Bloomberg: The U.S. Can’t Bring Russia ‘to Its Knees’

[CostinR]

Pension reform has everything to do with the budget. Why do you think the budget can't cover them anymore? Just demographics? That's a bit too easy. I think Russia is lacking money. :P

Russia has yet to change its ways. This isn't an obligation by the EU. We've made the mistake in the past, invite some sub-standard country and hope they reform themselves into something that is tolerable in the EU. It doesn't work. Russia will conform to human rights and proper democratic standards or it will never be part of the club. And I'm not talking about being part of the EU, I mean part of the club of free countries that try to do what's right.

Russia's budget deficit isn't that significant. It's around 3% of their GDP. It's a number they can handle with no major problems.

They can't handle so many older people that are retiring. Heck my country raised the retirement age some years ago and it didn't go so well for the ruling party.

[Shalcker]

Pension reform has everything to do with the budget. Why do you think the budget can't cover them anymore? Just demographics? That's a bit too easy. I think Russia is lacking money. :P

You are severely overestimating sanction impact here. Did you ever bother to check damage estimates from your sanctions given by EU experts?

Do you know how much Russia spends on pensions right now?

Pension Fund has 7.15 trillion roubles (or about 110 billion $) budget this year, 40% of which come from government budgetary transfers and the rest comes from current pension payments. That's just pensions, without any other social security benefits.

Meanwhile, total Russian government budget for 2018 is 15.258 trillion roubles of profits and 16.529 roubles of expenses.

Demographics mean that current pension payments will dwindle as working age population decreases, and then Russian budget would have to shoulder higher portion of them - which means higher deficit or lowering pensions. Sanctions or no sanctions.

And our technocrats hate high deficits (something your German economists seem to share), while our "rulers" clearly understand what will happen with them with lower pensions.

Russia has yet to change its ways. This isn't an obligation by the EU. We've made the mistake in the past, invite some sub-standard country and hope they reform themselves into something that is tolerable in the EU. It doesn't work. Russia will conform to human rights and proper democratic standards or it will never be part of the club. And I'm not talking about being part of the EU, I mean part of the club of free countries that try to do what's right.

Well, can you explain to me why you invited Ukraine into "association" then?

They clearly aren't on path of "reforming themselves into something that is tolerable to EU".

[AsGryffynn]

Germany, France and the UK have close ties to the US. It's ok if Spain isn't too thrilled about the US, they'll still be there when Spain needs them. That's what NATO means. That's what the EU means. And that's why Shalcker's inane talk about dividing the West is just as ludicrous as any invasion of Russia, as you rightly point out. Not sure why you're talking about invading Russia, since I didn't bring it up, though.

I brought that up because I thought you were going on a Skroeiestic rant. I am glad I was wrong though, since you've admitted what everyone in any of this circlejerk "my country is better than yours" click bait threads should: that this geopolitical pissing contest has officially frozen and turned into "propaganda wars" and we better get chairs, pop corn and a drink, because things will start looking better than a CW comedy and stay that way for... a while, to say the least.

This has basically turned into "poking each other with sticks".

But three countries aren't really the EU or NATO. You're referring to the "Big Three" and even among those, France has always been more of an "ally of convenience" than a genuine one (that's Britain's schtick).

[Easo]

Of course such options exist - i just don't believe US would be actually willing to employ them, given your general distaste to international law when it limits your actions.

EU policy will change, obviously.

I am not american, genius. Did you really just judge that due to my avatar? That fully explains your answer.

Yes, they would change. But you are not answering as to how.

[AsGryffynn]

Pension reform has everything to do with the budget. Why do you think the budget can't cover them anymore? Just demographics? That's a bit too easy. I think Russia is lacking money. :P

Russia has yet to change its ways. This isn't an obligation by the EU. We've made the mistake in the past, invite some sub-standard country and hope they reform themselves into something that is tolerable in the EU. It doesn't work. Russia will conform to human rights and proper democratic standards or it will never be part of the club. And I'm not talking about being part of the EU, I mean part of the club of free countries that try to do what's right.

They don't lack any more money than we do, but their population is aging too fast and their debt will skyrocket if the reforms aren't pushed through sooner than later. They aren't news to them. They've been postponed for more than 30 years.

