13 ms·

Russia’s apparent resilience is being kept up by policy tricks and cash

79 points by BerislavLopac 4y ago

f6v 4y ago
> Meanwhile the domestic economy has been hit hard by a collapse in the workforce as millions have either fled or been drafted. Official figures show the workforce shrank by 600,000 in October alone, most likely some of the most qualified. That creates a long-term hit both to the demand and supply side of the economy. While many have been drafted,“millions” is an exaggeration. Yes, Yerevan is full of Russians at the moment. But likely most are from IT, those who need to get payments from international clients. Doubt that its “millions” though.
- IgorPartola 4y ago
  He drafted 300,000 in the partial mobilization. There were I believe three other call ups before then that didn’t quite reach into 100k range but were close. Also relatively comparable numbers have left Russia during the partial mobilization, so losing a million able workers from the workforce is not an unreasonable estimate.
  - lawn 4y ago
    That's what they claim anyway. Corruption, fear and propaganda is absolutely rampant, so it's very likely some numbers are adjusted.
    - IgorPartola 4y ago
      ISW had verified independent reports that while they didn’t quite meet the goal, they were close. And tens of thousands of the poorly trained call ups had already shown up on the front lines.
- eloff 4y ago
  It's millions[1] between the number the have been drafted and the number that have fled, and that's taking the Kremlin at their word about how many people they drafted. Also Russia has a brewing demographics collapse, similar to what Japan is experiencing. This is going to royally fuck them for the next 50 years. I think the Ukraine invasion might be the beginning of the end for Russia as we know it, I wouldn't be surprised to see parts of Russia break away going forward. [1] https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/11/25/russia-uzbekistan-kyrgyzstan-putin-mobilization-great-reverse-migration/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/11/25/russia-uzbekistan-kyrgy...
  - NovemberWhiskey 4y ago
    A disorderly failure of the Russian state is pretty much one of the nightmare scenarios.
    - eloff 4y ago
      Yes. It's a pretty scary possibility given their massive stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction of all kinds.
    - rich_sasha 4y ago
      Depends to whom. To countries far away, but wary of, dunno, nukes going into the hands of terrorists, sure. To countries bordering Russia who are intimidated and threatened (or invaded!) on a continuous basis, this is a definite improvement.
      - adamsmith143 4y ago
        Not so sure about this. That a handful of aggressive and hungry Russo-Warlords with Nukes is any improvement over Putin.
        rich_sasha 4y ago
        Russia seems to be throwing it's entire war machine at Ukraine. It deployed units, and conscripts, from all over Russia, including the Far East (in fact sourcing conscripts predominantly from poorer regions, and preferentially not ethnic Russians). Chop that machine into 4 or 5 pieces and it's far less scary. Even the nukes, scary as they could be, are less of a threat when the individual actors are smaller and weaker. They may not even be able to maintain these nukes. And even if they are capable of using them, they are at a more precarious position than eg. Putin at the helm of Mighty Russia.
baybal2 4y ago
greggarious 4y ago
They're running out of things like missles and bombs though IIRC? Why don't we honor the Budapest agreement and let the Ukrainians finish off Putin's regime with US made weapons if we are going to play word games about the difference between NATO and a firm and unambiguous promise to defend a nation if they give up their nuclear weapons? The people of Russia don't seem to want this war, they are conscripted. (From what I've read from afar.) It's time to stop letting totalitarians use people like pawns -- let them fight it out 1 on 1 like the thugs they are. I want to see Putin personally running up on Ukraine like it's the American civil war if he's such a history fan, rather than hiding in a spider hole like the rude little pedophile he is.
- IgorPartola 4y ago
  Because nukes. If Ukrainians push into Russia (which to be clear, they can’t for many other reasons aside from weapons), Russia would launch nukes and that could make the entirety of Europe uninhabitable for centuries.
  - BurningFrog 4y ago
    Maybe they would. But I doubt they're that suicidal.
    - IgorPartola 4y ago
      Is that a chance you’d be willing to take?
      - oneoff786 4y ago
        Yes
      - BurningFrog 4y ago
        I'd rather not, of course. My point is only that "Russia would launch nukes" is an overstatement.
  - 4y ago
IgorPartola 4y ago
