Transcript of the above video: 

As the title of this video suggests I'm basically refuting to notion that Thailand is the "sick man" of anything or anywhere. Why am I calling it if that? Well I'm referring to an article in the Bangkok Post, bangkokpost.com, the article is titled: Thailand now 'the sick man of Asean'.

As I'll get into, they call the title that, then in the article itself it goes on to say "yeah no, nobody thinks that." It's like okay, so what was the point of the title? That said, this is actually written by somebody I'm actually a pretty big fan of, Chartchai Parasuk who I've quoted in the past. Overall I think he has a commonsensical approach to economic theory. I think we disagree fundamentally on certain things as I'll get to here in a moment, but we are even in agreement as he points out in his own article here which I will cite here in a moment that Thailand isn't really the sick man of anything. That said, in my opinion we're in such a precarious state of things with the unique state of the world if you will, as we are seeing sort of the tectonic plates of geopolitics move around us; I have likened Thailand as being akin to sitting in the middle of a kaleidoscope that moves around it. So if you think of a kaleidoscope, if you look into a kaleidoscope, you think of the centre point of the kaleidoscope and everything's moving around it, that's what it feels like we are dealing with sitting out here in Southeast Asia from Thailand right now. And from the one side, the sort of banking sector if you will of the West, the sort of financial interests of the West who are seeing their system let's just say going through a rather wild state of change right now, metamorphosis if you will, especially in the international context away from their epicentres of finance, places like London, New York, even Los Angeles, to some extent Florida even now, and then on the European continent traditional places like Paris, Frankfurt, even Italy. These normal epicentres of what was the old or the old dominant unipolar or if you will financial system, things are changing. The East is rising; the centres of financial power also are moving and as I've heard, I think it was maybe Jim Rickards that brought this up, I think also Alastair McLeod who has his own Substack now - he used to write for Gold Money - I think he has brought this up specifically as well. We're moving from a financialized system as we knew it from Bretton Woods following the Second World War into what I can only describe is at this point, not a monolithic system but sort of the financial system is continuing to move forward as it did from the place it has since shall we say Bretton Woods was first created, again back in the late '40s in the United States, we are moving to a system that's not so monolithic. And one aspect of this emerging parallel system is that it is resource based, it's not based on finances.

Again, quoting from this article, Bangkok Post, bangkokpost.com, "The inspiration for this article comes from the International Monetary Fund's World Economic Outlook (WEO) Report for the month of October." Okay, so from the outside with this kind of analysis, we have to look at fundamentals. So this is coming from the IMFs perspective, so understand that. Sort of Western Financial, sort of the epicentre if you will, the IMF of Western Financial thinking is where this is coming from. Quoting further: "As usual, the organization conducted a quarterly review of the world economy including GDP growth projections from member countries." Well first off, again going back to Alasdair McLeod - who I have cited previously on this channel - and I've cited on our paid news service; and for those who are interested in receiving long-form content on our paid news service, please feel free to email us, [email protected], and I can get you into the email list for the long-form content. At the turn of the year, we are going to be changing that over to a new extra set of services which I will get into in other videos as I get that set up, but long story short, if you are interested in the long form content, [email protected] is where to email for that. Also very quickly while I'm talking my book, my better half and I have set up a restaurant here in downtown Bangkok. It is called Pancake Palace, as the name implies, it's breakfast anytime as well as American Diner style food, including hamburgers, cheeseburgers, buffalo wings, chilli bowls, glass bottled cokes, all the good stuff you think of when you think of American Diner style food. Links are in the description below if you want to come down and say hi to us. We'd love to see you at Pancake Palace. 

