To put it graphically, these exporting countries are accepting napkin-IOUs as payment for real goods and real food.)

Thailand subsidises imports in USA.
 
'USD value is down, THB looks up. If THB is devalued, then USD looks up and Thailand subsidses (not exports to USA but all) imports in USA.' ... anon. economist.
 
The US Dollar has been losing value for many months now. The recent news of US banks went bankrupt and the US treasury continues to print money do not add confidence to the US economy. So, USD value goes down further. And Thailand Baht goes up like all other countries that have products to export.
 
Then, there are loud cries of glooms and dooms from some exporters in Thailand. They are saying Thailand Baht has gone up and made it more difficult to (get more profit from products to) export. They are saying something like they are losing US exports by millions USD for every decimal point THB goes up. They are losing major customers to other (competing) exporting countries.
 
Some competing countries may undercut the prices to lock in new and longer-term customer contracts. By doing so, they devalue their currency and make USD value more. (Thereby, approving US newly printed money - virtually IOU note on napkins - to be of some value. These exporting countries therefore subsidise US imports. To put it graphically, these exporting countries are accepting napkin-IOUs as payment for real goods and real food.)
 
What happens to producers in those exporting countries? To sell for less, they have to cut their cost or produce more and sell more. So, they say 'the industry' have to increase productivity (like getting 'all' workers to work more for less pay) or to squeeze profit margin out from small local producers (like farmers and growers). In short, the poor get squeezed from two sides. They have less income, and they have to pay more for import goods. So, what can they do? They could be looking for their smaller fish to eat down the chain. But they would be out of luck, because 'primary producers' are, as the name says, at the bottom of the chain. So they would have to destroy more natural resources -- the nation's reservoir for health and prosperity. (We will come back to the importance of natural resources or nation's reservoir later -- if there is anything left in the reservoir!).
 
Reports from UN and many NGOs point to increase of world population beyond the world food production capacity very soon. Demand for food and goods will go up with more people. Production technologies such as GMO, chemical/artificial foods, enhanced proteins and enriched carbohydrates may be accepted in some countries. But for most people, traditional and customary foods will be of high value and 'real food'. The hunger for real and quality food will be there and will be more day after day. So, there is no need to panic and reduce our food prices.

If we hang on to THB increased value. We would sell less in quantity and earn less (value-decreasing IOUs or) USD. Our low income earners, farmers and workers would work less and earn less. They would be buying 'cheap local' export quality goods and food. So, they would live better, but, they would need to cut their spending on imports (to keep THB in Thailand). Our producers would have to work smarter and produce better quality or more value-added goods. They would turn another way -- to earn more from less quantity. But by producing less, the nation's resources would have time to replenish. We would have more resources remaining in reservoir[2, 3]. For our government, higher-valued THB would make GNP/GDP figures lower and tax revenue lower. The government would have to use tax money wisely: cut spending, reduce debts and restructure to improve and lower cost of public services[5].
 
If we go into learning mode, improve our product quality and production technologies, our infrastructures[1] and our social coherence (ability to work as a team [4]), we would then be in the position to respond to the hungry world market better and longer.
 
So, which way do we choose?  
Cut price, devalue THB, produce more for lesser USD and use up our national resources in cheap and dirty market? Or
Let THB float, improve quality of products, enhance production and infrastructures, learn to work cooperatively to save resources and to reduce wastes, and to grow with the world demand for quality products?
 
 
<Note 1> What are the major infrastructures for Thailand? We can classify them into life essential category (like water supply, food supply, housing and health care); security and safety category (like armforces, fire and rescue, cleaning and hygiene); social development category (like education including arts and crafts, sports and recreation, religions and cultures). In food supply category, we may define infrastructures such as land and water resources management including pollution control; plants and animals management including micro-organisms and  genetic variations; integrated transport systems including railways and ports; and storage, imports and exports management. Currently, inefficient management and inadequate infrastructural services in many areas are the main reasons for poor performance in food production and hardships among farmers and growers.
 
