[annatar1914]

There are economic studies of the collapse, they are quite informative.

Written from a Capitalist perspective of course, and after-the-fact justifications of the looting of the country by your Westernizing friends.

I've got too many friends and family who lived through that time, and before, and knowing the truth makes one not live by lies.

Don't live by lies.

[late]

Written from a Capitalist perspective of course, and after-the-fact justifications of the looting of the country by your Westernizing friends.

I've got too many friends and family who lived through that time, and before, and knowing the truth makes one not live by lies.

Don't live by lies.

First, what you call looting happened after the collapse.

Second, capitalism requires capital. After the collapse Russia was a wreck. People were willing to invest, but they wanted something in return. We simply gave Russia a ton of money, what you are saying is you wanted more. And you didn't want to have to do anything to get it.

Third, the kleptocracy you wound up with steals every hour of every day.

[annatar1914]

First, what you call looting happened after the collapse.

Dead wrong. The collapse was for the purpose of looting, and it began under Gorbachev.

Second, capitalism requires capital. After the collapse Russia was a wreck. People were willing to invest, but they wanted something in return. We simply gave Russia a ton of money, what you are saying is you wanted more. And you didn't want to have to do anything to get it.

Trillions worth in USD of flight capital makes that a lie as well. Yes, the comrador class of looters was paid to buy up everything-where else do you think they got the funds to do so?

Third, the kleptocracy you wound up with steals every hour of every day.

Corruption is always endemic in a modern society, that's the nature of the beast. But, in Russia there are plans to actually roll it back, not encourage it as we have here in the USA.

[late]

Dead wrong. The collapse was for the purpose of looting, and it began under Gorbachev.



Trillions worth in USD of flight capital makes that a lie as well. Yes, the comrador class of looters was paid to buy up everything-where else do you think they got the funds to do so?



Corruption is always endemic in a modern society, that's the nature of the beast. But, in Russia there are plans to actually roll it back, not encourage it as we have here in the USA.

Clever, you didn't use the quote function so I wouldn't get informed about this post being created.

Cute, but resistance is futile...

Russia suffered an economic collapse. The price of oil dropped, and they couldn't adapt quick enough. The economy had been suffering a long time, anyone that was alive back then remembers the empty shops and Black market.

The USSR is literally a textbook case of how not to run a country. The ruble was non-convertible. You couldn't exchange your money for any other currency. That meant a regular guy couldn't buy imported goods except through the Black market. The government had to barter for foreign goods. Yes, barter. They'd swap sturgeon or diamonds or oil for coca-cola or cars or computers. And, of course, this stuff mostly went to Party members.

"By some measures, the Soviet economy was the world’s second largest in 1990, but shortages of consumer goods were routine and hoarding was commonplace. It was estimated that the Soviet black market economy was the equivalent of more than 10 percent of the country’s official GDP. Economic stagnation had hobbled the country for years, and the perestroika reforms only served to exacerbate the problem. Wage hikes were supported by printing money, fueling an inflationary spiral. Mismanagement of fiscal policy made the country vulnerable to external factors, and a sharp drop in the price of oil sent the Soviet economy into a tailspin."
https://www.britannica.com/story/why-di ... n-collapse

This is not to say you are completely wrong, that would make me a neocon. But this does bring us to the crux of the problem. Putin came to power and didn't regulate markets, he corrupted them, for his own advantage.

Among other consequences, that means long term under-investment that will have unfortunate consequences.

[annatar1914]

Clever, you didn't use the quote function so I wouldn't get informed about this post being created.

Cute, but resistance is futile...

Russia suffered an economic collapse. The price of oil dropped, and they couldn't adapt quick enough. The economy had been suffering a long time, anyone that was alive back then remembers the empty shops and Black market.

The USSR is literally a textbook case of how not to run a country. The ruble was non-convertible. You couldn't exchange your money for any other currency. That meant a regular guy couldn't buy imported goods except through the Black market. The government had to barter for foreign goods. Yes, barter. They'd swap sturgeon or diamonds or oil for coca-cola or cars or computers. And, of course, this stuff mostly went to Party members.

