• 
• 

Published on August 4, 2007

I would like those who think it is time for industrialists to upgrade machines to consider the environment in which an industrialist currently operates:

l Raw-material prices go up indefinitely and in an awkward manner.

l The only loans you get for any reason, including the need to upgrade machinery, are short-term ones, that is if you get a loan at all.

l The minimum wage increases every year.

l Your workers ask you to increase their wages regularly.

l The local market is diminishing.

l With the strong baht there is very little possibility of exporting.

l You are in constant pressure of increased petrol prices and other effects of inflation.

l There is no consistency in the market and no stability on your costs.

l You cannot ask your customers to pay more because they will go to other countries to purchase these parts; customers are continuously asking you to reduce your prices.

As an industrialist I can assure you I have no incentive to order new machinery or upgrade my technology. I am only trying to stay alive as long as a can and only invest in machinery when my customers place orders with me.

I am also praying hard for the prices of raw materials to be reduced. I am a parts-maker for the electronics and automobile industries and am not in the textile or shoe industry. In the present circumstances, I am happy I am still surviving.

I am finding ways to cut my costs, including shifting my factory from Zone 1 to Zone 3. I am also trying to pay back my loans as fast as possible. I am also trying to increase my efficiency with whatever machines and equipment I have by training my workers to work more effectively.

If machinery loans could be issued for 10 years with a two-year grace period and a reduced interest rate, and if I could get a direct tax incentive for investing in higher technology, I might think about upgrading.

Economics 101

Bangkok

Chat with Samak shows Thaksin isn't finished yet

Re: "Samak: I'm not a proxy for Thaksin", News, August 3.

Thaksin Shinawatra has repeatedly said that he has renounced politics, that whatever he does after being removed as Thailand's prime minister last September will never be to destabilise his beloved country, that he seeks only reconciliation and not division back home. Enough is enough, he says.

Yet veteran politician Samak Sundaravej's revelation that Thaksin phoned him on Tuesday and asked him to take up the leadership of the Thai Rak Thai group during his absence tells another story. This shows that Thaksin is still de-facto leader of the group, that he's very much alive politically and that he is scheming, via remote control, against the Kingdom's present government's efforts to rid the country of dirty-money politics.

It also implies that Thaksin is using his host country, the United Kingdom, as his base for this political manoeuvring.

Chavalit Van

Chiang Mai

US bridge collapse a call for caution everywhere

Re: "At least nine dead, many injured", World, August 3.

It is interesting to note that this 40-year-old bridge of the world-famous Inter State highway system that collapsed like a deck of cards in a matter of seconds had received an inspection as recently as last year. If this sort of thing could happen in a highly developed country like the US then what would be the chances of it happening in less developed countries where every phase of any construction project, from study, design and construction to maintenance, are carried out under somewhat limited transparency?

According to many reports, this Mississippi River bridge was having just a "face lift" while the main cause, still to be confirmed, was most likely the corrosion of the bearings under the heavy concrete decks that were carrying all kind of vehicles at full capacity so that if any one of the bearings under any section of the bridge weakened and gave out, all other remaining sections would just follow in quick succession.

I hope that this tragedy will wake up many people who are involved with this sort of thing.

Vic Phanumphai

Bangkok

Vegans kindly leave much for the rest of us to eat

Re: "Health-conscious readers appreciate vegan diet info", Letters, August 3.

I wish to take this opportunity to express my appreciation to Eric Barht and his friends for their staunch stance in the fields of vegetarianism. The services performed by those persons are exemplary in the extreme.

Thank you from the deepest depths of my heart, because your refusal to have anything to do with the eating of animal flesh and/or drinking of milk just leaves more of those items for me and my colleagues.

Oh, as an afterthought, how often do we hear of a vegan who has reached the ripe old age of 100 years?

William Reynolds, USAF (ret)

Bangkok

A major reformer would be an outcast in Islam

Re: "Islam needs its own Martin Luther", Opinion, August 2.

Anyone who has made the painful transition from dogmatic religious fundamentalism to a kinder, gentler worldview will empathise with Mansour al-Nogaidan's struggle to free his mind from the shackles of Salafism and formulate a more humane version of Islam. Even those who have not made such a transition can admire his courage, because in the part of the world he lives in people who question the dominant version of Islam sometimes don't live very long.

Unfortunately, I am pessimistic about al-Nogaidan's chances of success. The same applies to any potential Martin Luther who might arise within Islam.

The difficulty lies in a fundamental tenet of Islam, which holds that the Koran was dictated to Muhammad by the angel Gabriel at the command of God. This means that every word in the Koran comes from the mouth of God, and only God can change it.

Well, you will say, some of the practices approved by the Koran may have looked reasonably progressive in the 7th century, but they look embarrassingly primitive in the 21st: stoning, beheading, and the like. Suppose that God were to commission a new prophet, authorising him to update the precepts in the Koran so that they accord with the needs of our time.

That cannot happen, because there is a fail-safe mechanism in Islam that prevents anybody from modifying the revelation to Muhammad. That is the doctrine that Muhammad is the "seal of the prophets": after him, there can be no more prophets. That means that nobody will ever be qualified to change anything written in the Koran.

It is for this reason that Islam rejected Baha'ullah, the great Persian Shi'ite reformer of the 19th century who claimed to be the Mahdi and who delivered a message intended to unite all humankind under one government, one language and one religion.

His message was progressive in many respects, but it was rejected because of his claims to authority. He spent most of his life in jail, but his work has been carried on by his followers, the Baha'is.

A Martin Luther might conceivably arise within Islam, but if he were to try to abrogate or modify any of the precepts enshrined in the Koran, he would probably be stoned to death as a blasphemer and a false prophet.

William Page

Bangkok