<Note 2> Food production management often overlook ecological factors: soil ecology (micro-organinisms, materials and their interactions), bees and pollinators, predatorial and beneficial insects and wildlifes. The use of broadband and indiscriminating chemicals (fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides) has modified soil ecology and soil texture, upset wildlifes and environmental balances and increased health risks for rural communities.
 
A simple example: an insect spray kills insects on contact; prevents bees and other pollinators from collecting nectar and pollens; less fruits are produced; less food for bees reduces bee population and in turn reduces fruit production; more fertilizers and chemicals are used to increase yields; soil microbes are killed and chemical reactions in soil change the soil texture and properties (eg. more acidic and more salt compounds); this in turn reduces soil microbial population and reduces microbial activities (converting minerals to organic molecules and enzymes that plants can use; some plants have developed symbiosis with certain microbes); thus in the long term chemicals reduce yields and increases cost of production; then sale of land to commercial and housing property development reduces area for farming, reduces food availability; ...
 
<note 3> Food exporters in Thailand are usually not direct food producers (farmers). They obtain food for sale by buying from farmers or farm produce market brokers (middlemen). They always profit by driving down the price they buy and driving up the price they sell. And sometimes they gain statuses, favours and political supports from long-term contracts with their buyers in 'powerful nations'. (There are import-export businesses run to benefit politicians and their families. Sometimes, these businesses make profit only when the politicians remain in power. So, they must remain in power to continue the businesses.) These hidden agendas can drive the volume of food exports up and the value of food export down leaving farmers to bear the costs.
 
It should be clear that that farmers need to cooperate and combine their resources to avoid further exploitation and impacts of market manipulation.
 
<Note 4> Presently, various data from markets around the world is accessible on the Internet in English - the international market language. To understand and use the data farmers (or their cooperatives) will need to be familiar with English, the Internet and information technologies. Access to market information from rural farms is a key factor in farm planning (as we all know farming has long lead time -- from planning to harvesting, the decision to plant a crop should be supported by not only promises from local (middlemen) buyers and projected local demand but also information from other markets elsewhere.
 
The produce index price information (ข่าวสินค้าเกษตร) on กรมวิชาการเกษตร (DOA) website < http://www.doa.go.th/News/ข่าวสินค้าเกษตร/tabid/139/Default.aspx > and < http://www.talaadthai.com > is only from a few markets. More data from provincial and local markets should be made available.
 
Perhaps, school and OTOP websites have a means to collect and publish market prices on certain periodic bases (eg. monthly with rolling averages). The countrywide and international market data can be assessed and reported by provincial agricultural offices in consultation with agriculture faculties at local or proximity universities.
 
<Note 5> EU Countries are putting in unpopular 'austerity' measures to get their countries through this global financial crisis (mark II). These measure are not much different from dealing with obesity (= inflation), one has to eat right, but eat less; one has to expend energy (work) more and rest right (not indulge in vices). So, one will be 'leaner and healthier' - fitter to go on.
 
USA is calling all nations to consume more, spend more, and globalise more; so that the world (and US) economy would expand and recover from the global financial crisis. But more US banks are failing from the property/housing markets leaving mortgaging home-owners with uncertainties and legal problems to wrangle for years to come.  
 
The problem is like this: A house is brought with borrowed money (say, a NINJA - no income-no job-no asset loan) from a bank. The mortgage was packaged and sold to other banks around the world. So, no one really knows who actually owns the house. The people who bought the house do not own the house until they pay up the loan. They make repayment to a bank. If that bank went bankrupt. The bank's creditors come in and claim the mortgaged house, evict the people who live in the house so they can sell off the house and recover money the bank owes them. The housing market in USA is in a bad shape -- a lot of people have no income, no job and no asset to buy so, a house in the market can wait for buyers for years.  
 
To sum up roughly: The evicted mortgagers would lose their home eventhough they have been making repayment (and so they should own x% of the house); the bank's creditors would get no money back unless they could sell the house or re-arrange the mortgage loan (but what is the loan security? The house that is partially paid for?); the bank itself is bunkrupt so it does not even exist anymore.