As a Ukrainian, good! This war should have a long cost to Russia. They are certainly causing long term damage to Ukraine by destroying Ukrainian culture where they can, using rape as a widespread war tactic, and relocating Ukrainian children to Russia “for their own good” (see any recent ISW report for details). Having said that, the real thing that appears to have happened in this war is that Putin is a KGB stooge, not a military commander. He spent most of 2020 and 2021 in isolation due to concerns for COVID and I believe as a result further lost touch. He is fighting this war and setting up information space in Russia as if this was the USSR fighting Germany’s invasion in WWII, which is the war lore most citizens are familiar with. But obviously that isn’t the case as this is clearly a war of conquest, not defense of one’s own home land. Russian citizens and Putin have more or less struck a bargain that as long as his bullshit doesn’t affect them, he gets to remain in power. But clearly this isn’t the case anymore as military call ups and hard hit economy are having a very real effect on the citizens day to day lives. So the real question is whether this is what will eventually break Putin’a hold on Russia. Another surprising aspect of this war has been the large community of military bloggers that has developed on Telegram. This nationalist group has an outsized influence on both the Russian overall view of the war and even on the Russian military command. They are often quite critical of the Russian MoD and sometimes of Putin, yet Putin has protected them from consequences of this rhetoric. It appears the Russian information space w.r.t. the war is split into thirds between the MoD communications, the federal news outlets, and the milbloggers and of the three the milbloggers have the most freedom to point out the many problems facing the Russian armed forces in Ukraine. Yet Putin protects them because of the three they are the only ones who genuinely are pushing for annexing what they call “so called ‘ukraine’” due to their strong nationalist beliefs. Basically they are the most ideologically aligned with Putin but also the most critical of his failures. The milbloggers often find cover by criticizing MoD officials and generals in the field instead of Putin himself, and it appears that Purim’s frequent staff shake ups have taken at least some cues from this group. I wonder if a Western information campaign could disrupt this critical component of the war effort. Lastly, Putin’s main ace in the hole is that NATO is trying to invade Russia and Ukraine was the last stop on their way in. The boogieman of the West is so far enough to get at least some older Russians to believe in the war effort. I have relatives there that are convinced that the war atrocities being committed by Russian AF in Ukraine aren’t real and that it is all crisis actors in the TV and internet footage. But at the same time Putin is definitely showing that NATO could clearly crush the Russian armed forces, nukes aside. Russia apparently still relies on trains to conduct its warfare for example, a practice that went away at the end of the last century for most modernized militaries. Essentially the only thing left in Russia is nukes, oil, hunger, and an out of touch dictator who keeps making military mistakes.
keewee7 4y ago
One reason that sanctions haven't had an apparent immediate effect is that the Russian economy was already in a slow downward spiral. The Russian economy peaked in 2013 and has been going down hill since then. The Russian society has already been hardened by these 9 years of "hard times" and not to forget the much harder times in the 1990s. Another reason is that Western companies stopped their sales in Russia while the West continues to buy natural gas from Russia. Short-term macroeconomic numbers will regard this as an improvement of Russia's trade balance even slightly boost their GDP.
- H8crilA 4y ago
  Yeah, and consider the effect that it has on the rouble: with lots of sales (of mostly energy) but nowhere to spend that money the rouble is actually likely to appreciate rather than depreciate. I'm referring here to the premature celebration of the "death of the rouble", you may remember this narrative. This is still a bit obfuscated by the ongoing sale of the Russian foreign reserves (the ~50% that wasn't frozen). But generally speaking the rouble needn't decrease in value, despite the sanctions taking the intended effect. If you're still unconvinced then look at the granddaddy of all deflations, the great depression. Caused by the freezing of trade it was (in most countries) experienced through the appreciation of the value of currency - deflation, rather than inflation.
  - 082349872349872 4y ago
    Heh. I sometimes wonder how vulnerable the US would be to a squeeze appreciating USD. You could probably even get large parts of the US political class to go along with it, as (in the short term) they'd be benefiting relative to their countrymen.
    - RC_ITR 4y ago
      Very invulnerable. This whole “Squeeze” thing is a function of liquidity. The reason that stocks like GME and AMC can experience the effects of a short squeeze is because of how relatively illiquid they are (i.e. point $1bn of consumer capital toward a $3bn stock with thin trading and you can do wild things). The USD is the currency in which nearly all middle eastern oil is priced, the currency in which $16tn of consumer spending is done, quadrillions of stock trades, etc etc etc. There’s no individual or group who can point enough capital at that to make for a squeeze, and even if they could, then why wouldn’t the treasury take advantage and start printing more dollars (see: Hertz issuing new shares and ruining wallstreetbet’s day)
Kukumber 4y ago
- olabyne 4y ago
  As a european, I think both of your "sources" seems dodgy and very US-libertarian biased (should I say Kremlin biased ?)
  - avn2109 4y ago
    I'm not the GP and don't have a horse in this race, but is English Wikipedia widely considered "Kremlin biased?" That seems far fetched.
    - lordfrito 4y ago
