4 ms·

Much of this growth came from spiking commodity prices, particularly oil and natural gas. That's not long-term sustainable. High energy prices masked the struct

Much of this growth came from spiking commodity prices, particularly oil and natural gas. That's not long-term sustainable. High energy prices masked the structural problems Russia faces. Now that's over.

lisper 18y ago
Does anyone bother to even look up the most basic facts before making proclamations any more? Oil prices were prety much flat through 2003. The rise of oil certainly helped, but you can't explain eight years of growth starting in 1999 with four years of oil price rises starting in 2003.
- mattobrien 18y ago
  Two things. Developing economies generally have higher rates of growth than more advanced ones, so the fact that Russia had higher rates of growth than the seven most advanced economies in the world is fairly meaningless. In fact, there was debate at the time about whether the G7 should expand to include Russia, since Russia's profile didn't match the others'. And second, how much of the cumulative growth from 1999-2007 was due to astronomical energy prices? I don't think it's absurd to point out that for half of the period you mention, energy prices made Russia's economy appear much stronger than it was in reality. The same happened in the late 1970s and the early 1980s with the USSR. Many attribute the USSR's implosion in large part to the collapse in energy prices in the late 1980s/early 1990s, since the failings of their centrally planned economy couldn't be concealed any longer.
  - diN0bot 18y ago
    an interesting discussion from both sides. i just wanted to thank mattobrien for remaining politce and on-topic.
  - lisper 18y ago
    > Developing economies generally have higher rates of growth than more advanced ones, so the fact that Russia had higher rates of growth than the seven most advanced economies in the world is fairly meaningless. Not when the thesis on the table is that "relentless, unremitting, and perhaps unstoppable depopulation" is "a bomb" that "amounts to an ethnic self-cleansing" and "carries with it grim and potentially disastrous implications." Since depopulation began in 1992 Russia has enjoyed eight years of extraordinary economic growth, not all of which can be accounted for by rising oil prices. That is a salient fact, which the article completely ignores. At best it's shoddy journalism.
- varjag 18y ago
  The growth in 1999 started after GKO default in 2nd half of 1998. There was only way up from that point.

lisper 18y ago

Does anyone bother to even look up the most basic facts before making proclamations any more? Oil prices were prety much flat through 2003. The rise of oil certainly helped, but you can't explain eight years of growth starting in 1999 with four years of oil price rises starting in 2003.

mattobrien 18y ago
Two things. Developing economies generally have higher rates of growth than more advanced ones, so the fact that Russia had higher rates of growth than the seven most advanced economies in the world is fairly meaningless. In fact, there was debate at the time about whether the G7 should expand to include Russia, since Russia's profile didn't match the others'. And second, how much of the cumulative growth from 1999-2007 was due to astronomical energy prices? I don't think it's absurd to point out that for half of the period you mention, energy prices made Russia's economy appear much stronger than it was in reality. The same happened in the late 1970s and the early 1980s with the USSR. Many attribute the USSR's implosion in large part to the collapse in energy prices in the late 1980s/early 1990s, since the failings of their centrally planned economy couldn't be concealed any longer.
- diN0bot 18y ago
  an interesting discussion from both sides. i just wanted to thank mattobrien for remaining politce and on-topic.
- lisper 18y ago
  > Developing economies generally have higher rates of growth than more advanced ones, so the fact that Russia had higher rates of growth than the seven most advanced economies in the world is fairly meaningless. Not when the thesis on the table is that "relentless, unremitting, and perhaps unstoppable depopulation" is "a bomb" that "amounts to an ethnic self-cleansing" and "carries with it grim and potentially disastrous implications." Since depopulation began in 1992 Russia has enjoyed eight years of extraordinary economic growth, not all of which can be accounted for by rising oil prices. That is a salient fact, which the article completely ignores. At best it's shoddy journalism.
varjag 18y ago
The growth in 1999 started after GKO default in 2nd half of 1998. There was only way up from that point.