Vietnam also control Cambodia government, but how come Cambodia are allow to hold election. Khmer also welcome back their king. Laos should be allow to hold election at least. Lao monarchy should be allow to come back if they want, but hold no power  or get involve in politics just like Japan, Thailand or UK.

People in Laos don't support the monarchy to make a comeback. The President of Laos act as a "King" anyway.

Admin Saovaluck wrote on 17^th Aug, 2010 at 11:14am:

People in Laos don't support the monarchy to make a comeback. The President of Laos act as a "King" anyway.

Find no monarchy in Laos. It a deal. But Laos should be able to hold election just like Cambodia. What do you think Vietnam.

[quote author=70757C787F110 link=1282012627/0#1 date=1282043651]People in Laos don't support the monarchy to make a comeback. The President of Laos act as a "King" anyway.[/quot]

Vietnam government don't support the monachy to make a comeback you mean, but Lao people love the king, but has no say, let Lao people decide then we will see. Does Lao people love Lao monachy or Ho Chi Minh? We love the monarchy of course." Long live Lao Lan Xang."

There were lots of bloodshed involved to remove the Khmer Rouge regime, before Cambodian people were given the right to vote. If you want Laos to hold an election just like Cambodia, then expect to see many deaths as well.

Having a monarchy can bring in too much corruption and ridiculous laws. We don't want to see foreigners go to jail like they do in Thailand for saying a simple joke, or do something with a King's picture. A monarchy will have negative effects.

Admin Saovaluck wrote on 18^th Aug, 2010 at 3:05am:

There were lots of bloodshed involved to remove the Khmer Rouge regime, before Cambodian people were given the right to vote. If you want Laos to hold an election just like Cambodia, then expect to see many deaths as well. Having a monarchy can bring in too much corruption and ridiculous laws. We don't want to see foreigners go to jail like they do in Thailand for saying a simple joke, or do something with a King's picture. A monarchy will have negative effects.

I want to see democracy in Laos. Who know current government might win election. People in Greece and Nepal elected a Communist government. Lao People like to live in peace. It's in our nature. If Laos has election it will not be violence like Cambodia, but at least Khmer people can vote. Give peace and democracy a chance.

Laos will not be more corrupt with the return of monarchy, just like monarchy in Japn or UK. I think they should not be in power or be involve in politics. I'm not speaking for anybody just one man opinion. I agree Royal Lao government was corrupt too, but the current government is worse. "Absolute power corrupt."

We like it or not. I think we will democracy in Laos in my lifetime. LPDR if Laos has election who know you might get my vote hehe...I just want to see peace an prosperiy in Laos. With no string attach.
;)

You say that if the monarchy was restored, they should not have power or be involved in politics. The problem is that it's easier said than done because I think they will always try to be in the spotlight.

The remaining members of the Royal Family in France are never short of voicing their opinions about politics in Laos, so it's unlikely to see them stay out of politics if they made a comeback.

Unlike North Korea, Laos have had many changes in leaders over the years, and they are voted in by members of the National Assembly so this is evidence that there's no "absolute power corrupt." If they don't think that the current leader is doing a competent job then they will drop him, and choose a new leader at the elections later next year.

Admin Saovaluck wrote on 18^th Aug, 2010 at 8:27pm:

You say that if the monarchy was restored, they should not have power or be involved in politics. The problem is that it's easier said than done because I think they will always try to be in the spotlight. The remaining members of the Royal Family in France are never short of voicing their opinions about politics in Laos, so it's unlikely to see them stay out of politics if they made a comeback. Unlike North Korea, Laos have had many changes in leaders over the years, and they are voted in by members of the National Assembly so this is evidence that there's no "absolute power corrupt." If they don't think that the current leader is doing a competent job then they will drop him, and choose a new leader at the elections later next year.

You make good point. If you run for Lao president I will vote for you. very smart and intelligent. I think Lao king should not be in power, this is 21st century, but it should be up to the Lao people to decide, not Vietnam. If Laos became a democracy states, and Royal family want to be in politics. Maybe they got better idea and vision for Laos that might work better. French have freedom of speech. Everything Royal Lao Family said about Laos politics is right on the money. They know what they are talking about.