      I would assume that most Wikipedia articles are biased by whatever interests have skin in that game (and deep pockets). For example, I'm sure the sugar industry has their hand correcting "misinformation" on Wikipedia pages related to the benefits of sugar. Political articles on Wikipedia? I assume they're all biased. Some by groups I agree with, others by groups I don't.
    - olabyne 4y ago
      It was not wikipedia.
- user3939382 4y ago
  - vlovich123 4y ago
    Are you referring to [1]? Cause to me it seems like Russia has been given every chance to establish peace. Peace for an act of aggression Russia initiated because they didn’t like that Ukraine was pro-US and considering joining NATO (which would have put a critical naval port under US control). Is the “baiting” aspect the US courting Ukraine to be in NATO? That seems rather mild considering that’s a sane strategy given how Russia under Putin has unprovoked invaded neighbors in the past (see Georgia). Putin has also robbed the Russian people through his oligarchs and rampant corruption and acted like a despot reinstalling a dictatorship in effect within Russia, killing or imprisoning anyone who didn’t bow the knee or threatened to expose him. He’s also struck out at the US by trying to sow discord and confusion by having the US elections hacked. Not sure why you’re painting Russia here as the poor innocent victim here, but this line that the US is the cause of the war in Ukraine is kind of laughable when you look at the totality of Putin’s career. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_agreements https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_agreements
icare_1er 4y ago
The real losers are Europe.
- clnq 4y ago
  Everyone involved in a war is a loser. It really shows how immature humanity is that we still start new wars.
  - throwayyy479087 4y ago
    This is reductionist. The Pax Americana has been maintained by an overwhelming capability for war by the USA. You need to punish in countries that violate international norms. Russia has been truly chucklefucked by this war, and the Norks, Iranians, etc. are going to be significantly more wary of engaging in new wars going forward. That is how peace is actually maintained.
    - clnq 4y ago
      Capacity for war is not the same as starting wars. Pax Americana is a result of defensive capacity for war. The Middle East situation is a result of starting wars. I have a lot more criticism for the latter than the former.
  - bell-cot 4y ago
    Yes and no. For most of history, conquest of pre-industrial agrarian societies was generally an excellent idea...politically and economically, that is. See any good history of (say) the economics of the Roman Empire. Or the British Empire. That's part of why WWI was so hellishly destructive for Europe - national leaders, military planners, educated elites, etc. really didn't get that modern(-ish) industrialized warfare was profoundly different from "the good old days", and they made endless bad decisions based on obsolete "wisdom".
    - clnq 4y ago
      Historically, yes and no. I agree. But recent wars look much more like All Quiet on the Western Front than conquests of the Roman Empire.
throw903290 4y ago
Call it what you want. Russia is switching from export to internal consumption. Getting something like 30 years mortgage on house, was unheard of until recently. If West can run quantitative easing for 15 years, why not Russia?
- oneoff786 4y ago
  Because people want dollars
- popilewiz 4y ago
- Nifty3929 4y ago
  Because you cannot eat money, or live in money. A country can QE forever, but this will not put food on the table or shoes on people's feet. If people want those things, they must either be produced or imported. QE doesn't help with either of those. Production is a physical act, not a monetary one. And if you want to import from somewhere, then you need that nation's currency to do so. Which means that in turn you must have produced something to exchange for that currency.
  - riku_iki 4y ago
    > Which means that in turn you must have produced something to exchange for that currency. and Russia still perfectly sells oil and gas.
    - Nifty3929 4y ago
      Yes exactly. But I don't think QE will help.
      - riku_iki 4y ago
        why do you think Russia is doing any QE and why they would need it?..
lkrubner 4y ago
The simplest version of the story is this: Russia has gained tremendously thanks to the unusually high price of oil. Should the price of oil fall back the average of the last 10 years, then Russia's situation will appear far more precarious.
- 082349872349872 4y ago
  Looking at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980s_oil_glut https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980s_oil_glut and eyeballing 1980-1990, it seems plausible that the Union had been doing OK with oil at USD 30 but became far more precarious indeed with oil under USD 20? OPEC+ doesn't seem to be in the mood to replay the 1980s, though.
oxff 4y ago
Do not ever forget what was promised: Russia in rubble in two weeks from sanctions and Russia out of missiles in two weeks. This was the "negotiated" social contract upon which quality of life in other parts of Europe was thrown into a dog shit trash fire. These kinds of articles are just not-so subtle cover for the once again failure of leaders here, and moving the goalposts and rewriting of history.
- djaychela 4y ago
  Do you have sources for those claims? I don't remember hearing either - my recollection is that there were warnings that sanctions would have some effect but take a long time to work, and the Russian economy would be supported by China and India, among others.
