Stupid Shit in Kyiv

[WyattEarp]

First, whether Putin's overthrow would change things depends on who replaces him. A like-for-like swap is unlikely to have much effect. And, as things stand right now, if he's removed (or dies) it's more probable he'd be replaced by a hawkish nationalist rather than a reformer.
.....................................................

After decades of Putin's autocratic and kleptocratic rule, he's either eliminated or driven out anyone who might be a credible reformer. And even high-profile opposition figures, like Navalny, are still cut from the same Moscow-Saint Petersburg, elite-centric, ethnic-Russian nationalist cloth. One of the reasons Russia seems (IMO) doomed to decades of darkness is that there doesn't appear to be anyone, or any credible movement, capable of leading them toward a different path. And it's my sense that the national mindset has been so conditioned by Putinism that they're incapable, at least at this point in time, of changing course. A rough analogy would be that of an addict who needs to hit rock bottom, with all their lies exposed and rationalizations destroyed, as an essential step toward rebuilding..

This is all very likely, but I'm a bit more optimistic. A Russian nationalist can politically benefit for a few years from putting things back together, stopping the carnage and getting the economy going again.

I think what extreme nationalist leaders like Putin (and Hitler) benefited from was taking over in a period of chaos. There is only one direction to go from chaos and that is up. Interestingly if you look at crude oil price charts starting from Putin's rise to power in 1999, you will see oil at $20 per barrel rising virtually unstoppable to a price of over $100 per barrel in 2014. I also don't think that the invasion of the Ukraine and the rapid rise in oil prices in 2021 are unconnected events.

Getting back to the question of a new Russian leader. There is certainly a real fear that Russia will be in some form of constant belligerency with NATO and the West. I don't think Russian institutions have improved since 1992. Russian institutions certainly don't appear immediately ready to try another attempt at real democratic progress and free market economics.

My hope is time. The more time that passes from the disintegration of the Soviet Union thirty years ago the more Russia will be able to move forward. Hitler launched his war of aggression twenty years after World War II. Many Germans and certainly the German military were all too willing to avenge the defeat of WWI. The difference is older Russians familiar and somewhat satisfied with life under the Soviets is slowly giving way to younger and more modern Russians. Putin himself is a relic of the Soviet system.

The key is to find a way around a humiliating Russian defeat in the Ukraine or at least the appearance of such. Russian reparations are problematic. I'm also not so sure the Ukrainians will now be satisfied with a draw. I'm not convinced the Biden Administration will be adept at managing the peace.

[Kozerog]

To me it seems more likely that Russia, after full or partial defeat in Ukraine, will retreat into isolation, continue on the path of belligerence and NATO-West blaming and, even though exposed as a (conventional) paper tiger, remain dangerous by virtue of their nuclear capability.

Yes, that's the most likely outcome, as cooler heads have been predicting all along, which is why they warned against trying to pull Ukraine into the Western orbit and thus provoke this war. In other words, Russia with be more like North Korea than before, a thorn in the side of the USA and Western Europe and others. Not so crazy and isolated as North Korea, but vastly more dangerous and with enough of an economy and valuable natural resources to cause far more mischief than North Korea. Note that 60+ years of isolation and sanctions have done nothing to break North Korea's (or Cuba's) defiance of the USA.

[Kozerog]

This is a recent short video clip where Mearsheimer clearly explains the extreme danger of current USA policy. To summarize, there are 2 conditions under which Russia will use nukes: (1) someone uses nukes against Russia first; (2) Russia faces threat to its existence. "Threat to existence" is a fuzzy concept, but that is exactly what the USA cheerleaders seems to be hinting at. In particular, humiliating external military defeat that might lead to internal political disintegration sounds like "threat to existence". If you care about Ukraine, then you cannot be hoping for humiliating Russian defeat because of the possibility this causes escalation to nukes. Painful as it will be to the Ukrainians, they need to accept any reasonable settlement with Russia. Which probably means more of south and east Ukraine under Russian control that before.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Z9YOETL3ICc

Russia has clearly shown they don't care about world opinion, so world opinion will not deter them from using nukes.

[PedroMorales]

Russia has a deep and wide culture. The USA has none, nada.

Venezuela's problems are exasperated by the USA stealing (freezing etc) its financial and other resources.

The rouble is strong, the German economy is in the toilet, all for obeying the USA and its puppets.

American bullshit bla bla, some points responded to for any non American who has a brain

[Jmsuttr]

The problem with this article is it's already 2-month old. Russia has proved that it's capable of weathering the storm for the time being.