And I'm afraid around 40 percent of this mudball doesn't cut it "into the club". Hell, we've had Police Officers beat peaceful Indy protesters over here shitless.

- - - Updated - - -

You are severely overestimating sanction impact here. Did you ever bother to check damage estimates from your sanctions given by EU experts?

Do you know how much Russia spends on pensions right now?

Pension Fund has 7.15 trillion roubles (or about 110 billion $) budget this year, 40% of which come from government budgetary transfers and the rest comes from current pension payments. That's just pensions, without any other social security benefits.

Meanwhile, total Russian government budget for 2018 is 15.258 trillion roubles of profits and 16.529 roubles of expenses.

Demographics mean that current pension payments will dwindle as working age population decreases, and then Russian budget would have to shoulder higher portion of them - which means higher deficit or lowering pensions. Sanctions or no sanctions.

And our technocrats hate high deficits (something your German economists seem to share), while our "rulers" clearly understand what will happen with them with lower pensions.

Well, can you explain to me why you invited Ukraine into "association" then?

They clearly aren't on path of "reforming themselves into something that is tolerable to EU".

I bet even Vladimir is regretting not siding with Med's cadre instead of the Russian equivalent of the British DUP now.

And Ukraine was pretty much just a pity "invitation", and it's not really an invitation. The recent improvements in Kiev have been almost entirely home grown by younger Kievan startups shooing the Ukrainian Nazis out of the city into the northwest. Sadly, in Russia, they are still allowed to show their faces in public (Ksenia Sobchak was a joke, but I smiled when she chucked a glass of water at Zhirinovsky).

But deficits are indeed the Russians most immediate concern even though they have plenty of leeway. The plan is to keep it that way.

[Shalcker]

I am not american, genius. Did you really just judge that due to my avatar? That fully explains your answer.

In absence of other information one has to make some assumptions.

But then your opinion about US is exactly as valid as mine.

Yes, they would change. But you are not answering as to how.

That depends on who gets the lead.

- - - Updated - - -

I bet even Vladimir is regretting not siding with Med's cadre instead of the Russian equivalent of the British DUP now.

But "Medvedev's cadre" are the ones leading "technocrat" faction really. Ones that actually could work.

Lots of Medvedev's projects and gains are kept.

And Ukraine was pretty much just a pity "invitation", and it's not really an invitation.

It was part of dwindling EU expansion project that hit natural limits with Ukraine where costs started to out-weight the gains.
...and they weren't even willing to pay fair price for it.
...supporting oligarch/nazi rebellion just to avoid it falling to Russian side.

The recent improvements in Kiev have been almost entirely home grown by younger Kievan startups shooing the Ukrainian Nazis out of the city into the northwest. Sadly, in Russia, they are still allowed to show their faces in public (Ksenia Sobchak was a joke, but I smiled when she chucked a glass of water at Zhirinovsky).

Nazis aren't allowed to show their face really; most Russian nazi organizations are outlawed and/or persecuted.

Zhirinovsky is populist-nationalist, something like current Italian PM Renzy - used to make those leaning that way largely "safe" for those in power.

But deficits are indeed the Russians most immediate concern even though they have plenty of leeway. The plan is to keep it that way.

Plan itself is sound; it is doubtful world economics will be stable long enough for it to work it's magic.

But they are quite careful with both global economic and geo-political risks as well.

[AsGryffynn]

But "Medvedev's cadre" are the ones leading "technocrat" faction really. Ones that actually could work.

Lots of Medvedev's projects and gains are kept.

Even though they pretty much left half of his plans untouched.

It was part of dwindling EU expansion project that hit natural limits with Ukraine where costs started to out-weight the gains.
...and they weren't even willing to pay fair price for it.
...supporting oligarch/nazi rebellion just to avoid it falling to Russian side.

The EU has been overextended for a while now, mostly because they act as a pseudostate without the overarching structure to do so.

It's closer to an old Empire, and as seen in the past, those are notoriously hard to stabilize in Europe. Visegrad itself would leave now if they knew how. As much as people don't like Russia, they also ought to realize the EU is broken.

Nazis aren't allowed to show their face really; most Russian nazi organizations are outlawed and/or persecuted.