  - themgt 4y ago
    As a result of our unprecedented sanctions, the ruble was almost immediately reduced to rubble. The Russian economy is on track to be cut in half. It was ranked the 11th biggest economy in the world before this invasion — and soon, it will not even rank among the top 20. - President Biden, Mar 26, 2022 https://twitter.com/potus/status/1507842574865866763 https://twitter.com/potus/status/1507842574865866763
    - jmull 4y ago
      I'm defending this idiotic tweet (sanctions have never been quick work), but it doesn't make the claims the previous poster was talking about.
- daveguy 4y ago
  You are way off here. It was Russia who was promising that Ukraine would fall in two weeks. The response was always going to be a hard defense. And Ukraine has been incredibly successful with their defense. That defense includes these sanctions and material support of Ukraine. Russia's invasion has been a resource sucking failure for Putin.
- 4y ago
hiram112 4y ago
> The reality is that Russia is losing the economic war, just as it is losing the war on the battlefield. Real incomes in Russia are already estimated to be 10 per cent lower today than in 2014, when Putin first invaded Ukraine. I imagine the average American is doing worse than that since then. In 2014 USA, things for me and my peers were finally stabilizing after 5 years of financial crisis, housing busts, horrible job market, etc. Inflation was low, I'd finally found a fair employer at a decent salary, had bought a late model car (3 year old Acura) for about $25K, and my investments had recovered and were now growing again in the stock market. Housing was still modestly priced after the bubble crash, interest rates were low for buyers, but rent prices were doable, with plenty of inventory, too, for those not yet ready to buy. And there were dozens of 2nd and 3rd tier cities in which any standard worker would be able to move to and likely obtain the "American Dream" of home ownership, a couple cars, etc. Let's compare that to now: My salary has grown by about 25% in absolute dollars (2-3% corporate raises don't add up so quickly). Meanwhile, I still own my 2010 car, and it would cost about $40K today to replace it with a similarly low-miled used one, or $50K+ if new. That's if I could even get one since it seems there is now a perpetual "chip shortage." The same apartment I rented in 2014 would cost at least 50% more now, though probably closer to double with all the extra fees. The same starter homes I looked at then are double in absolute dollars, and at current 7%+ interest rates, might be closer to 3x as expensive per monthly payment. And this isn't just in places like NYC or Bay Area or Miami Beach. Once "cheap" cities like Phoenix and Nashville are now just as expensive, relative to salaries, as the over-crowded and desirable coastal areas were last generation. Everything else is way MORE expensive, especially food. I eat out less. Food quality is generally lower or smaller portioned. I take less vacations as airfare seems to have doubled in price in the last 5 years. And let's not even get into health insurance, which has also doubled in price since 2014 (I now have a $3K deductible with the same premium costs as before, thanks to Obamacare). My retirement savings have lost over 1/3 of their value in the last year. So Russians should know that it's not just them suffering. Most of us in the west have taken a 10% hit to standard of living in just the last 3 years, IMO.
Kukumber 4y ago
- reducesuffering 4y ago
  Agree, can we have a better educated and sourced discussion instead of yours? Your source makes huge overreaching claims by only citing McCain visiting Ukraine and Nuland expressing preference for new leadership to an ambassador.
  - Kukumber 4y ago
    > Agree, can we have a better educated and sourced discussion instead of yours? Well, luckily we do not live in Russia, so we can still do our own civil investigation > Your source makes huge overreaching claims by only citing McCain visiting Ukraine and Nuland expressing preference for new leadership to an ambassador. It's a documented issue, it's one of the source material Here is another one, still from a western source: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-ukraine-tape-idUSBREA1601G20140207 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-ukraine-tape-idUSBREA...
- electrondood 4y ago
  This is disgusting apologism for Putin's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine. No one forced Russia to attack Ukraine. No one forced them to target cities and civilian infrastructure. They are absolutely not victims.
  - Kukumber 4y ago
    If you didn't flag my comment, and instead ask questions, you would have seen my comment on that matter Putin did indeed made a mistake in engaging his military in Ukraine, and doubled down with the various nukes, he and his government should be punished for that That doesn't mean we should stay blind when it comes to the wrongdoings of the western block It goes both ways, otherwise you are not critical and objective in your analysis
dang 4y ago
Url changed from https://archive.vn/6EXTd https://archive.vn/6EXTd, which points to this. It's ok to post archive links in the comments, but please submit the original source as the story link. "Please submit the original source. If a post reports on something found on another site, submit the latter." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