For as long as Europe is buying, Russia will be OK. Not fine, but OK. They're getting a billion per day, that's enough to keep them going. Now with time, as Europe is buying less and less, things will get tougher, but that can take up to a couple of years.

Flawed culture. Yes, with faulty leadership being inevitable effect. All leaders are faulty, but in a democracy they don't usually rule too long (with some exceptions, which are balanced by longstanding democratic traditions). But in the Russian tradition, you can take the best of them and watch them desperately try to stick to power no matter what, descending and degrading into madness and absolutism, unless they're murdered along the way.

Nothing will ever change in Russia unless there is a bulletproof Constitutional and enforcement mechanism prescribing and detailing democratic rotation of power.

If Putin left in 2008, as he was supposed to according to the Constitution, he would've been remembered as one of the greatest leaders ever. He wouldn't have deserved it, but that's another story.

Obviously Russia is bigger, with more resources in reserve, and is dealing with a sanctions regime that is recent and still evolving. Oh yes, and they have nukes. But those differences, and I'm sure more could be named, don't negate the usefulness of the analogy.

Venezuela and Russia are both resource-rich countries, yet both depend heavily on foreign companies to provide the technology and expertise to extract those resources. Those essential companies have, due to sanctions and other reasons, mostly abandoned Venezuela, and the same is happening to Russia. From everything I've read, Venezuela's energy industry is limping along. And they don't have to deal with issues like Siberian winters. So the usefulness of the analogy is that it highlights areas to watch, like whether Russia's oil and gas industries will suffer similar difficulties and declines.

Also, Venezuela continues to sell oil but is constrained by sanctions and is in a weakened bargaining position when buyers like China and India demand discounts. And, whatever funds they get for their oil can only be used to purchase non-sanctioned goods and services. Obviously there's a constant dance to evade the sanctions, but the fact that Venezuela is an economic basket-case is pretty good evidence that the years of isolation have taken their toll.

Has Russia fully arrived at a Venezuela-like state yet? Of course not, and my earlier post wasn't intended to imply or argue that they have, only that their paths and trajectories are similar. Russia is only at the early stages of the process that Venezuela has been burdened with for years and, being bigger and richer to begin with, has more "fat" to burn through before needing to consume muscle and bone. But, with a brain-drain of their brightest and best, and no replenishment from outside, they are truly eating their own seed corn.

About Europe buying Russian oil and gas, that's certainly the near-term scenario but, now that everyone understands what it means to be at the mercy of Russia's "weaponized" energy policy, every European country is looking for alternate supply wherever they can find it. Italy's recent deals with Azerbaijan and Algeria are examples of this. So, while the wheels may turn slowly in some circles, they're still all turning in a direction that's not favorable to Russia and will result in further isolation.

And yes, Russia gets billions for its oil and gas. That sounds great but, because of sanctions they're limited as to what they can do with that money. They can't buy needed semiconductors, as just one example, and I recently read that they're having to cannibalize washing machines to repurpose some of the chips for military use. That certainly doesn't sound like an efficient or sustainable practice. Maybe they should get help from Cuban mechanics. After all, in Havana they've figured out how to keep cars from the 40's and 50's on the road.

How a country declines, by virtue of its own flaws + external sanctions and pressures + faulty leadership, is a process rather than an event. In terms of the progress of that process, two months is nothing. What's relevant is the trajectory, and Russia is clearly trending in a downward, Venezuela-like, direction. With every passing day I see more negative straws piling on the back of the camel and I see nothing on the horizon to suggest any relief or change in the landscape.

[Xpartan]

https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2...orse-than-1991

The problem with this article is it's already 2-month old. Russia has proved that it's capable of weathering the storm for the time being.

For as long as Europe is buying, Russia will be OK. Not fine, but OK. They're getting a billion per day, that's enough to keep them going. Now with time, as Europe is buying less and less, things will get tougher, but that can take up to a couple of years.

Q: How does a country that is rich in natural resources, and had a high level of positive potential, turn itself into an economic disaster?

A: Flawed culture + faulty leadership..

Flawed culture. Yes, with faulty leadership being inevitable effect. All leaders are faulty, but in a democracy they don't usually rule too long (with some exceptions, which are balanced by longstanding democratic traditions). But in the Russian tradition, you can take the best of them and watch them desperately try to stick to power no matter what, descending and degrading into madness and absolutism, unless they're murdered along the way.

Nothing will ever change in Russia unless there is a bulletproof Constitutional and enforcement mechanism prescribing and detailing democratic rotation of power.

If Putin left in 2008, as he was supposed to according to the Constitution, he would've been remembered as one of the greatest leaders ever. He wouldn't have deserved it, but that's another story.

