The Thailand government will distribute money to its citizens. Economists critic

[ecdsa123]

The policy of mass cash transfers was one of the campaign slogans of the centrist Pheu Thai Party (For Thais), which came to power in the Asian country in the summer. The aim is to stimulate the economy by giving the equivalent of over a thousand Dollars to 50 million people, encouraging them to spend more and thus helping local producers, shops, and small businesses. Under the influence of opposition criticism, Prime Minister Srettha slightly reduced the initially planned scale of the program, which was originally intended to cover 56 million people. Income limits and savings limits were introduced. Ultimately, anyone who is at least 16 years old, earns less than 70,000 baht per month, and has less than 500,000 baht in their bank account will be eligible for the transfer.


The money is intended to reach the broad masses of the population exclusively in electronic form, through an e-wallet available via the government application used by millions of Thai citizens. Citizens will not be able to convert the virtual wallet contents into cash, and the funds will need to be spent within six months of receiving them.

The authorities also want to control how the money is spent. Recipients of the government program will not be allowed to use the received funds for debt repayment, bill payment, tuition fees, gas and petrol purchases, gold or gemstones, internet products and services, alcohol, cigarettes, or marijuana.

-------------------------------------------

Question : is this a planned experiment regarding money supply manipulation and full control over society? Is this an attempt before implementing "temporary" currency internationally? A test on the population? What are your thoughts on this?

[TimeTeller]

If nothing else, this will give its citizen something to augment their income.
Also, instead of having those money in the pocket of few officials, at least give something to its people.
We don't know their long-term plan on this matter, but I guess, they will make a study on how it will impact their economy.
As we are not residing in their country, we don't know exactly what benefits it will give to its citizen, but for sure, people will be happy as it is free money.

[pakhitheboss]

Where is Bitcoin discussion on this topic OP? I don't see anything about Bitcoin in it. What you writing is about government policy if systematic distribution of virtual money to it's citizens account. I don't think the topic is relevant to the Bitcoin discussion board. It is better to move this topic to Politics & Society discussion board as your topic doesn't even talk about crypto.

[Hamza2424]

If nothing else, this will give its citizen something to augment their income.
Also, instead of having those money in the pocket of few officials, at least give something to its people.
We don't know their long-term plan on this matter, but I guess, they will make a study on how it will impact their economy.
As we are not residing in their country, we don't know exactly what benefits it will give to its citizen, but for sure, people will be happy as it is free money.

It is not as simple as it looks, First of all as the restriction to the spending of the received amount next to it giving such an amount of money to the citizens can really lead to a major economic crisis and inflation, I'm not sure what type of experiment they want to conduct because the amount they are giving to the people is increased supply it will directly lead to the inflation whether there is the restriction to limits such as Petroleum products some other services which cant be afforded by this directly.

Still, it will greatly disturb local production and local product costs, etc. More to this OP this topic doesn't belong to the Bitcoin discussion session it should be moved to the economics.

[hugeblack]

It is not the first time, but many countries provide financial aid to individuals in the middle class to move the wheel of the economy, especially if traditional solutions, for example, zero interest rates are not useful. This happened to many countries in the Corona pandemic in some economic crises, but it will be useful as long as the consumer classes know the nature of. spending: If citizens shift to a culture of keeping money and not withdrawing it, this money may cause unintended inflation instead of moving the wheel of the economy. In short, economics is not a fixed science, and there cannot be a single solution suitable for all countries.

[ModernTechnoXX]

Question : is this a planned experiment regarding money supply manipulation and full control over society? Is this an attempt before implementing "temporary" currency internationally? A test on the population? What are your thoughts on this?

This policy has also been carried out in my country, at least in my country this model policy is successful in raising the consumption of the country and the economy is running again. Policies such as the Thai government do now have our officials to do during Pandemi Covid 19, many free money programs from the government, with the condition that the money must be spent immediately, not to be tube, so that the economy runs. And that was successful, maybe this was what the Thai government did to save his country from the monetary crisis.

[rat03gopoh]

The government in my country has been providing cash stimulus money for at least the last decade (new leader program). In its aim it is to "protect" the poor, but in reality it only maintains poverty levels. Someone who is poor becomes dependent on stimulus money and reduces their workload because they feel secure.

[Apocollapse]

I guess this is nothing new, many other country must experienced like this one, but in different forms.

Asking a customer to join membership, giving a promotion by installing their apps, getting free money after submitting personal identity etc. All of them are few or many ways to get someone information.

Fiat is always related with supply manipulation and yes this could the first way to migrate to their own CBDC.

Move this topic to Economy section.

[vv181]

Question : is this a planned experiment regarding money supply manipulation and full control over society? Is this an attempt before implementing "temporary" currency internationally? A test on the population? What are your thoughts on this?

