iPlug
Active Member
In other news, Ukraine continues to expand Russia’s submarine fleet:
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I figure GDP is misleading in the context of a war economy, just as it is misleading in the context of a natural disaster and that recovery from the disaster.As the article mentions, "Military spending is doing that."
GDP is the term commonly applied to measure the economic "growth" of a country. It may be the single best tool for such, but far from perfect. During a war economy, GDP often increases but for reasons that break away from real and sustainable growth.
GDP = Consumption + Investment + Government Spending + Net Exports. Putin's Russia is heavy on consumption and government spending, but reduced exports and most importantly very little investment (except in building things that explode). Investment is the long term driver of economic growth.
More from the article:
...But spend big on the military and there’s less to spend on everything else.“Longer term, you are destroying the economy,” believes Chris Weafer, founding partner of Eurasian consultancy firm Macro-Advisory. “There is no money going into future development.”He says back in 2020 there was much discussion about the National Project programme, under which $400bn was to be spent on improving Russia’s infrastructure, transportation and communications. Instead, “almost all that money has been side-tracked to fund the military industrial-complex and support stability in the economy”.
Do you not think that Russia could duplicate the economic boom that propelled the US economy after WWII ?I figure GDP is misleading in the context of a war economy, just as it is misleading in the context of a natural disaster and that recovery from the disaster.
Yes there is a fantastic level of economic activity associated with both situations. However the proportion of that economic activity that yields improved / maintained infrastructure - the ongoing expansion of the economy's ability to generate further wealth is destroyed.
In the case of a war economy, the fruit of all that economic activity gets shipped off and destroyed on a battle field. There is no enduring economic capacity or benefit.
In the case of natural disaster that infrastructure / capacity for further economic activity starts by being destroyed. That recovery effort is exactly that - a whole bunch of economic activity that produces nothing except restoration of the state of affairs prior to the natural disaster.
Do you not think that Russia could duplicate the economic boom that propelled the US economy after WWII ?
Do you not think that Russia could duplicate the economic boom that propelled the US economy after WWII ?
Much of the rest of the industrialized world was bombed, except for the U.S. Will be interesting if Russia bombs China.Do you not think that Russia could duplicate the economic boom that propelled the US economy after WWII ?
That is why if Russia escalates, outside of Ukraine, it would be good for Ukraine....
The Democratic West is willing to sacrifice Ukrainian Soldiers, Ukrainian Civilians and Ukrainian land to keep this bottle up:ed [inside of the 1991 borders of Ukraine]. ...
They should be put in charge of Gaza reconstruction when Israel finally agrees to a permanent ceasefire deal.Mariupol at the end of 2023
Wrong thread, but hire the arsonists to rebuild, brilliant!They should be put in charge of Gaza reconstruction when Israel finally agrees to a permanent ceasefire deal.
The way I see it that's a different thing. New infrastructure / economic capability was being built in that economic boom AFTER the war. But I stand by the idea for the war economy, whether US or Germany or whoever else. The airplanes, ships, guns, bullets, and on and on that were consumed by the war - those look great in GDP numbers and represent 100% waste (economically).Do you not think that Russia could duplicate the economic boom that propelled the US economy after WWII ?
Do you not think that Russia could duplicate the economic boom that propelled the US economy after WWII ?
Russia has curbed the corruption a bit due to the war and its necessities, but once the war is over the black market freebooters will be back at work skimming whatever they can for their own pockets. Any attempts to turn swords into plowshares will be consumed by the grifters.
No; Russia's economy was/is a resource extraction economy rather than a versatile industrial economy like the US.Do you not think that Russia could duplicate the economic boom that propelled the US economy after WWII ?
No; Russia's economy was/is a resource extraction economy rather than a versatile industrial economy like the US.
And this is the foundation for the kleptocracy that Kasparov alluded to in the previous post. In a diversified economy, creation of wealth is distributed over many businesses, owned by an even higher number of individuals. In Russia, the majority of wealth is created from oil and gas extraction, which enables the government / Mafia bosses to divert large portions into their own pockets. (Yes, there is also uranium, gold and other resources but these are not the decisive factors.)
Everybody is talking about how oil funds the Russian war machine - which is true - but in war or peace, it's also the foundation for their mafia-like government. Obviously, autocratic regimes do not only exist in countries where the economy depends on resource extraction and there are examples of resource rich democracies but there is a clear correlation. Russia has a better chance to become a democratic country if nobody buys their oil. The way things are going, Putin's successor is likely to become the next Godfather.
In war the Russians don't care about their people and they don't care in peace either.