79 points by BerislavLopac 4y ago

f6v 4y ago

> Meanwhile the domestic economy has been hit hard by a collapse in the workforce as millions have either fled or been drafted. Official figures show the workforce shrank by 600,000 in October alone, most likely some of the most qualified. That creates a long-term hit both to the demand and supply side of the economy. While many have been drafted,“millions” is an exaggeration. Yes, Yerevan is full of Russians at the moment. But likely most are from IT, those who need to get payments from international clients. Doubt that its “millions” though.

IgorPartola 4y ago
He drafted 300,000 in the partial mobilization. There were I believe three other call ups before then that didn’t quite reach into 100k range but were close. Also relatively comparable numbers have left Russia during the partial mobilization, so losing a million able workers from the workforce is not an unreasonable estimate.
- lawn 4y ago
  That's what they claim anyway. Corruption, fear and propaganda is absolutely rampant, so it's very likely some numbers are adjusted.
  - IgorPartola 4y ago
    ISW had verified independent reports that while they didn’t quite meet the goal, they were close. And tens of thousands of the poorly trained call ups had already shown up on the front lines.
eloff 4y ago
It's millions[1] between the number the have been drafted and the number that have fled, and that's taking the Kremlin at their word about how many people they drafted. Also Russia has a brewing demographics collapse, similar to what Japan is experiencing. This is going to royally fuck them for the next 50 years. I think the Ukraine invasion might be the beginning of the end for Russia as we know it, I wouldn't be surprised to see parts of Russia break away going forward. [1] https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/11/25/russia-uzbekistan-kyrgyzstan-putin-mobilization-great-reverse-migration/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/11/25/russia-uzbekistan-kyrgy...
- NovemberWhiskey 4y ago
  A disorderly failure of the Russian state is pretty much one of the nightmare scenarios.
  - eloff 4y ago
    Yes. It's a pretty scary possibility given their massive stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction of all kinds.
  - rich_sasha 4y ago
    Depends to whom. To countries far away, but wary of, dunno, nukes going into the hands of terrorists, sure. To countries bordering Russia who are intimidated and threatened (or invaded!) on a continuous basis, this is a definite improvement.
    - adamsmith143 4y ago
      Not so sure about this. That a handful of aggressive and hungry Russo-Warlords with Nukes is any improvement over Putin.
      - rich_sasha 4y ago
        Russia seems to be throwing it's entire war machine at Ukraine. It deployed units, and conscripts, from all over Russia, including the Far East (in fact sourcing conscripts predominantly from poorer regions, and preferentially not ethnic Russians). Chop that machine into 4 or 5 pieces and it's far less scary. Even the nukes, scary as they could be, are less of a threat when the individual actors are smaller and weaker. They may not even be able to maintain these nukes. And even if they are capable of using them, they are at a more precarious position than eg. Putin at the helm of Mighty Russia.

baybal2 4y ago

greggarious 4y ago

They're running out of things like missles and bombs though IIRC? Why don't we honor the Budapest agreement and let the Ukrainians finish off Putin's regime with US made weapons if we are going to play word games about the difference between NATO and a firm and unambiguous promise to defend a nation if they give up their nuclear weapons? The people of Russia don't seem to want this war, they are conscripted. (From what I've read from afar.) It's time to stop letting totalitarians use people like pawns -- let them fight it out 1 on 1 like the thugs they are. I want to see Putin personally running up on Ukraine like it's the American civil war if he's such a history fan, rather than hiding in a spider hole like the rude little pedophile he is.

IgorPartola 4y ago
Because nukes. If Ukrainians push into Russia (which to be clear, they can’t for many other reasons aside from weapons), Russia would launch nukes and that could make the entirety of Europe uninhabitable for centuries.
- BurningFrog 4y ago
  Maybe they would. But I doubt they're that suicidal.
  - IgorPartola 4y ago
    Is that a chance you’d be willing to take?
    - oneoff786 4y ago
      Yes
    - BurningFrog 4y ago
      I'd rather not, of course. My point is only that "Russia would launch nukes" is an overstatement.
- 4y ago