I agree at least Laos is not like North Korea or Cuba, but Laos should at least be like Cambodian. They have election, and dictator Hun Sen won. Even military dictatorship Burma are holding election in November. I hope new Lao generation, new Lao leader step up and make a change that will benefits the people and the country. We need to move forward and catch up the neighboring country. We been underdog and kick around for the past two three hundred year. Please don't let Vietnam take over Laos. We don't have even an inches of land to give away.

How come Cambodian have an election, but Laos don't?
>:( :( :-/ :-[ :'(

Admin Saovaluck wrote on 18^th Aug, 2010 at 8:27pm:

Unlike North Korea, Laos have had many changes in leaders over the years, and they are voted in by members of the National Assembly so this is evidence that there's no "absolute power corrupt." If they don't think that the current leader is doing a competent job then they will drop him, and choose a new leader at the elections later next year.

Why not let Lao citizens vote too. Even though current government probably win.
8-)

I won't run for President but thank you for your support. I'm happy with the current situation and I support anyone who is elected as the President of Laos.

There must be at least two parties for an election to occur, and allow Lao citizens to vote. We only have one party in Laos, so therefore only members of the National Assembly can vote for the person to lead the country.

The Lao Royal Family and the current party don't get along with each other, so bringing them back will result in trading accusations, finger pointing and even war. If there is an opposition party or parties in the future, the Royal Family won't be one of those parties.

Admin Saovaluck wrote on 19^th Aug, 2010 at 1:29am:

I won't run for President but thank you for your support. I'm happy with the current situation and I support anyone who is elected as the President of Laos. There must be at least two parties for an election to occur, and allow Lao citizens to vote. We only have one party in Laos, so therefore only members of the National Assembly can vote for the person to lead the country. The Lao Royal Family and the current party don't get along with each other, so bringing them back will result in trading accusations, finger pointing and even war. If there is an opposition party or parties in the future, the Royal Family won't be one of those parties.

One political party system, corruption  is a problem in Laos.  Again "absolute power corrupt." There is no check and balance of power. No freedom of speech. Nobody can speak about the corruption, no freedom of press and information. No media can report on any wrong, so corruption go on and on. I just don't trust Vietnam advisors 100%. After thirty year. I think they are doing a bad jobs and most or all should be fire and deport back to Vietnam in my opinion.

LP Admins. I think we need first Laos women president. There is alway new leader, new Lao generation willing to step up if giving opportunity. Laos has many, many best and the brightest too. Government should give young Lao in Laos, Lao oversea a chance. I am find with it if Lao Royal Family are ban from politics in Laos in my opinion. But Laos government should allow multi-party, and opposition to raise their voice and see what they has to offer. I understand it will take time.

US current political system take over 200 year to reach this level and it still not perfect, but very good in my book. I don't called it 100% Capitalist. I called it Capitalist Socialist because they favorite not just the elite and big corporation, but also poor and working class. Most American are middle class. Most citizens benefits from the system. They did pretty good jobs distributing the wealth. Some people are called low income here, but poor people in the US get subsidy for housing, have car to drive, assistant with medicare, food, education and so on. That is why I called it Capitalist Socialist. Not imperial Capitalist.

There's many people within a political party, including your advisors, your ministers, your deputies, and what have you. So if you're involved in too much corruption then you will be dealt with in-house. Like America, The President of Laos is replaced on a consistent basis, so any corruption can't go on and on forever.

Other countries would have stopped giving donations and loans to the Lao Government if they knew that the money would go into the pockets of the officials, instead of towards where it is intended to go. No country would be supporting us financially if they considered our government corrupted.

A woman as President of Laos would be nice, and I'm sure that a diversity of people are given the chance to enter Lao politics. I agree, the political system in America is very good for a country that big.

Sad but true that's how it work sometime. You scratch my back I scratch your. No check and balance. Lao government should declare their salary. If they got nothing to hide. In the US public have access to government salary infor. US president make about $400,000 a year. President server  two, four year term. Senator serve unlimited 6 year term, and congress serve 2 year unlimited term. Any politicians found guilty of corrupted will be impeach or throw out of offices by the voters. I wish Laos has similar politicals system though. US know what they are doing, world largest economy, and the world superpower. We should learn from the best.

If Laos become democracy states many Lao expats will move back, foreign government will also increase aid and investment. Look at Cambodia for example. I'm not sure, has to look it up, let say Laos get $1 billion a year in aid, Cambodia get about $5 billion. Many foreign agency oversee some of the economic development project themselves instead of giving the money directly to the Lao government. If LPDR want more aid to develop the country, easy abandon Communism.