Zhirinovsky is populist-nationalist, something like current Italian PM Renzy - used to make those leaning that way largely "safe" for those in power.

Zhirinovsky? The guy who said he wanted to turn Russia into an actual dictatorship with booze being sold everywhere and blamed Jews for ruining Russia's financial system even though the mad hatter himself was one?

He's either a fascist, or the leader of Norsefire. As for Renzi, you're confusing him with Matteo Salvini.

[Slant]

I brought that up because I thought you were going on a Skroeiestic rant. I am glad I was wrong though, since you've admitted what everyone in any of this circlejerk "my country is better than yours" click bait threads should: that this geopolitical pissing contest has officially frozen and turned into "propaganda wars" and we better get chairs, pop corn and a drink, because things will start looking better than a CW comedy and stay that way for... a while, to say the least.

This has basically turned into "poking each other with sticks".

But three countries aren't really the EU or NATO. You're referring to the "Big Three" and even among those, France has always been more of an "ally of convenience" than a genuine one (that's Britain's schtick).

The EU hasn't been under attack in its current form. Nor do I honestly see anyone outright attacking the EU as it is today. The creation of a EU defense force would further deter whatever would happen. I think the big nations may have gotten the message about global wars being a stupid thing. At least for the time being. What we need to get under control, however, is Russia's antics in neighbouring nations. I don't care what they do over there in Mongolia, that's none of our business, but Ukraine... that's a bit too close to home. They need to understand that the Soviet Union ceased to exist and their influence in Europe is next to nil. They're European by geography only, but politically, they might as well be on the moon.

Having said that, the real victims are as usual the Russian people. For their sake, I hope the nightmare of Putinism ends soon. He's not doing the country any favours. Russia really, really can't out-American the Americans.

- - - Updated - - -

They don't lack any more money than we do, but their population is aging too fast and their debt will skyrocket if the reforms aren't pushed through sooner than later. They aren't news to them. They've been postponed for more than 30 years.

And I'm afraid around 40 percent of this mudball doesn't cut it "into the club". Hell, we've had Police Officers beat peaceful Indy protesters over here shitless.

To be honest, I think you're not giving humanity enough credit. We're used to instant solutions these days. Evolution doesn't work like that. And Europe has fought bitter and bloody wars to get where we are now, realising that cooperation is the only way to move forward in a meaningful manner. Other cultures and nations may still have to go through that process. And some others, like China, may choose an entirely different path altogether. I keep saying on this forum that people shouldn't be as scared of China in an expansionistic sense. Economically? Hell yeah, but China has next to no ambition to actually grow beyond the contested areas that are known, Tibet, Taiwan, Southern Chinese Sea... those things. But beyond that, China is unlikely to start an expansion like Germany did in the 30s, for example.

Having said all of that, I disagree that it's just demographics in Russia. It's part of the problem, sure, but these sanctions work against their social problems and make it that much harder for Russia to fix it. That's the intended goal and it works wonderfully. Doubt it'll get Crimea released, however. Not with Putin at the helm.

[AsGryffynn]

The EU hasn't been under attack in its current form. Nor do I honestly see anyone outright attacking the EU as it is today. The creation of a EU defense force would further deter whatever would happen. I think the big nations may have gotten the message about global wars being a stupid thing. At least for the time being. What we need to get under control, however, is Russia's antics in neighbouring nations. I don't care what they do over there in Mongolia, that's none of our business, but Ukraine... that's a bit too close to home. They need to understand that the Soviet Union ceased to exist and their influence in Europe is next to nil. They're European by geography only, but politically, they might as well be on the moon.

The EU has been attacked by most of Visegrad, Russia, Turkey, Italy... and even the effing UK!

As for Ukraine... if we went ahead and worried about their problems for being "close to home", we'd be worrying about a lot more about Turkey right now. So why do you insist Russia is not European, but Ukraine is? Let me remind you they are still far more alike than they're different.

As for your USSR comment, this reeks of someone who didn't know how they collapsed or operated in the first place. As a whole, Russia alone was the ultimate source of the Soviet Union's clout. All other republics simply provided manpower, aggregate crops for their unproductive (thanks Lysenko) agriculture and specialized industry (Ukrainian shipyards, Baltic semiconductors). From 1957 to 1991, however, everything that the USSR achieved could've been achieved by the Russians alone. The main reason the post Baltics USSR collapsed was because Russia seceded, and without them, there was no union.