[Jmsuttr]

- Overthrow Putin

First, whether Putin's overthrow would change things depends on who replaces him. A like-for-like swap is unlikely to have much effect. And, as things stand right now, if he's removed (or dies) it's more probable he'd be replaced by a hawkish nationalist rather than a reformer.

After decades of Putin's autocratic and kleptocratic rule, he's either eliminated or driven out anyone who might be a credible reformer. And even high-profile opposition figures, like Navalny, are still cut from the same Moscow-Saint Petersburg, elite-centric, ethnic-Russian nationalist cloth. One of the reasons Russia seems (IMO) doomed to decades of darkness is that there doesn't appear to be anyone, or any credible movement, capable of leading them toward a different path. And it's my sense that the national mindset has been so conditioned by Putinism that they're incapable, at least at this point in time, of changing course. A rough analogy would be that of an addict who needs to hit rock bottom, with all their lies exposed and rationalizations destroyed, as an essential step toward rebuilding.

- Promise to make nice.

Second, nobody believes or trusts Russia anymore. Which means promises would be insufficient and some kind of guarantee regime would need to be crafted. I have no idea what kind of guarantees would be deemed sufficient by Ukraine and at-risk countries like Poland, the Baltics, etc. While I try to "never say never," achieving a workable level of trust may prove to be an impossible task, at least in the near-to-medium term.

- Turn on the spigots.

Third, while I agree this would be a positive step, it'll be complicated by the need to garnish all or part of the proceeds from energy sales to pay reparations. Lots of moving parts involved and the devil will be in the details.

To sum up, what Russia needs is a radical roots-up reformation. And even with that it'll be decades before any semblance of "normal" relations will return. Sadly, I don't see the necessary antecedent conditions for such a change. To me it seems more likely that Russia, after full or partial defeat in Ukraine, will retreat into isolation, continue on the path of belligerence and NATO-West blaming and, even though exposed as a (conventional) paper tiger, remain dangerous by virtue of their nuclear capability.

[WyattEarp]

https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2...orse-than-1991

Q: How does a country that is rich in natural resources, and had a high level of positive potential, turn itself into an economic disaster?

A: Flawed culture + faulty leadership.

P.S. The article also makes some good points as to why countries like India and China, no matter what kind of "help" they may offer, won't be enough to save Russia from its self-destructive path.

A lot can change quickly. Here's one scenario that would greatly benefit Russia and the globe for that matter.

- Overthrow Putin.

- Promise to make nice.

- Turn on the spigots.

[Jmsuttr]

https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2...orse-than-1991

Q: How does a country that is rich in natural resources, and had a high level of positive potential, turn itself into an economic disaster?

A: Flawed culture + faulty leadership.

P.S. The article also makes some good points as to why countries like India and China, no matter what kind of "help" they may offer, won't be enough to save Russia from its self-destructive path.

[Jmsuttr]

China's economic miracle over the last thirty plus years is nothing but astounding. As you mention, the Chinese government has had an overly-controlling hand on the economy. Market reforms and capitalism are what brought China prosperity. Xi, however, has arrogantly brought back more government control and intervention in the economy to ride out the rough patch.

Many think of economics as some kind of decadent and imperialistic Anglo-American construct. For those who study it, they know its kind of like the gravity of human commerce. Governments can't avoid the inevitable forces of economics.

When a farmer gives a blacksmith meat, milk, or crops, in exchange for a new plow, that's economics. Individual activity, no matter what gobbledygook and complicated intermediate steps are inserted, remains the foundation or "the gravity of human commerce," as you put it. It's fascinating to me that "experts" try to pretend it's anything more than a social science. If it was truly a hard science, like physics, economic prognosticators wouldn't have such a dismal track record for their predictions.

China's economic miracle is undeniable, but the most significant factors that made it possible have either faded or are altogether gone. Some of that is due to natural trends, such as demographic changes (aging, migration to cities, low birthrate, etc.), some of that is due to changes to Deng-era policies, and some of that is due to reactions from foreign countries and companies as they wake up to the true nature of China's leadership.

Low-cost production in Asia has been moving out of China to places like Vietnam, Indonesia, Cambodia, etc. Supply-chain sensitive products have been moving out since the institution of Trump's tariffs, further exacerbated by pandemic lockdowns and disruptions that continue to this day. Hong Kong, once viewed as a safer way to have a piece of the Chinese market, is now just another CCP-controlled metropolis.