But that said, going back into this. I have talked about this a lot, and Alasdair McLeod brought it to my attention I think the first time, and it was like it just shifted my paradigm tremendously. GDP is purely tabulated from the standpoint of bank credit. And that's important to understand, because GDP is not the most accurate metric of the economy because it doesn't take in huge swaths of the real economy especially in an economy like Thailand that has a large “informal” or I would argue non-hyper financialized aspect of their economy. I have talked about this at length in other videos and it's something to really understand when doing any of this analysis that again you are looking at it through a limited prism. If anything, it's like sort of putting blinkers on like a horse, so you are just looking directly ahead and only seeing things through the rubric of bank credit, of Finance itself, and this financial system is trying to tell Thailand in a way, that Thailand's got a problem when in reality no, Thailand doesn't have a problem. From where I sit, Thailand is just sitting as the world goes through a transition and Thailand has to deal with the vicissitudes of that transition as they arise. It's not a matter of Thailand having some kind of problem or being the sick man of anything or anywhere. That said, quoting further: "Some of the projections surprised me as Thailand's expected GDP growth for 2026 ranked the lowest among the 10 member nations of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)." Well, first of all, let's understand. Other countries in ASEAN are starting from a demonstratively or substantially lower if you will from a lower place of economic sophistication compared to Thailand, okay. It's part and parcel of this whole notion that Thailand is somehow third world. It's not. We may be developing on some of the more hyper-sophisticated levels of civilization if you will, not civilization, but the economy if you will, or the new economy or something of that nature but Thailand has a very sophisticated economy okay. And the point I am trying to make here is, if you built a laundromat in East Timor okay just for example, you would have a dramatic impact on GDP in a place like that. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with East Timor, it's just far less developed than Thailand, and that's the point. When you see these numbers of GDP coming from these countries that are so much less developed, I mean just putting an airport into a place is going to have a tremendous upward movement of GDP as an effect. Just understand that. Thailand is not going to have these big swings of GDP because they are adding in substantial new development because they already have that in the system; it's already part of the inherent infrastructure. That is a really important thing to point out, and I am really kind of tired of the international press, and I understand this isn't the international press, but we are using international metrics and things from International organizations, are constantly trying to place Thailand in some race against these other countries in Southeast Asia. It's just not warranted. It would be like saying, "oh, what's a good example? It's like saying Switzerland needs to be in a race with Slovenia or Serbia economically. It fails to look at the history of the two jurisdictions; it fails to understand the developments that have occurred in those places; it fails to understand that it's comparing apples and bowling balls in many ways, if you try to compare the Thai economy one to one with the Indonesian economy or something. Not that there's anything wrong with either economy, it's just comparing them this way is if they're in some kind of race; it's kind of disingenuous. 

That said, quoting further: "And the second lowest (1.6%) in Asia after Japan at 0.6%. We know things are not going great in Thailand but to suggest GDP growth will lag that of Myanmar (3%), Laos (2.5 %) and Cambodia (4%) especially by such a large margin, is not only inaccurate but insulting." Well I don't know that it is even accurate or insulting. All of those places are probably going to show higher GDP growth because they have to make major upgrades to their infrastructure that Thailand doesn't need to make; she's already done that. 

That said quoting further: "The IMF projects the Kingdom will see 2.0% GDP growth this year. If readers do not feel embarrassed by this point, please look at the attached table." Well I don't feel embarrassed by that. As somebody who was born abroad and became a Thai, show me some place in the West that is showing real 2% growth, and I mean real 2% growth, not where doctoring it up through the Bureau of Labour statistics, back in the United States with jobs, or calling it all kinds of chicanery, what is it, "lies, damn lies and chicanery" is the quote. All kinds of economic chicanery to show that the West is growing. Look I don't really, an economy could always do better, it's sort of like, who doesn't want more money on an individual level? Sure, but to say that Thailand has some fundamental, structural problem right now, I don't really see it. It's just in a different place than these other economies. Just one more thing while I'm on that point. Thailand is showing these numbers without the chicanery; I don't think there's anything to suggest that Thailand is overly being disingenuous with his GDP numbers but at the same time, Thailand has similar demographic problems as the West and is still showing these kind of numbers. 

