reap the benefits of. By taking poverty as a commodity, politicians only give handouts or offers to maximise political gains; they don't bridge the disparity gap or improve people's livelihoods in the long run.

Take a look at the Yingluck government's rice-pledging policy, which caused a 1-trillion-baht loss to the state but did little to better farmers' quality of life or ease poverty. The scheme's failure echoes the need for agricultural reform, not just a handout that enable politicians to reap political gains.

In recent years, the Prayut Chan-o-cha regime has also spent a great deal on schemes to alleviate poverty. This targets people with less than 100,000 baht in yearly income. It has injected cash to several programmes. At the same time, there is vocational training for people who registered under the anti-poverty scheme. But as training is voluntary, few people pay attention to it. In fact, only three million out of 14.5 million for-the-poor cardholders have joined the activity.

One Tambon, One Product (Otop) is the only anti-poverty scheme that has been successful so far in making recipients enthusiastic about improving their skills, thanks to its evaluation and ranking system. Only qualified Otop producers receive stars, which gives them access to fairs or expos with certain subsidies. Such measures and incentives secure the success for the scheme as Otop producers see the need to improve their skills to make their products more distinctive.

It's wrong to make poverty a political commodity with the goal of political gain as that means state assistance is not sustainable, while disparities remain and can even be intensified. The Global Wealth Databook by Credit Suisse (CS) last year said the inequality gap in Thailand has become the worst in the world as it's found that national assets are held and controlled by the nation's richest 1%, compared to the other 99%.

When poverty and disparity become a commodity, clients or poor people prefer to make a deal, rather than paying attention to self-improvement so they can stand on their own two feet and, ultimately, escape the poverty trap.

We can win the war on poverty, but only when politicians sincerely tackle the problem and stop taking advantage of "political commodities" using shoddy populism.

Wichit Chantanusornsiri

Senior economics reporter

Wichit Chantanusornsiri is a senior economics reporter, Bangkok Post.

Do you like the content of this article?
COMMENT (9)