American Eagle wrote:
These 5 Facts Explain Russia’s Economic Decline
1. Lack of Diversification
It’s not simply the size of your economy, but its diversity and resilience that counts. For years, the Kremlin has supported and protected large state-owned companies at the expense of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). But those smaller firms are the foundation of any strong and well-diversified economy. SMEs spur innovation and respond effectively to changing times, technologies, and consumer tastes. In the EU, SMEs contribute an average of 40 percent to their respective countries’ GDP; in Russia, SMEs contribute just 15 percent. Those are daunting figures for anyone looking to start a business in Russia.
Things aren’t getting better—between 2008 and 2012, Russia’s private sector lost 300,000 jobs while the state added 1.1 million workers to its payroll. Rather than diversifying, Moscow is doubling down on its state-centered approach to economic development.
These claims are lies. They count Rosneft and Gazprom and UAC and every other such enterprise as "state". These are autonomous
companies that are distinguished by the fact that the Russian state is a dominant shareholder. Please tell us more how UAC (which includes
Sukhoi) is a "failure" and then go f*ck off.
Number of SMEs in Moscow Region, including medium-sized enterprises, small and micro-enterprises, individual entrepreneurs
2010 ---------- 2011 --------- 2012 --------- 2013
109.3 thousand 129.4 thousand 165.9 thousand 215.3 thousand
So the number of small and medium sized businesses in the Moscow region (a key economic zone in Russia) doubled in three
years but Time wants everyone to believe that nothing of the sort happened.
2. At the Mercy of Oil Markets
The price of oil has now fallen below $45 a barrel—welcome to the new normal. OPEC continues to pump oil at historic rates as it tries to price out competitors, and Iran expects to bring over a million new barrels a day to world markets after the lifting of international sanctions. These are deeply troubling developments for Moscow, which relies on oil and gas sales for nearly 50 percent of its government revenues. In 1999, oil and gas accounted for less than half of Russia’s export proceeds; today they account for 68 percent. Moscow has grown so reliant on energy sales that for each dollar the price of oil drops, Russia loses about $2 billion in potential sales. For Russia to balance its budget, oil will need to surge back to $100 a barrel. That’s going to take a while.
But only 13% of Russia's GDP depends on oil and natural gas. The fact that government revenues are 40% dependent (see below, they can't
even get the number right) says that the Russian government is doing the optimal thing. It has shifted the tax burden onto the resource
sector instead of onto Russian citizens. Russians pay 13% flat income taxes. Eat your heart out you NATO chauvinist numbskulls.
3. At the Mercy of Sanctions
Moscow’s over-reliance on crude oil—which makes up 40 percent of Russia’s state budget—has also left the country particularly vulnerable to international sanctions. Given the age of many existing fields, Russia will increasingly depend on cutting-edge technology from Western firms to pump oil from difficult-to-reach shale and deep-water reserves. These sources could account for more than 15% of the world’s undiscovered oil reserves and 30% of the gas. Some argue that Russia can turn for help to China—but while China wants more Russian oil and gas, it doesn’t have the technology Russia needs to draw those resources from the ground. The IMF believes sanctions could eventually cost Russia 9 percent of its GDP.
The above is simply laughable delusion and wishful thinking. There has been no "cutting-edge" technology revolution in the oil and gas sector
in the last 15 years. Maximal contact drilling (tree pattern horizontal wells) and 3D seismic tomography for high resolution field topology
characterization were developed decades ago. Any updates are incremental. The USSR led the world in developing well drilling technology
during the 1980s as it drilled the deepest wells in the world. Russia bought out oil and gas field services (technology support) companies
during the early 2000s and closed any technology gap it had.
Why would Schlumberger buy a Russian technical services company if Russia lacked capacity in this field? Also, this buyout proves that
the flow of "cutting edge" tech is not stopping.
BTW, "cutting edge" tech is a Pavlovian trigger phrase for western media consumer doggies. It parks their brain in neutral and they can
feel all warm and fuzzy inside and stop using their brains for critical thinking.
4. Russia’s Other Problems
Russians aren’t nearly as productive as they could be. For each hour worked, the average Russian worker contributes $25.90 to Russia’s GDP. The average Greek worker adds $36.20 per hour of work. And Greece is not a country you want to trail in productivity. The average for U.S. workers? $67.40.
Let's play retarded games with numbers. Only fucktards would believe that the US GDP is purely domestically produced. The above brain dead
calculation takes the US GDP and divides it by the number or workers and then the number of hours they work per year. But that is not how you
calculate productivity. You sum up the fraction of the GDP that is produced by those workers and then divide. So $67.40 becomes closer
to $30. Also, the US economy has a 40% "financial industry" fraction. This "industry" consists of a few workers pushing buttons and computers
doing all the transactions. So we have an apples and oranges comparison with Russia where the GDP does not have such a large financial industry
fraction. The US "efficiency" is due to its huge external GDP footprint and its huge financial industry.
In addition, endemic corruption costs the Russian economy between $300 and $500 billion each year, or roughly the cost of three Greek bailout packages combined. This year, Freedom House gave the country a 6.75 on its corruption scale; 7 is “most corrupt.”
Anyone citing "Freedom House" a neocon PAC is either a certifiable idiot or malicious. These rankings are transparent BS since they
place Mexico and Indian way above Russia. Mexico is notoriously corrupt and the narco-mafia war proves this. In India we had
$14.5 billion in food aid stolen by corrupt local officials for resale (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-08-28/poor-in-india-starve-as-politicians-steal-14-5-billion-of-food). I challenge any NATO drone to find a similar example in Russia.
It’s no surprise then that well-educated Russians are leaving their country in droves. Between 2012 and 2013, more than 300,000 people left Russia in search of greener economic pastures, and experts believe that number has only risen since Moscow’s annexation of Crimea last year.
Yet more lying through context removal. Of those 300,000 people most were from the Central Asian 'stans who went home.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/markadomanis/2013/02/27/the-myth-of-russias-brain-drain/ (I will throw Adomanis, the fuckwit as a source).
http://russia-insider.com/en/2015/01/20/2557 (hilarious distortion through broken telephone misquotation, great job NATO drone media!)
5. No Incentive to Change
Russia’s biggest problem may be denial. Typically, a stumbling economy brings about change in political leadership. Some countries, like Greece, take this to an extreme—Athens has seen five different governments in five years. But Russians have gone the other way—as their economy has slowed, Putin has grown more popular; he now holds an approval rating of 86 percent. More surprising is that while 73 percent of Russians are unhappy with their economy, 7 in 10 approve of the way Putin is handling it.
How is that possible? About 90 percent of all Russians get their news from Russian television channels directly controlled by the Kremlin. By framing sanctions and the invasion of Ukraine as “Russia vs. the West”, Putin has succeeded in stoking the country’s nationalism. Today, 63 percent of Russians have a very favorable view of their country, up from 29 percent in 2013 and 51 percent in 2014. It’s easier under those circumstances to blame bad economic circumstances on outsiders. Credit where credit’s due—Putin knows what his people want to hear. It’s just not clear if he knows how to fix his flailing economy.
God, what total rubbish. I have heard this line about Russians being in denial and not "voting for change". As Bill Clinton said, "it's the economy, stupid".
Russian wages went from $80 per month in 1998 to $960 per month as of early 2014 (you need to use PPP metrics to account for ruble devaluation).
Putin and his "regime" have delivered systematically better living conditions year in and year out. Why should Russians vote from some NATO chosen
5th column dirtbag? Take your hubris rotted thinking and peddle it elsewhere NATO fuckwits!