That said, quoting further: "The title of this article, "Thailand now 'sick man of ASEAN'", actually could not be further from the truth." Okay, good to hear. Quoting further: "Nonetheless, things are bad. The article still makes the point that the economy is in a coma and needs an urgent turn-round." Okay, we may be in a transition, but a coma? I don't know. Look, the world is changing. I don't know that this is so much Thailand's problem other than Thailand needs to react to it correctly and make the right moves right now for her own national interests. That said, quoting further: "Political propaganda and small fixes will not do the job" - we agree there - "Policymakers should stop dreaming that there are easy solutions." Well again, solutions to what? What's the problem? The West is saying we have a problem in Thailand mostly because I think they want to instigate another 1997- like event to put Thailand back on her economic back foot at best and thereby allow the West to take advantage of Thailand economically, accordingly; at least monetarily, probably accordingly. That said, quoting further: "Solutions will not only be difficult but also painful." - again, to what? Problems brought in from outside? I mean inherently, yeah there's some debt, household debt issues, and some things like that but I like how especially the International Financial Press or the press backed by the International Financial apparatus if you will, always brings up this debt problem in Thailand. They never point out the fact we are talking about unsecured debt. It's not like the Thais have all gone out and gotten a bunch of mortgages on land that's now going to be foreclosed upon. No, that is not the problem per se. The problem for international lenders is that the Thais have taken out personal credit and they are having issues getting that paid back. Well that's the bank's problem, and the bank's business. If they don't make proper loans to folks here in Thailand that they aren't able to recoup on, hey that is the cost of doing business, that's part of their business. It's not a matter of "oh, the government now needs to do something; we all need to run around like our hair is on fire, like there's a problem." I notice as I have discussed in other videos, they are constantly kind of trying to nudge for oh like collateralized debt and things of this nature. Yeah, they want the land, at least it's collateral and again, if they gave out a bunch of unsecured debts to Thais, why is that Thai's problem? That's the Bank's problem, or the banker’s problem. That said, quoting further: "For a good example of painful solutions to turn the economy around, we can turn our attention to Argentina." Really? Quoting further: "The country was previously plagued by 200% plus inflation rates that mutilated its economy. The Argentine peso even lost 45% of its value within a single year. Even the IMF gave up hope on controlling the level of skyrocketing inflation there. Newly installed President Javier Milei performed a de facto miracle by pushing inflation down to the 30% level." 

It's worth noting, I'm going to put this on screen, I'll put a link in the description below to El Païs. Yeah, there's a weird situation where their gold also got sent out of the country too during all this re-hypothecation and what not on all this inflation and everything, so there's that. Quoting further: "Many thought that his hostile spending cuts of 30% and massive market reforms would cost him his political future. On the contrary, his Party won a majority of seats in both Houses in last week's midterm elections. But despite the sharp pain, Argentines did feel the benefit of low inflation after he came to power."  And didn't they just take 40 billion in aid from the United States? So is that the best example of like economic economy and independence and things of this nature? I urge those who are watching this video go check out that article in detail. I always respect that author's opinions even if I might disagree with him sometimes; there are a lot of good insights to be found in there. 

The point I'm trying to make in this video is look it's not Thailand's problem right now what is happening in the economy globally or elsewhere. If anything, Thailand has been inoculated against this in what happened in 1997 and it its experiences it since then. The problems we are seeing in the economies of the world are stemming from what started in my opinion, in 2008 with what they euphemistically referred to as "quantitative easing" i.e. printing money. Everything and many of the issues we're seeing now stem from that, and that is what we are seeing, and we are seeing the, again if you will tectonic plates of geopolitics shifting as we are seeing changes to the way trade is conducted, and we are also seeing a shift again, and this is a broad theme, it's not going to happen overnight. I'm not Chicken Little. I don't think the sky is falling, but we are shifting from what has been a predominantly debt-based financial system and really predominantly been used the world over, really if you go back into the early to mid-age of exploration if you will. I mean these expeditions like Columbus to the New World if you will, had to be financed and we have seen that financial system continue even into the modern era. Things are changing with that. First off, I'm not saying it is completely going away, but it is changing. Also, we are seeing the rise of what can only be described as sort of "resource backed" financial and economic systems, and they are going to interact with the world is different ways than we saw economic interaction in the past; it's just the way of it. Is that Thailand's problem? Is that Thailand's fault? Is Thailand the sick man of ASEAN? I don't see it.

Thailand is a sophisticated economy sitting in a region that is surrounded by frankly to one degree or another, less sophisticated economies, with maybe some exceptions where we see other economies that are at a sophisticated level albeit not a fully, broadly, standardized economy. What I mean to say by that is, you look over at Singapore, and every everybody lauds that as sort of an example to Southeast Asia. Well it's a hyper-specialized economy. They are involved in primarily international finance and things. They are an island nation. Very different than a nation state like Thailand that deals with major agricultural concerns, industrialization etc., again apples and bowling balls in the comparison. But for the most part, going back to my point, I don't see where it's fair to call Thailand in any way or to sort of to put Thailand on the spot as having some kind of problem under the current situation. If anything, under the current fact pattern that we are dealing with in the world economy, if anything Thailand is in a better position than many other countries that I can think of off the top of my head, around the world.