First of all, I'm wondering if there are similar experiments in the past about money distribution or stimulus packages, and figuring out their impact and consequences. But let's take their good initiative that their main intent is to boost the economy and help those in need. Another thing I consider is the reason this policy was initiated, I believe it will heavily affect the impact of how the regulation is configured. As you said, if the goal is only to stimulate the economy, other thoughts worth thinking about and noting are whether this is the only policy to achieve that goal.

I believe if the goal is to stimulate the economy there are many other ways, but, I can't say much since I don't know how the country's similar policy results in comparison. Nevertheless, back to your main concern, this kind of initiative surely requires massive surveillance and heavily configured output expectations. As in result, the capability in case of manipulation and control is clear. In fact, it is likely prone to such effects. I believe the outcome of this initiative will surely affect and shape how the future digital currency or stimulus package policies will turn out, for better or worse.

[Hamza2424]

The government in my country has been providing cash stimulus money for at least the last decade (new leader program). In its aim it is to "protect" the poor, but in reality it only maintains poverty levels. Someone who is poor becomes dependent on stimulus money and reduces their workload because they feel secure.

Well, this would be a nice policy for the poor people, but due to this policy, people should not stop working because it's not money running the economic circle of the country is the service & productivity.

TBH there are a lot of welfare programs running in my country to help different types of people, and it's not enough amount live well in current economic circumstances, most people misuse it some of the needy ones are not getting their allocated funds due to politics and corruption around 20% to 30% of the funds are helping and rest are going to the pockets of corput people. They use such support programs to promote their party, they utilize the government funds on their name for their election campaigns & market purposes.

TBH when I look closely at how unfair the system is I feel so sad about how brutally immorality is dominating. Transparency in the system can only fix it, they are no willing to bring transparency because of how they and their heirs will live in luxuries. 

[Blitzboy]

This Thai government endeavor poses intriguing money supply manipulation and social control problems. Fine line, eh? Funding the economy could boost consumption and local businesses. But control - limiting how the money is used, who gets it, and keeping it digital - looms. Is this the start of a global, controlled digital currency? Due to its unregulated status, Bitcoin thrives. It lets users manage their assets without third-party interference, unlike banks.

In contrast, Thailand rigorously controls digital currency. It looks to be controlling crypto and stimulating the economy. This may influence global monetary policy (perhaps). Government-controlled digital currencies offer economic benefits but pose concerns about surveillance and control.

[Hispo]

To me the most interesting part about this initiative if how this government are putting some hard restrictions on what those benefited by the program can or cannot do with the money. The fact they cannot use that money to pay for loans or use it to buy hard commodities like gold or precious gems says a lot about the awareness the Thailand authorities on this plan would have on the prices of those products/goods.

Hopefully a good percentage of those people use that stimulus to pay for things the need and also in order to get for things they can later use as mean of production.

[DrBeer]

The policy of mass cash transfers was one of the campaign slogans of the centrist Pheu Thai Party (For Thais), which came to power in the Asian country in the summer. The aim is to stimulate the economy by giving the equivalent of over a thousand Dollars to 50 million people, encouraging them to spend more and thus helping local producers, shops, and small businesses. Under the influence of opposition criticism, Prime Minister Srettha slightly reduced the initially planned scale of the program, which was originally intended to cover 56 million people. Income limits and savings limits were introduced. Ultimately, anyone who is at least 16 years old, earns less than 70,000 baht per month, and has less than 500,000 baht in their bank account will be eligible for the transfer.


The money is intended to reach the broad masses of the population exclusively in electronic form, through an e-wallet available via the government application used by millions of Thai citizens. Citizens will not be able to convert the virtual wallet contents into cash, and the funds will need to be spent within six months of receiving them.

The authorities also want to control how the money is spent. Recipients of the government program will not be allowed to use the received funds for debt repayment, bill payment, tuition fees, gas and petrol purchases, gold or gemstones, internet products and services, alcohol, cigarettes, or marijuana.

-------------------------------------------

Question : is this a planned experiment regarding money supply manipulation and full control over society? Is this an attempt before implementing "temporary" currency internationally? A test on the population? What are your thoughts on this?

This injection of money is unlikely to solve the economy's problems. I emphasize that these are systemic problems.

Of course, there is an anecdote about 100 dollars, which solved the problems of the village, having passed through all hands and returned to the hands of the one who brought them, but this is a different story and there is a different meaning. In order for the economy to work:
- The population regularly produces and consumes the domestic product. For this purpose, people should take money out of their wallets and give it to others. The movement of money in the economy is like the movement of blood in an organism - it moves, and there is enough of it - the organism works perfectly. Blood pressure drops a lot - and you can't move yourself.
- The economy has to produce goods for export in order to get stable currencies to buy critical products for the country on the foreign market. Since local economies are rarely fully self-sufficient.

And giving away money is not a very logical way to go about it. I can assume that most of the population will buy an iPhone or fashionable sneakers, unfortunately this is human nature, independent of the country.