IgorPartola 4y ago

As a Ukrainian, good! This war should have a long cost to Russia. They are certainly causing long term damage to Ukraine by destroying Ukrainian culture where they can, using rape as a widespread war tactic, and relocating Ukrainian children to Russia “for their own good” (see any recent ISW report for details). Having said that, the real thing that appears to have happened in this war is that Putin is a KGB stooge, not a military commander. He spent most of 2020 and 2021 in isolation due to concerns for COVID and I believe as a result further lost touch. He is fighting this war and setting up information space in Russia as if this was the USSR fighting Germany’s invasion in WWII, which is the war lore most citizens are familiar with. But obviously that isn’t the case as this is clearly a war of conquest, not defense of one’s own home land. Russian citizens and Putin have more or less struck a bargain that as long as his bullshit doesn’t affect them, he gets to remain in power. But clearly this isn’t the case anymore as military call ups and hard hit economy are having a very real effect on the citizens day to day lives. So the real question is whether this is what will eventually break Putin’a hold on Russia. Another surprising aspect of this war has been the large community of military bloggers that has developed on Telegram. This nationalist group has an outsized influence on both the Russian overall view of the war and even on the Russian military command. They are often quite critical of the Russian MoD and sometimes of Putin, yet Putin has protected them from consequences of this rhetoric. It appears the Russian information space w.r.t. the war is split into thirds between the MoD communications, the federal news outlets, and the milbloggers and of the three the milbloggers have the most freedom to point out the many problems facing the Russian armed forces in Ukraine. Yet Putin protects them because of the three they are the only ones who genuinely are pushing for annexing what they call “so called ‘ukraine’” due to their strong nationalist beliefs. Basically they are the most ideologically aligned with Putin but also the most critical of his failures. The milbloggers often find cover by criticizing MoD officials and generals in the field instead of Putin himself, and it appears that Purim’s frequent staff shake ups have taken at least some cues from this group. I wonder if a Western information campaign could disrupt this critical component of the war effort. Lastly, Putin’s main ace in the hole is that NATO is trying to invade Russia and Ukraine was the last stop on their way in. The boogieman of the West is so far enough to get at least some older Russians to believe in the war effort. I have relatives there that are convinced that the war atrocities being committed by Russian AF in Ukraine aren’t real and that it is all crisis actors in the TV and internet footage. But at the same time Putin is definitely showing that NATO could clearly crush the Russian armed forces, nukes aside. Russia apparently still relies on trains to conduct its warfare for example, a practice that went away at the end of the last century for most modernized militaries. Essentially the only thing left in Russia is nukes, oil, hunger, and an out of touch dictator who keeps making military mistakes.

keewee7 4y ago

One reason that sanctions haven't had an apparent immediate effect is that the Russian economy was already in a slow downward spiral. The Russian economy peaked in 2013 and has been going down hill since then. The Russian society has already been hardened by these 9 years of "hard times" and not to forget the much harder times in the 1990s. Another reason is that Western companies stopped their sales in Russia while the West continues to buy natural gas from Russia. Short-term macroeconomic numbers will regard this as an improvement of Russia's trade balance even slightly boost their GDP.

H8crilA 4y ago
Yeah, and consider the effect that it has on the rouble: with lots of sales (of mostly energy) but nowhere to spend that money the rouble is actually likely to appreciate rather than depreciate. I'm referring here to the premature celebration of the "death of the rouble", you may remember this narrative. This is still a bit obfuscated by the ongoing sale of the Russian foreign reserves (the ~50% that wasn't frozen). But generally speaking the rouble needn't decrease in value, despite the sanctions taking the intended effect. If you're still unconvinced then look at the granddaddy of all deflations, the great depression. Caused by the freezing of trade it was (in most countries) experienced through the appreciation of the value of currency - deflation, rather than inflation.
- 082349872349872 4y ago
  Heh. I sometimes wonder how vulnerable the US would be to a squeeze appreciating USD. You could probably even get large parts of the US political class to go along with it, as (in the short term) they'd be benefiting relative to their countrymen.
  - RC_ITR 4y ago
    Very invulnerable. This whole “Squeeze” thing is a function of liquidity. The reason that stocks like GME and AMC can experience the effects of a short squeeze is because of how relatively illiquid they are (i.e. point $1bn of consumer capital toward a $3bn stock with thin trading and you can do wild things). The USD is the currency in which nearly all middle eastern oil is priced, the currency in which $16tn of consumer spending is done, quadrillions of stock trades, etc etc etc. There’s no individual or group who can point enough capital at that to make for a squeeze, and even if they could, then why wouldn’t the treasury take advantage and start printing more dollars (see: Hertz issuing new shares and ruining wallstreetbet’s day)