In other words, the tide of positive factors and capital flows that once masked all of the bubbles and economic fragilities of China is steadily going out. Xi is like a child trying to use a toy shovel to keep the water on the beach, only to see every attempt end with the water draining into the sand. The end result is that China is stuck in a middle-income trap, from which there is no easy or short-term solution, if ever.

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/ar...le-income-trap#.

Anyone who buys into the current crop of China hype would do well to remember the lessons of 1980's Japan. At that time it was Japan that was experiencing "to the moon" growth and was widely expected to supplant the US as the dominant economic power. And China? At that time China hardly merited a second thought. With 20-20 hindsight we now see how drastically such hype can collapse. Luckily for Japan, they managed to grow wealthy enough, on a per capita basis, to have reached escape velocity from the middle income trap. China is unlikely to be so fortunate. Demographic wheels grind slowly, even if other factors are favorable. China's biggest problem is that their leaders, intentionally or unintentionally, have been removing or undermining many of the favorable factors. And, just as the USSR's centrally-planned economy was opaque to outside observers and projected strength, when the dam cracks and breaks it tends to happen suddenly.

IMHO, one of the reasons China has been relatively subdued with respect to the Russia-Ukraine war, offering mostly only token support, is because they know how much is currently on their plate and can't afford to be distracted or waste resources.

To sum up all of the above, because the individual is at the heart of economics, systems that don't value both the individual and that individual's rights (like Russia, the USSR, or the CCP) will be constantly fighting against the tide and, sooner or later, will inevitably fail.

[WyattEarp]

China, however, has systemic problems that stem from the CCP's need to maintain a narrative that supports Xi's "Mandate of Heaven" irrespective of real economic conditions. And that's reflected in their need to control everything, from capital flows to property sales to stock market levels. But central control is a practical impossibility in an environment where a near-infinite number of variables means that unintended consequences will almost certainly occur. In a world experiencing generally positive growth a lot of those problems never break above the surface. But, like a Ponzi scheme that runs out of new money, at some point the chickens come home to roost. It's hard to know exactly where China's stall-speed point is, since everything is so opaque and they have many ways to keep bad news under wraps. It's my sense that, like the proverbial Minsky Moment, it'll be something that seems relatively small that'll trigger the next crisis.

Oh yes, and all the "whataboutism" finger-pointing at the US won't change a thing about the negative direction, and likely hard landing, of the Russian and Chinese economies.

China's economic miracle over the last thirty plus years is nothing but astounding. As you mention, the Chinese government has had an overly-controlling hand on the economy. Market reforms and capitalism are what brought China prosperity. Xi, however, has arrogantly brought back more government control and intervention in the economy to ride out the rough patch.

Many think of economics as some kind of decadent and imperialistic Anglo-American construct. For those who study it, they know its kind of like the gravity of human commerce. Governments can't avoid the inevitable forces of economics.

[Jmsuttr]

https://www.reddit.com/r/UkrainianCo...e_leaving_the/

Why? Because Putin is killing Russia's present, just like he's already killed Russia's future.

[Jmsuttr]

Comrade Jmsuttr (wink), I suspect your post will generate the typical response that the United States economy and dollar are a house of cards. This even though you and I have presented the well-established academic view that having a reserve currency is a burden.

The real estate market in the United States is in a mini-bubble, but this is mostly driven by supply shortages. First, we weren't building enough houses after the 2008-2009 crash. Second, COVID slowed down real estate construction and materials. Outside a few small, desirable areas where foreigners flock, we don't have empty condo buildings. There is far less speculation than what we experienced in the 2000's.

I completely agree that the US isn't free of problems, and neither is the EU. But one big difference is the existence of a sizeable private sector with the incentive to find a way to profit from imbalances and govt mistakes. It may take a recession, or even a depression, but the errors and problems will eventually wash themselves out of the system. Also, most Western countries tend to wash out the politicians they hold responsible for the mismanagement. And one other relevant point is that in the EU and US we don't make a habit of putting such private investors in jail, as long as they keep their activities legal and above-board.

Until the invasion happened, I would have included Russia in the list of generally investable markets. Even though the problem of corruption and kleptocracy existed, many corporations and investors had figured out how to navigate those waters. But Putin changed everything and now the Russian economy has zero upside and nearly unlimited downside. Here's a current assessment from Al-Jazeera:

https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2...r-over-ukraine

China, however, has systemic problems that stem from the CCP's need to maintain a narrative that supports Xi's "Mandate of Heaven" irrespective of real economic conditions. And that's reflected in their need to control everything, from capital flows to property sales to stock market levels. But central control is a practical impossibility in an environment where a near-infinite number of variables means that unintended consequences will almost certainly occur. In a world experiencing generally positive growth a lot of those problems never break above the surface. But, like a Ponzi scheme that runs out of new money, at some point the chickens come home to roost. It's hard to know exactly where China's stall-speed point is, since everything is so opaque and they have many ways to keep bad news under wraps. It's my sense that, like the proverbial Minsky Moment, it'll be something that seems relatively small that'll trigger the next crisis.