[Fiatless]

The policy of mass cash transfers was one of the campaign slogans of the centrist Pheu Thai Party (For Thais), which came to power in the Asian country in the summer. The aim is to stimulate the economy by giving the equivalent of over a thousand Dollars to 50 million people, encouraging them to spend more and thus helping local producers, shops, and small businesses. Under the influence of opposition criticism, Prime Minister Srettha slightly reduced the initially planned scale of the program, which was originally intended to cover 56 million people. Income limits and savings limits were introduced. Ultimately, anyone who is at least 16 years old, earns less than 70,000 baht per month, and has less than 500,000 baht in their bank account will be eligible for the transfer.

I know that this policy will have positive and also some negative effects, but it is good to know that it is targeted at low-income earners. At least it will meet some of their basic needs. It will also create employment opportunities because businesses will enjoy high patronage which could lead to an increase in profit maximization. The only problem with such policies is implementation. In some cases, they are marred by corruption, tribalism, and nepotism. But if it is well implemented, it will improve the standard of living of citizens for a while.

The money is intended to reach the broad masses of the population exclusively in electronic form, through an e-wallet available via the government application used by millions of Thai citizens. Citizens will not be able to convert the virtual wallet contents into cash, and the funds will need to be spent within six months of receiving them.

The time frame for the use of money is also ideal to avoid saving or hoarding these funds. It will help to stimulate the economy within a period and the government will afterward roll out control measures to tackle inflation.

The authorities also want to control how the money is spent. Recipients of the government program will not be allowed to use the received funds for debt repayment, bill payment, tuition fees, gas and petrol purchases, gold or gemstones, internet products and services, alcohol, cigarettes, or marijuana.

There is a need to control the money that will be spent to avoid waste. Spending money on cigarettes and alcohol is a waste because it has little impact on the people. it is better to spend the money on food, clothing, and shelter. I would have suggested that the spending be limited to locally produced goods to stimulate the local industry.

[macson]

snip

-------------------------------------------

Question : is this a planned experiment regarding money supply manipulation and full control over society? Is this an attempt before implementing "temporary" currency internationally? A test on the population? What are your thoughts on this?

Uncontrolled circulation of money is just a time bomb for the country, besides that giving free money to citizens will not be effective if the money in the country only circulates within the country, not leaving the country.  The government should prioritize buying products produced by small traders to stimulate purchasing power, because i'm sure there will be a lot of fraud that occurs, for example people who receive financial assistance put the money into gambling or other negative things, hopefully they will study their plan more deeply.

[Negotiation]

It is highly unlikely that the thai government will distribute money to its citizens thailand's economy is currently slowing down. The country's economy slowed due to lower than expected foreign tourist arrivals and lower demand for goods from top trading partner China. Apart from this it is also feared that inflation in the country may increase due to the possibility of reduced production of rice and sugar due to drought. In view of this Thailand has decided to launch a digital wallet program to encourage investment financing through the national budget and taxes could further exacerbate the fiscal deficit.

[STT]

Basic income provision is seen as a healthier alternative to only providing cash to those without a job etc.   The idea being its conducting greater amounts of business in the economy by not excluding the hard working and active members from capital they can deploy and create further revenue with.  I  think there is some worth to this idea but the first thing any government should do is return a surplus on their budget every year, also trade balance or the currency itself is a source of poorer citizens.

[davis196]

This looks like something between a voucher system and a "helicopter money" government program.
I wonder how this program will be funded. Does the government of Thailand have 50 billion dollars in the form of reserves, or the money will come from the foreign creditors.
Such "helicopter money" programs usually lead to two things-short term revival of the economy and long term inflation.
Perhaps the "expiry date" of these "electronic vouchers" are a measure against future inflation. This seems like an interesting idea in theory, but I don't know what will happen in reality. Perhaps the impact of this program will be short term, and the economy will return back to it's previous state(before the program launch) after this weird "e-cash" thing expires.

[knowngunman]

I quite understand that there are some convincing reasons why governments give money to their citizens. It's either to stimulate the economy during a recession. A good example of this was during the COVID-19 pandemic. Some countries around the world gave money to their citizens to help them stay afloat financially. Sometimes, government share money to provide financial support for people who are struggling especially those on low incomes or those who are unemployed. But this very action of giving money has repercussions on the economy because sometimes it can lead to inflation if the government prints too much money. People become too reliable and dependent on government for bailout. These money could be better spent on other things like infrastructure or education to better the lives of the citizens. But what I don't understand here is why the government wants to dictate how this money should be spent? When you gift someone something, I guess the person can decide on whatever they choose to do with it.

[tabas]

This is stimulus but for some conditions, it can't be spent for most of the basic needs of their citizens as you've mentioned mainly with the bills. Much better if this is like the subsidy that they does but if there are some conditions then for sure its people will think of what important thing they can use it for. Honestly, when a country does this, there's a possibility that it can be abused by the recipients although the control is there. The results will vary as well but with what I have seen for some countries that did this like for many times, they didn't able manage to comeback and overcome the inflation.