Kukumber 4y ago

olabyne 4y ago
As a european, I think both of your "sources" seems dodgy and very US-libertarian biased (should I say Kremlin biased ?)
- avn2109 4y ago
  I'm not the GP and don't have a horse in this race, but is English Wikipedia widely considered "Kremlin biased?" That seems far fetched.
  - lordfrito 4y ago
    I would assume that most Wikipedia articles are biased by whatever interests have skin in that game (and deep pockets). For example, I'm sure the sugar industry has their hand correcting "misinformation" on Wikipedia pages related to the benefits of sugar. Political articles on Wikipedia? I assume they're all biased. Some by groups I agree with, others by groups I don't.
  - olabyne 4y ago
    It was not wikipedia.
user3939382 4y ago
- vlovich123 4y ago
  Are you referring to [1]? Cause to me it seems like Russia has been given every chance to establish peace. Peace for an act of aggression Russia initiated because they didn’t like that Ukraine was pro-US and considering joining NATO (which would have put a critical naval port under US control). Is the “baiting” aspect the US courting Ukraine to be in NATO? That seems rather mild considering that’s a sane strategy given how Russia under Putin has unprovoked invaded neighbors in the past (see Georgia). Putin has also robbed the Russian people through his oligarchs and rampant corruption and acted like a despot reinstalling a dictatorship in effect within Russia, killing or imprisoning anyone who didn’t bow the knee or threatened to expose him. He’s also struck out at the US by trying to sow discord and confusion by having the US elections hacked. Not sure why you’re painting Russia here as the poor innocent victim here, but this line that the US is the cause of the war in Ukraine is kind of laughable when you look at the totality of Putin’s career. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_agreements https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_agreements

icare_1er 4y ago

The real losers are Europe.

clnq 4y ago
Everyone involved in a war is a loser. It really shows how immature humanity is that we still start new wars.
- throwayyy479087 4y ago
  This is reductionist. The Pax Americana has been maintained by an overwhelming capability for war by the USA. You need to punish in countries that violate international norms. Russia has been truly chucklefucked by this war, and the Norks, Iranians, etc. are going to be significantly more wary of engaging in new wars going forward. That is how peace is actually maintained.
  - clnq 4y ago
    Capacity for war is not the same as starting wars. Pax Americana is a result of defensive capacity for war. The Middle East situation is a result of starting wars. I have a lot more criticism for the latter than the former.
- bell-cot 4y ago
  Yes and no. For most of history, conquest of pre-industrial agrarian societies was generally an excellent idea...politically and economically, that is. See any good history of (say) the economics of the Roman Empire. Or the British Empire. That's part of why WWI was so hellishly destructive for Europe - national leaders, military planners, educated elites, etc. really didn't get that modern(-ish) industrialized warfare was profoundly different from "the good old days", and they made endless bad decisions based on obsolete "wisdom".
  - clnq 4y ago
    Historically, yes and no. I agree. But recent wars look much more like All Quiet on the Western Front than conquests of the Roman Empire.

throw903290 4y ago

Call it what you want. Russia is switching from export to internal consumption. Getting something like 30 years mortgage on house, was unheard of until recently. If West can run quantitative easing for 15 years, why not Russia?

oneoff786 4y ago
Because people want dollars
popilewiz 4y ago
Nifty3929 4y ago
Because you cannot eat money, or live in money. A country can QE forever, but this will not put food on the table or shoes on people's feet. If people want those things, they must either be produced or imported. QE doesn't help with either of those. Production is a physical act, not a monetary one. And if you want to import from somewhere, then you need that nation's currency to do so. Which means that in turn you must have produced something to exchange for that currency.
- riku_iki 4y ago
  > Which means that in turn you must have produced something to exchange for that currency. and Russia still perfectly sells oil and gas.
  - Nifty3929 4y ago
    Yes exactly. But I don't think QE will help.
    - riku_iki 4y ago
      why do you think Russia is doing any QE and why they would need it?..

lkrubner 4y ago

The simplest version of the story is this: Russia has gained tremendously thanks to the unusually high price of oil. Should the price of oil fall back the average of the last 10 years, then Russia's situation will appear far more precarious.

082349872349872 4y ago
Looking at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980s_oil_glut https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1980s_oil_glut and eyeballing 1980-1990, it seems plausible that the Union had been doing OK with oil at USD 30 but became far more precarious indeed with oil under USD 20? OPEC+ doesn't seem to be in the mood to replay the 1980s, though.

oxff 4y ago

Do not ever forget what was promised: Russia in rubble in two weeks from sanctions and Russia out of missiles in two weeks. This was the "negotiated" social contract upon which quality of life in other parts of Europe was thrown into a dog shit trash fire. These kinds of articles are just not-so subtle cover for the once again failure of leaders here, and moving the goalposts and rewriting of history.