So the enemy you face today is more or less the same one that you feared would one day rule the Earth. It just looks less scary.

Having said that, the real victims are as usual the Russian people. For their sake, I hope the nightmare of Putinism ends soon. He's not doing the country any favours. Russia really, really can't out-American the Americans.

Even though Americans have notoriously low war weariness thresholds?

They already kind of drew the curtain on almost everything they needed. Right now, all they need to do is work on their inner act, which depends on the policies of the ruling party and less on the guy whose actual influence over mundane policies is rather small.

- - - Updated - - -

To be honest, I think you're not giving humanity enough credit. We're used to instant solutions these days. Evolution doesn't work like that. And Europe has fought bitter and bloody wars to get where we are now, realising that cooperation is the only way to move forward in a meaningful manner. Other cultures and nations may still have to go through that process. And some others, like China, may choose an entirely different path altogether. I keep saying on this forum that people shouldn't be as scared of China in an expansionistic sense. Economically? Hell yeah, but China has next to no ambition to actually grow beyond the contested areas that are known, Tibet, Taiwan, Southern Chinese Sea... those things. But beyond that, China is unlikely to start an expansion like Germany did in the 30s, for example.

You're not getting my point.

You're holding Russia to a specific set of standards you're familiar with, ignoring the fact we trade and have amicable links with equally grating partners, but since they aren't an obstacle to the EU's interests, nobody cares. Does that mean we will once they grow strong and challenge us?

You see, it's this "know your place" memtality that annoys me. Power abhors a vacuum, yet it's also restless. It seeks new masters, new horizons and thus moves towards other places. What you consider standard international conventions today will not last forever and any attempt to keep things this way is short sighted, selfish and honestly hubristic.

Basically, we should stop holding Russia to Western standards. Russia is culturally Western, but they've always pinned more towards Eastern societal norms (stability over free will, thus the Soviet moniker, "Eastern bloc"). However, to call them "non European" would be revisionist in the worst possible way. Europe isn't "Western" (Turkey says hi), Europe isn't "liberal" (we were ruled halfway by tinpot dictators until the 50-70's (De Gaulle and Franco, anyone?) and we're not going to be defined by a former group of loosely related colonies an ocean away. Our views and choices don't override those of others and are no less valid, but theirs are not either.

So let's stop seeing them as being "out of touch" with the modern world when your definition of "out of touch" would see half the planet added to the list, which would mean it might be the pro-democracy cadre that's out of touch with reality.

Having said all of that, I disagree that it's just demographics in Russia. It's part of the problem, sure, but these sanctions work against their social problems and make it that much harder for Russia to fix it. That's the intended goal and it works wonderfully. Doubt it'll get Crimea released, however. Not with Putin at the helm.

Except when they don't. When you have a country as vast as Russia, they and they alone, have the final say on whether they sink or swim. The only thing sanctions do is give them an ultimatum: no more postponing or procrastinating; get your shit together NOW! and nothing but, mostly because the reforms are freeing overhead, not adding it. If anything, sanctions give Vlad a perfect scapegoat to pin the blame into instead.

We've been played like a fiddle, solely because we didn't bother learning what we're up against, and Russia put us against a corner. We can either freeze the game or let them win and bring a strong team to the negotiating table. Our choice.

...or you could, of course, hope for a USSR scenario where a complete loon like Zhirinovsky destroys Russia from the inside. That's doable, for all we know...

[Shalcker]

You see, it's this "know your place" memtality that annoys me. Power abhors a vacuum, yet it's also restless. It seeks new masters, new horizons and thus moves towards other places. What you consider standard international conventions today will not last forever and any attempt to keep things this way is short sighted, selfish and honestly hubristic.

I want to highlight another angle.

Russia knows it's place and acts like it.

All those things Russia does that are "frowned upon" by EU? They are done because Russian position allows them. Due to UN Security Council veto and all other artifacts of the past.

"But Russia shouldn't do it! Think of international law!" - international law was written by USSR/Russia (together with others) after WW2 for their own benefit. Shielding it from any real repercussions is one of the points of current system.

If you want Russia to suffer, you want to break international law system, not preserve it.