The Lao Government probably do delcare their salary but it's not something the general public is interested in. We only care about how much we earn, and the food we put on the table.

The US President has to serve a minimum of 4 years, so if he is corrupted, voters still have to put up with him during his term since you can't throw him out of office immediately.

Admin Saovaluck wrote on 19^th Aug, 2010 at 10:51pm:

The Lao Government probably do delcare their salary but it's not something the general public is interested in. We only care about how much we earn, and the food we put on the table. The US President has to serve a minimum of 4 years, so if he is corrupted, voters still have to put up with him during his term since you can't throw him out of office immediately.

Taxpayer, citizens pay government salary. Public have the right to know to reduce corruption. Some people might want to know, how can officials afford private jet or million dollars mansion. But, let say their salary is only $3000 a month. Government officials has to declared all their asset. So does Thai government. Democracy country are less corrupt and more prosper then country with one party system.

US president can serve no more then 2 term, 4 yrs for each term, 8 yrs total. But if he is found guilty of corruption he can get impeach by the congress and senator and force to resign immediately. Not just president any government officials can be impeach. Because of freedom of press and speech they will be all over the news. In Democracy there's a check and balance of power. Nobody is above the law. Not like Hun Sen or Than Shew of Burma these dictator been in power for over 30 yrs.

Most American citizens were against the war in the Middle East, yet George Bush still went ahead with it. The war is also considered illegal according to international law. It's about oil and money for the officials really. This demonstrates that although it can be all over the news, the US President is still above the law because he can do as he pleases.

Admin Saovaluck wrote on 21^st Aug, 2010 at 1:09am:

Most American citizens were against the war in the Middle East, yet George Bush still went ahead with it. The war is also considered illegal according to international law. It's about oil and money for the officials really. This demonstrates that although it can be all over the news, the US President is still above the law because he can do as he pleases.

US president does not have absolute power. Any foreign and domestic policy in order to pass had to have a majority vote by Senators, and Congressmen. At that time President Bush and his the Republican Party has the supported, and enough votes from senate, and house to go ahead with the war in Iraq. President Obama opposed war in Iraq and he is trying to reversed president Bush foreign policy.

Yes most America are against Iraq war. President Bush want Iraq war that is why they are no longer in government. Most of  American citizens vote Democrats Party in and Bush Republican party out. Currently Democrats has the majority in the house and senate and Democrats president. US will pull out of Iraq at the end of this year.

Admin Saovaluck wrote on 21^st Aug, 2010 at 1:09am:

Most American citizens were against the war in the Middle East, yet George Bush still went ahead with it. The war is also considered illegal according to international law. It's about oil and money for the officials really. This demonstrates that although it can be all over the news, the US President is still above the law because he can do as he pleases.

Democrat and Republican Party are the two main politicals party in the US. There're other smaller political party. President Bush is a Republican, most Republican supported Iraq war when they were in power, and few Democrats also. But now Democrats are in power, and the majority are opposing Iraq War. They're trying to end the war. I supported and vote for Democrats Party. "Go Obama 4 more year."

I don't know about in the US, but we don't often hear negative things about Obama. He is generally more likable than Bush.

Admin Saovaluck wrote on 22^nd Aug, 2010 at 8:34am:

I don't know about in the US, but we don't often hear negative things about Obama. He is generally more likable than Bush.

Doesn't matter which party won presidential election in the US. There was alway criticism from opposition. Some Republican are calling President Obama, and his Dmocrats Party Socialist because of his policy, running up nationals debt, social program helping the working class, poor, student, small business and so on. Same situation when president Bush was in offices. Democrats party also criticize him from left to right, and votes against his policy. "No matter what you, you can never make everybody happy."

The job of a leader is not to make the opposition party happy, but to make the people happy, most of them anyway.

Admin Saovaluck wrote on 22^nd Aug, 2010 at 10:25pm:

The job of a leader is not to make the opposition party happy, but to make the people happy, most of them anyway.

I agreed. Government should look out for it citizens and national interest.  Not just themselves, their friends and family. Foreigner power not going to really care about our country or our family like we do. Government was supposed to be public servant, but that is not the case most of the time. Money and power change people. Those in power or in position of authority want to be there forever.