djaychela 4y ago
Do you have sources for those claims? I don't remember hearing either - my recollection is that there were warnings that sanctions would have some effect but take a long time to work, and the Russian economy would be supported by China and India, among others.
- themgt 4y ago
  As a result of our unprecedented sanctions, the ruble was almost immediately reduced to rubble. The Russian economy is on track to be cut in half. It was ranked the 11th biggest economy in the world before this invasion — and soon, it will not even rank among the top 20. - President Biden, Mar 26, 2022 https://twitter.com/potus/status/1507842574865866763 https://twitter.com/potus/status/1507842574865866763
  - jmull 4y ago
    I'm defending this idiotic tweet (sanctions have never been quick work), but it doesn't make the claims the previous poster was talking about.
daveguy 4y ago
You are way off here. It was Russia who was promising that Ukraine would fall in two weeks. The response was always going to be a hard defense. And Ukraine has been incredibly successful with their defense. That defense includes these sanctions and material support of Ukraine. Russia's invasion has been a resource sucking failure for Putin.
4y ago

hiram112 4y ago

> The reality is that Russia is losing the economic war, just as it is losing the war on the battlefield. Real incomes in Russia are already estimated to be 10 per cent lower today than in 2014, when Putin first invaded Ukraine. I imagine the average American is doing worse than that since then. In 2014 USA, things for me and my peers were finally stabilizing after 5 years of financial crisis, housing busts, horrible job market, etc. Inflation was low, I'd finally found a fair employer at a decent salary, had bought a late model car (3 year old Acura) for about $25K, and my investments had recovered and were now growing again in the stock market. Housing was still modestly priced after the bubble crash, interest rates were low for buyers, but rent prices were doable, with plenty of inventory, too, for those not yet ready to buy. And there were dozens of 2nd and 3rd tier cities in which any standard worker would be able to move to and likely obtain the "American Dream" of home ownership, a couple cars, etc. Let's compare that to now: My salary has grown by about 25% in absolute dollars (2-3% corporate raises don't add up so quickly). Meanwhile, I still own my 2010 car, and it would cost about $40K today to replace it with a similarly low-miled used one, or $50K+ if new. That's if I could even get one since it seems there is now a perpetual "chip shortage." The same apartment I rented in 2014 would cost at least 50% more now, though probably closer to double with all the extra fees. The same starter homes I looked at then are double in absolute dollars, and at current 7%+ interest rates, might be closer to 3x as expensive per monthly payment. And this isn't just in places like NYC or Bay Area or Miami Beach. Once "cheap" cities like Phoenix and Nashville are now just as expensive, relative to salaries, as the over-crowded and desirable coastal areas were last generation. Everything else is way MORE expensive, especially food. I eat out less. Food quality is generally lower or smaller portioned. I take less vacations as airfare seems to have doubled in price in the last 5 years. And let's not even get into health insurance, which has also doubled in price since 2014 (I now have a $3K deductible with the same premium costs as before, thanks to Obamacare). My retirement savings have lost over 1/3 of their value in the last year. So Russians should know that it's not just them suffering. Most of us in the west have taken a 10% hit to standard of living in just the last 3 years, IMO.

Kukumber 4y ago

reducesuffering 4y ago
Agree, can we have a better educated and sourced discussion instead of yours? Your source makes huge overreaching claims by only citing McCain visiting Ukraine and Nuland expressing preference for new leadership to an ambassador.
- Kukumber 4y ago
  > Agree, can we have a better educated and sourced discussion instead of yours? Well, luckily we do not live in Russia, so we can still do our own civil investigation > Your source makes huge overreaching claims by only citing McCain visiting Ukraine and Nuland expressing preference for new leadership to an ambassador. It's a documented issue, it's one of the source material Here is another one, still from a western source: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-ukraine-tape-idUSBREA1601G20140207 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-ukraine-tape-idUSBREA...
electrondood 4y ago
This is disgusting apologism for Putin's unprovoked invasion of Ukraine. No one forced Russia to attack Ukraine. No one forced them to target cities and civilian infrastructure. They are absolutely not victims.
- Kukumber 4y ago
  If you didn't flag my comment, and instead ask questions, you would have seen my comment on that matter Putin did indeed made a mistake in engaging his military in Ukraine, and doubled down with the various nukes, he and his government should be punished for that That doesn't mean we should stay blind when it comes to the wrongdoings of the western block It goes both ways, otherwise you are not critical and objective in your analysis

dang 4y ago

Url changed from https://archive.vn/6EXTd https://archive.vn/6EXTd, which points to this. It's ok to post archive links in the comments, but please submit the original source as the story link. "Please submit the original source. If a post reports on something found on another site, submit the latter." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html