[kyon.haruhi.suzumiya]

Originally Posted by Irenicus

You let Bangkok rot, you let Thailand rot. It's the single biggest metropolis in the country by far, the sole economic center, an international financial center of some note (though not as prominent as, say, Singapore), a historic capital, a cultural center, the educational center, roughly at the geographic center, and the biggest tourist spot. In short, it's the epicenter of Thailand.

Hmm, that's true. But it's also the riot center, as long as PAD is around.

The city may or may not have decayed. But it wasn't very clean and nice and pretty to begin with. It's an archetypal developing country's metropolis kind of place -- huge, overcrowded, polluted, with the very rich and very poor, and immensely interesting.

While I agree that the chaotic Bangkok is its charm, the wide gap between rich and poor is one of the reason the PAD is up and going. The PAD uses the poor of Bangkok to fight Thaksin and follow their will, while saying the poor in the North are being cheated by Thaksin's people. A pot calling the kettle black, IMO.

Or may be I'm just biased. Admittedly, much of Thailand's economy depends on the agricultural sector -- the rural area -- but if you remove Bangkok from the focus, you remove any chance for the country to move from being just a breadbasket to anything resembling a developing country (assumption = towards a more diverse economy).

Not really, if the new government unfreezes Thaksin's assets and allows him to return, I'm pretty sure some amazing things can happen.

The development came at a price of looting the treasury and monopolizing otherwise growing business sectors. Like so many times in history, it could be argued that the government does not cause the (post-Asian economic crisis) prosperity/recovery as it is benefiting from it, perhaps even hindering it for its own agenda.

Where did you get that from? The PAD?

Moreover, Chiang Mai as a new administrative capital? Are you really serious? It's the center for Northern Thailand, but note the keyword: Northern Thailand. Place it as the administrative capital, and you risk even more of the country being marginalized, or worse, further aggravating the already troubled South.

Well, if Thaksin had his way, I think he would choose somewhere far enough from mess, like Bangkok and further south. In fact, I am one of those who feel that Malaysia should have some say in South Thailand, since the chaos could spread to Malaysia, if though Anwar wasn't bad enough already.

That, and it's a mountainous region and an established city, an architectural nightmare for this sort of prestige/administrative city planning.

Isn't that a good thing?

If the Government of Thailand really wants to pull a Rio de Janeiro-to-Brazilia move, it is far better served by staying on the Central Plains. There's a historical precedent with such a move in King Narai's Lopburi, although anywhere would do. A return to Ayutthaya? Ha! Or Thaksin and his suppoters could just expand the Suvarnabhumi project.

Well, I only said to move ADMINISTRATIVE matters to Chiang Mai. Not 'transplant' the whole Bangkok there. I mean, Malaysia did it, so why can't the Thais?

Or better still, have an administrative capital for each region (North, Central, South), such that the government can move towards them if needed.