Stuff being blown up still counts towards production, but it doesn’t actually add any value. Changing tanks in storage to tanks blown up on the battle field isn’t actually good for the economy, it just looks like it for some metrics.
The US economy (and much of the rest of the world) actually went into recession after ww1. Then after ww2 you have to consider that the US was one of the very few industrialized countries that didn’t get its cities blown up. The war was ‘good’ for the US mostly because it was much worse for everyone else.
Yeah that’s tricky, I’d rather accelerate brain drain. But Russia has used immigration as a weapon before, targeting propaganda and sympathies in areas Russians immigrate to.
But Russians are still getting out somehow, conscription is a great motivator.
They aren’t, but Russia has used their presence as one. What was one of their justifications for invading Ukraine? The Russian speaking population and historic ties in the easternmost regions of Ukraine. They’ve also shipped millions of people into Crimea to shift the demographics and public opinion there.
The Russian speaking population weren’t just immigrants though, those were people born in Ukraine who spoke Russian as their native language. Kinda different.
Some definitely, but not all. And it’s multigenerational too. The USSR moved people around a lot too for demographic control to minimize separatist tendencies.
Besides, BRICS is probably going to default to Yuans. Like would you pay in Brazilian pesos, Russian Rubles or Indian whatever the heck that currency/economy is?
I don’t believe they’ll conclude that dealing with 5 or more currencies at the same time as being effective, especially when said currencies come from dumpsterfire economies.
I can also tell you that they will not be going for the EURO, and with all the debt to China… where does that lead them?
Trade cannot stop. That was the point of SWIFT and that is the point of BRICS.
But now I’m being presumptuous, which one is want to do on the internet.
Hypothetically it might make sense to pay pesos for Brazilian seed oil and rubles for Russian fossil fuel, as this would ensure no trade deficits exist between countries, but China is so much more productive than the rest of them that it might just default to Yuan. I’m still optimistic about the possibility of trade in national currencies, though.
Is war good for the Russian economy? Seems like Russia’s economy is running at its hottest pace in years.
Stuff being blown up still counts towards production, but it doesn’t actually add any value. Changing tanks in storage to tanks blown up on the battle field isn’t actually good for the economy, it just looks like it for some metrics.
You could say about the US during WW1/WW2, but look at their economy leading up to each war and following it.
The US economy (and much of the rest of the world) actually went into recession after ww1. Then after ww2 you have to consider that the US was one of the very few industrialized countries that didn’t get its cities blown up. The war was ‘good’ for the US mostly because it was much worse for everyone else.
But not during the war. The US did well after the war because Europe and Asia were wrecked by war and America wasn’t.
Dedollarization is good for their economy. They’re actually increasing exports in some sectors of their economy despite the SWIFT lockout.
I’ll sure they’re increasing their exports of skilled labor at least!
America deports Russians that try to immigrate or claim asylum. Doh!
Yeah that’s tricky, I’d rather accelerate brain drain. But Russia has used immigration as a weapon before, targeting propaganda and sympathies in areas Russians immigrate to.
But Russians are still getting out somehow, conscription is a great motivator.
Immigrants are not a weapon wtf
They aren’t, but Russia has used their presence as one. What was one of their justifications for invading Ukraine? The Russian speaking population and historic ties in the easternmost regions of Ukraine. They’ve also shipped millions of people into Crimea to shift the demographics and public opinion there.
The Russian speaking population weren’t just immigrants though, those were people born in Ukraine who spoke Russian as their native language. Kinda different.
Some definitely, but not all. And it’s multigenerational too. The USSR moved people around a lot too for demographic control to minimize separatist tendencies.
Russia uses immigrants as weapons on Europe
If those people are weapons, does that mean you want to kill them?
Go away troll
It’s also very good for Xi Jinpeng. The central kingdom shall rise again.
That’s kinda orientalist.
Dedollarization is good for China, but they’re hardly some kind of mystical asiatic kingdom.
I was being facetious.
Besides, BRICS is probably going to default to Yuans. Like would you pay in Brazilian pesos, Russian Rubles or Indian whatever the heck that currency/economy is?
I don’t believe they’ll conclude that dealing with 5 or more currencies at the same time as being effective, especially when said currencies come from dumpsterfire economies.
I can also tell you that they will not be going for the EURO, and with all the debt to China… where does that lead them?
Trade cannot stop. That was the point of SWIFT and that is the point of BRICS.
But now I’m being presumptuous, which one is want to do on the internet.
Hypothetically it might make sense to pay pesos for Brazilian seed oil and rubles for Russian fossil fuel, as this would ensure no trade deficits exist between countries, but China is so much more productive than the rest of them that it might just default to Yuan. I’m still optimistic about the possibility of trade in national currencies, though.