"By some measures, the Soviet economy was the world’s second largest in 1990, but shortages of consumer goods were routine and hoarding was commonplace. It was estimated that the Soviet black market economy was the equivalent of more than 10 percent of the country’s official GDP. Economic stagnation had hobbled the country for years, and the perestroika reforms only served to exacerbate the problem. Wage hikes were supported by printing money, fueling an inflationary spiral. Mismanagement of fiscal policy made the country vulnerable to external factors, and a sharp drop in the price of oil sent the Soviet economy into a tailspin."
https://www.britannica.com/story/why-di ... n-collapse

This is not to say you are completely wrong, that would make me a neocon. But this does bring us to the crux of the problem. Putin came to power and didn't regulate markets, he corrupted them, for his own advantage.

Among other consequences, that means long term under-investment that will have unfortunate consequences.

Again, you're using western sources invested in what happened, literally. It would have been quite silly from a Socialist perspective to convert the Soviet Ruble and thus peg it's value to the Capitalist markets...

And Putin? You're not even citing sources at this point, even Western ones, just making a judgement call of your own that is negative as a matter of course.

As for the quote function, I simply forgot, even I make mistakes, sometimes frequently.

[late]

1) Again, you're using western sources invested in what happened, literally. It would have been quite silly from a Socialist perspective to convert the Soviet Ruble and thus peg it's value to the Capitalist markets...

2) And Putin? You're not even citing sources at this point, even Western ones, just making a judgement call of your own that is negative as a matter of course.

1) China did, and poor China, they're one of the world's largest economies now.

2) I have provided sources for that in the past. Except among Putin apologists it's like saying the sun shines in the morning.

[annatar1914]

@late , you said;

1) China did, and poor China, they're one of the world's largest economies now.

They're also in serious trouble now, because of their decision to be the world's factory for Capitalism. And most Chinese are quite poor, i've seen them.

2) I have provided sources for that in the past. Except among Putin apologists it's like saying the sun shines in the morning.

Except that one doesn't have to be a ''Putin Apologist'' to recognize that Anti-Putinism is a cover with many people for spouting of their pathologies against Russia, Slavs, Russian Orthodoxy, etc...

[late]

[quote="annatar1914"

]@late , you said;



They're also in serious trouble now, because of their decision to be the world's factory for Capitalism. And most Chinese are quite poor, i've seen them.




Except that one doesn't have to be a ''Putin Apologist'' to recognize that Anti-Putinism is a cover with many people for spouting of their pathologies against Russia, Slavs, Russian Orthodoxy, etc...

[/quote]

Russia was in a bind before the collapse of oil prices. That lack of investment I talked about means their income is at best stagnant. But the situation is a long way from ideal. Russia is losing several hundred thousand workers each year. On top of that, they are dependent on exports, commodities (like oil) and stuff that can be made cheaply. What that means is they are not a developing economy.
https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/up ... hevsky.pdf

" Since opening up to foreign trade and investment and implementing free-market reforms in 1979, China has been among the world’s fastest-growing economies, with real annual gross domestic product (GDP) growth averaging 9.5% through 2018, a pace described by the World Bank as “the fastest sustained expansion by a major economy in history.” Such growth has enabled China, on average, to double its GDP every eight years and helped raise an estimated 800 million people out of poverty."

Now that China has finally decided to become a mature economy, income will rise, along with most of the metrics you would expect to accompany a rise in personal income.



https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/RL33534.html

[Puffer Fish]

Command economies have trouble with rapid change.

Russian history and culture made a difficult transition to a fully capitalist economy impossible, and you guys are still trying to pin the blame on everyone but yourselves.

An interesting topic, a very complicated one that we could have many discussions about.

But you two are getting off-topic here.

This discussion is about Vladivostok.