5 ms·

I watched an interview with President Medvedev in which problems like corruption were brought up. It seemed like he is taking a long term view of improving cond

by jeromec 16y ago

I watched an interview with President Medvedev in which problems like corruption were brought up. It seemed like he is taking a long term view of improving conditions in Russia, which makes sense to me, because it's not possible to transition to the kind of democracy with limited corruption we see in the U.S. overnight. What do you think of the actions or non-actions of the current Russian leadership? Are they at least on a path toward improving the situation? Interview: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwZLhqDEnSo&feature=player_embedded http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwZLhqDEnSo&feature=playe...

snitko 16y ago
If you listen carefully to this interview and others, you'll only hear he says he's going to fight corruption, but he doesn't say how. Politicians are usually all like this in any country, though. I listen a lot to Obama's speeches and interviews and he's pretty much the same. It's all blabbing. To give you an impression of how it probably should be, may I remind you of Mikhail Saakashvili, a Georgian president, who is so much hated in Russia. Personally, I don't know what happened at that war in 2008, but what many people in Russia realized recently is that he managed to eliminate corruption in Georgia in a matter of 3-4 years. How? One example: they fired all of the police force there overnight, hired and trained new people, raised their salaries and punished seriously for any bribes. What was the result? A great raise in respect for police in Georgia in less than 2 months.
- adobriyan 16y ago
  > he says he's going to fight corruption, but he doesn't say how. That's because he doesn't have a clue. Last step is to rename "militia" to "police" with trivial changes to law enforcement and direct insult of all those who served in supposedly "ineffective" Soviet militia.
- jeromec 16y ago
  Yes, I'm aware that politicians often speak "empty words". However, I would point out some politicians are indeed active and effective. President Obama has already signed over 200 bills into law, including one so large and complicated it took over 50 years of unsuccessful attempts: healthcare. I was just wondering if President Medvedev is more of the "empty words" type of politician, or does he genuinely feel compelled to do his best to improve conditions? As much as he safely can, that is.
  - snitko 16y ago
    Well, how am I supposed to know if he's genuine, I'm not his psychoanalyst. And I don't think it matters. I don't see how he can change anything - that's the problem.
    - jeromec 16y ago
      I agree that progress, if any at all, would be slow. President Medvedev recently toured Silicon Valley, opened a Twitter account, and proclaimed Russia "open for business". Unfortunately, with articles like this I don't think he will get many takers. However, I do think such efforts can plant the seeds of improvement better than doing nothing at all. That's why I mentioned a long term view. This article looks at Russia now, today, and we see people even is this thread talk of leaving. But if there were at least honest attempts to change things for the better, maybe people wouldn't be in such a hurry to leave, hurting chances for progress before they even get started.
  - varjag 16y ago
    None of his personality traits matter until he fires his puppetmaster buddy Putin. And that just ain't gonna happen.
  - temphn 16y ago
    Obama is a government official increasing govt power. That's easy comparatively, govt has the guns and the pulpit. Going against the flow is hard.
    - jeromec 16y ago
      Obama is a government official increasing govt power. Government power in the U.S. is limited by the Separation of Powers as well as the Constitution. Edit: Someone downvoted me? Why not post an argument with your position?
      - vorg 16y ago
        I'm always amazed how many U.S. Supreme Court decisions are passed by a 5-to-4 vote. Government power in the U.S. is limited by the beliefs of the 9 lifelong Supreme Court judges, interpreting written laws and precedents according to their own subjective belief systems.
- vorg 16y ago
  Vibrant countries seem to have "started again" more recently than more stagnant ones. E.g. Gernamy and Japan were "re-started" after conquest, China was restarted after a takeover by new people from the PLA and Communist Party, Georgia after a new police force. Startups and successful businesses thrive in countries with more lenient bankrupcy laws. This ensures the decay-death-rebirth rolls around quicker.
  - fgf 16y ago
    switzerland, the US and the UK haven't had any restarts for a long, long time. they are doing good. canada, australia and new zealand never had one (after the initial settlement). the wealth of germany and japan was a re-convergence in spite of bombing.. try again=)
dchest 16y ago
It's actually in the article: Russian President Dmitry Medvedev agrees—in theory at least. [...] But his bold speeches against corruption are largely ignored.

