No business sense

The paper constantly tries to address the increase in income inequality with relation to farmers yet nobody applies “business sense” to the situation.

If someone has a business where they cannot sell their product without government subsidies and pricing schemes such as with rice and rubber farmers, why are they allowed to continue? Every other successful business that operates without the benefit of government largesse is then expected to pay for failing businesses through taxation. Redistributing the wealth from competent businesses to support failing enterprises is not a functional business model.

What good does it do to the economy and society if literally, tonnes of a product are sold at a loss? Is it really good for accounting ledgers and GDP accounting to post millions of dollars of activity in the “Exports Column” if the activity costs more than it receives in compensation? If a retail store or restaurant is forced to close because of declining sales and the government stepped in and used tax dollars to maintain the operation, every other business that competes with these assisted shops would cry foul. They would be rightly upset if their tax submissions were used to allow incompetent and failed enterprises to continue operating.

Would it not be better to let dysfunctional businesses fail and cease operations than continue if we are concerned about income inequality?

How will so many of the population be expected to rise in socio-economic standings working in a market that is failed? DARIUS HOBER on an anti-corruption platform, how he handles this probe is of paramount importance.

PM Prayut, show us that you believe in rule of law, not by law. BURIN KANTABUTRA