Jump to content
BANGKOK
Scott

SURVEY: Should the Capital be relocated?

SURVEY: Should the Capital be relocated?  

153 members have voted

You do not have permission to vote in this poll, or see the poll results. Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.

Recommended Posts

The PM recently suggested that the government be moved to a new location, outside of Bangkok.    In your opinion, do you believe this would be a good move?

 

Please feel free to leave a comment and if you think it's a good move, how do you envision it being implemented.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Answer: It depends

 

What are their goals and what would be the plan? We need some details to answer such a significant question.

 

I have a low opinion of Thailand's ability to build highly functioning, efficient cities.

 

I also have a very low opinion of Thailand's ability to carry out anything as significant as building an entirely new city.

 

The Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Singaporeans, Taiwanese - yes, I have confidence in their abilities.

 

The Thais - no, I doubt they can coordinate and sustain such a large project.

Edited by Fex Bluse
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the survey had at least another option, I would have selected it

 

Yes, move it out of the city.

No, leave it in the city.

It depends (my comments below).

I don't think I have enough information for an opinion.

Edited by Fex Bluse

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's going to be 30 or 50 years till the combination of rising seas and sinking city produce their effects. More like 10-20 years. Which means that planning should be getting under way now, aiming for building to start somewhere north and high in say 10 years.

 

'Planning'? Oh, you mean do some things now that aren't needed for 20 years? Um, no can do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It worked very well in Malaysia. No reason why it wouldn't work in Thailand. Of course the politicians would not be happy as they would feel removed from the money and power of Bangkok, and the massage parlours. 

When the idea was muted in the 90s being too far from the parlours on Petchaburi Rd was actually given as a reason not to move by a high ranking government officials 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Highly hypothetical question and not doable, the Pm urred a thought that is whimsical at best and will face stiff resistance should he try to put it to action...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly who cares. All they are doing is moving the politics out of the area. Bangkok is still the center of focus for tourists and someone gonna make a ton of baht off of the land acquisitions then on making the new Capital center and then on to the satellite cities that will surround the new capital. What will be the political incentive? Do they get free multi million baht housing to stay in or to buy dirt cheap on zero % loans?

 

Can only be profit associated in this on a big scale for many.

 

Maybe also near or next to or surrounded by a new military base that houses the new armored vehicles? So political stability by close military protection that cannot be touched? What are the real motives?

Edited by holy cow cm
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Geordie59 said:

It worked very well in Malaysia.

Also Australia, Khazakstan, Burma and South Africa all benefit from banishing the MP's away from the good life IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

    Bad idea.  If they are moving the government because the city is sinking, the city will still be sinking without the government and the problem will still need to be dealt with.  Instead of moving the government to a new city, government agencies should continue to be moved to the outer suburbs to lessen traffic congestion in the inner city and work-at-home and satellite offices should be part of the plan.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, because Bangkok does not have much choice but first this decision should be taken by a truly democratically elected government with capable non-corruptible persons. The real question is when will this happen in Thailand ?

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...