Conflict, Legitimacy and Government Reform: Equitable Allocation of ...

44 KPI Congress XI
Table 3: Average household income by region in 1962, 2000, 2007 of
the entire country = 100
Region 1962 2000 2007
Bangkok 253.7 207.8 187.6
Central 131.1 107.1 105.7
South 120.1 92.1 105.7
North 73.7 71.2 72.7
Northeast 53.5 63.9 69.6
National average 100.0 100.0 100.0
Urban 119.9 150.1
Rural 69.9 76.7
Source: Yukio, Ikemoto, Income Distribution in Thailand, Tokyo, Institute of
Developing Economies, 1991; Nuarpear, 2009.
Data in Diagram 1 and Table 3 show average household income.
There are also data that reveal personal income disparities in Diagram 2
which reports salaries and wages by occupation during 2006-2007.
Again, inequality is evident here.
Regarding income distribution, there are at least four observations.
First, income data of the wealthy groups tend to be understated
because data derive from random sampling. So, there is a tendency that a
small number of super rich groups would be left out. (The National
Statistical Office never had access to Shinawatra, Damapong, or
Siriwattanapakdi families among others) Even if these groups could be
reached, respondents would not reveal the whole truth. Aside from that,
collected data would not include various indirect gains, which the rich
tend to have more than the underprivileged, especially from government
spending (such as gains from road construction that transects a piece of
land, pushing up the land price and so forth) or borrowing money for
investment at a special interest rate because they have a better credit
standing and so forth.