Oh yes, and all the "whataboutism" finger-pointing at the US won't change a thing about the negative direction, and likely hard landing, of the Russian and Chinese economies.

[WyattEarp]

Both Russia and China, viewed in a long-term and macro sense, are trending in a negative direction. Both face huge demographic headwinds from declining birthrates that are unlikely to be alleviated by immigration, or other means, for years to come (if ever). China's problem is worse because of the "one child" policy that wasn't changed until much too late. Russia's problem was less acute but now has been worsened because Russia is unlikely to be attractive to immigrants as long as their economy suffers under sanctions or reparations. But Russia, with a smaller population, has less of a built-in buffer, and so may feel the effects sooner than China. Add to that the brain drain, and exodus of younger Russians, and the Kremlin is facing a major societal challenge.

Comrade Jmsuttr (wink), I suspect your post will generate the typical response that the United States economy and dollar are a house of cards. This even though you and I have presented the well-established academic view that having a reserve currency is a burden.

The real estate market in the United States is in a mini-bubble, but this is mostly driven by supply shortages. First, we weren't building enough houses after the 2008-2009 crash. Second, COVID slowed down real estate construction and materials. Outside a few small, desirable areas where foreigners flock, we don't have empty condo buildings. There is far less speculation than what we experienced in the 2000's.

[Jmsuttr]

China is on the precipice of a economic crash or a long, cyclical stagnation. All of the years of overinvestment in real estate and infrastructure is catching up with them. The Xi government is kicking the can down the road until after he is given another five year term this year. Instead of stepping down after ten years, Xi wants to be Emperor for Life. Expect the small cracks to turn into big cracks after the re-coronation.

The China cheerleaders on social media say that the Chinese government is so smart and so firmly in control that they can navigate around a deep recession and just keep growing. It's never been done in the history of global economics. Economic cycles are not something that are only prone for Western economies. Even the Soviet Union suffered from economic cycles.

The fear is that years and years of hitting the economic accelerator at every sign of weakness had set the tables for a big crash or a long stagnation similar to Japan after its economic boom.

I believe China with its large economy will find a way to keep everyone fed, but the economic strain will test the CCP's hold on the people.

Both Russia and China, viewed in a long-term and macro sense, are trending in a negative direction. Both face huge demographic headwinds from declining birthrates that are unlikely to be alleviated by immigration, or other means, for years to come (if ever). China's problem is worse because of the "one child" policy that wasn't changed until much too late. Russia's problem was less acute but now has been worsened because Russia is unlikely to be attractive to immigrants as long as their economy suffers under sanctions or reparations. But Russia, with a smaller population, has less of a built-in buffer, and so may feel the effects sooner than China. Add to that the brain drain, and exodus of younger Russians, and the Kremlin is facing a major societal challenge.

Besides the demographic issues, both economies are full of smoke and mirrors and are opaque to any attempt to realistically analyze them. For example, even though Hong Kong has now been pretty much fully assimilated by China, its economic and financial reporting systems are still a product of pre-assimilation times. HK reported a 4% decrease in GDP in Q1 2022 due to COVID lockdowns. China, however, reported a 4. 8% increase over the same period, even though their COVID lockdowns have arguably been more severe and disruptive. No matter how bad things get, China will never report a negative GDP number. That would go against their "CCP brings prosperity" narrative and would pop Comrade Xi's bubble of competent leadership. Speaking of bubbles popping, the one most likely to go soon is the Ponzi scheme that is the China property market. All of China's recent moves have been to engineer a slow deflation and soft landing. I highly doubt that will happen, so Xi will do everything to kick the can down the road until he's elected to an unprecedented 3rd term. At that point, he'll become the new Mao and will try to consolidate his hold on power and become President for life. Whether that works, or for how long it works, will be interesting to watch. China is still China, but it's not Mao's China anymore.

The bottom-line is that both China and Russia will keep doing the same dysfunctional things that got them into their current predicaments. And that's why I laugh whenever I hear someone touting their partnership! Yeah, sure, they're partners in the same way one drowning person grabs onto another to keep themselves afloat. Unless one of them is a super-strong swimmer and experienced lifeguard, they're more likely to pull each other under.

And, guess what, neither Russia nor China is a super-strong, experienced lifeguard.