by jeromec 16y ago

snitko 16y ago

If you listen carefully to this interview and others, you'll only hear he says he's going to fight corruption, but he doesn't say how. Politicians are usually all like this in any country, though. I listen a lot to Obama's speeches and interviews and he's pretty much the same. It's all blabbing. To give you an impression of how it probably should be, may I remind you of Mikhail Saakashvili, a Georgian president, who is so much hated in Russia. Personally, I don't know what happened at that war in 2008, but what many people in Russia realized recently is that he managed to eliminate corruption in Georgia in a matter of 3-4 years. How? One example: they fired all of the police force there overnight, hired and trained new people, raised their salaries and punished seriously for any bribes. What was the result? A great raise in respect for police in Georgia in less than 2 months.

adobriyan 16y ago
> he says he's going to fight corruption, but he doesn't say how. That's because he doesn't have a clue. Last step is to rename "militia" to "police" with trivial changes to law enforcement and direct insult of all those who served in supposedly "ineffective" Soviet militia.
jeromec 16y ago
Yes, I'm aware that politicians often speak "empty words". However, I would point out some politicians are indeed active and effective. President Obama has already signed over 200 bills into law, including one so large and complicated it took over 50 years of unsuccessful attempts: healthcare. I was just wondering if President Medvedev is more of the "empty words" type of politician, or does he genuinely feel compelled to do his best to improve conditions? As much as he safely can, that is.
- snitko 16y ago
  Well, how am I supposed to know if he's genuine, I'm not his psychoanalyst. And I don't think it matters. I don't see how he can change anything - that's the problem.
  - jeromec 16y ago
    I agree that progress, if any at all, would be slow. President Medvedev recently toured Silicon Valley, opened a Twitter account, and proclaimed Russia "open for business". Unfortunately, with articles like this I don't think he will get many takers. However, I do think such efforts can plant the seeds of improvement better than doing nothing at all. That's why I mentioned a long term view. This article looks at Russia now, today, and we see people even is this thread talk of leaving. But if there were at least honest attempts to change things for the better, maybe people wouldn't be in such a hurry to leave, hurting chances for progress before they even get started.
- varjag 16y ago
  None of his personality traits matter until he fires his puppetmaster buddy Putin. And that just ain't gonna happen.
- temphn 16y ago
  Obama is a government official increasing govt power. That's easy comparatively, govt has the guns and the pulpit. Going against the flow is hard.
  - jeromec 16y ago
    Obama is a government official increasing govt power. Government power in the U.S. is limited by the Separation of Powers as well as the Constitution. Edit: Someone downvoted me? Why not post an argument with your position?
    - vorg 16y ago
      I'm always amazed how many U.S. Supreme Court decisions are passed by a 5-to-4 vote. Government power in the U.S. is limited by the beliefs of the 9 lifelong Supreme Court judges, interpreting written laws and precedents according to their own subjective belief systems.
vorg 16y ago
Vibrant countries seem to have "started again" more recently than more stagnant ones. E.g. Gernamy and Japan were "re-started" after conquest, China was restarted after a takeover by new people from the PLA and Communist Party, Georgia after a new police force. Startups and successful businesses thrive in countries with more lenient bankrupcy laws. This ensures the decay-death-rebirth rolls around quicker.
- fgf 16y ago
  switzerland, the US and the UK haven't had any restarts for a long, long time. they are doing good. canada, australia and new zealand never had one (after the initial settlement). the wealth of germany and japan was a re-convergence in spite of bombing.. try again=)

dchest 16y ago

It's actually in the article: Russian President Dmitry Medvedev agrees—in theory at least. [...] But his bold speeches against corruption are largely ignored.