


franco wrote:So what country's economy has grown from 1.2 trillion to 1.5 trillion US$using the West's measuring stick
since January 1st.
![]()
miketheterrible wrote:https://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/92668/
The Central Bank of Russia in March increased its gold holdings by 1.5% or about 25 tons per month
Austin wrote:miketheterrible wrote:https://sdelanounas.ru/blogs/92668/
The Central Bank of Russia in March increased its gold holdings by 1.5% or about 25 tons per month
They should buy gold more aggresively then they are doing right now , Buy all the gold russia produces and buy as much as you can from global market.
Russia for its size and economy should atleast have 5000 T of gold , Even pidly Germany has 4000 T of gold.
CBR is beholden to USD and have upped buying the green buck more than gold.
miketheterrible wrote:
Issue with buying lots of gold fast, is it will make the prices skyrocket. As well, buying USD when it fluctuates so much isn't a bad move, as the money can be used for foreign trade and purchasing Gold.
Did you know that lots of nations, when even at war with US, use US currency to purchase goods? This is a tactic used for decades.
Singular_Transform wrote:miketheterrible wrote:
Issue with buying lots of gold fast, is it will make the prices skyrocket. As well, buying USD when it fluctuates so much isn't a bad move, as the money can be used for foreign trade and purchasing Gold.
Did you know that lots of nations, when even at war with US, use US currency to purchase goods? This is a tactic used for decades.
the redemability of dollar papers depending on the willingness of the US to honor this papers.
And it doesn!t honor them , example iran.
miketheterrible wrote:I did. and I don't agree with everything he is suggesting. A lot of it is bullshit like the cheap credit. What people here cant seem to figure out is that cheap credit caused a lot of shit for Russia that she is still trying to get rid of - high debt. Companies weren't competitive even with cheap credit. Why is that? Because they figured it was easier to live off of cheap credit and bare minimum production/expansion. Now things are different and companies are having to use their own resources. Glazyiev can say they aren't able to expand but that is pure bullshit, which has been obvious to anyone of us that follows sites like Sdelanounas or others. Russia's industrial production has been up for the first quarter already and agriculture is expanding at rates Russia has not seen since Soviet Union. Yet credit rates are through the roof.
Hate to break it to you Austin, but even countries who have absolutely poor relations with US have a lot of money in USD reserves. Iran is a nobody in terms of international strength compared to Russia. So that is why no one bat an eye to it. Russia on the other hand has a lot more influence and more nations are reliant on Russia's resources than they were on Iran. Lets just say Russia can make it difficult for metallurgy industries, aerospace, space, and other industries for US. Have you noticed US has not blocked Russia's investments into USD? I mean, we keep bleating about near possible war, but it has not happened. Think long and hard about that one.
miketheterrible wrote:Rupee isn't used internationally and USD is usually used as reserve when making purchases abroad that otherwise may not have worked before, especially when ones currency fluctuate a lot. That is when one plays the currency market. Rupee isn't part of it.
What people here cant seem to figure out is that cheap credit caused a lot of shit for Russia that she is still trying to get rid of - high debt. Companies weren't competitive even with cheap credit.
kvs wrote:Austin is 100% on target. The whole "cheap credit" angle is complete diversionary BS. A CBR rate of 4% is not cheap
credit. Consumers would still see over 10% personal loan rates and credit card rates around 20%. Please stop bringing
up this cheap credit shite since it makes a negative contribution to this thread.
Glazyev is also right about Russia not having accessible credit levels for consumers. Exhibit A proving this is the collapse
in car sales. Big ticket items like cars are not bought for cash up front anywhere in the OECD. So why the different standard
for Russia?
What people here cant seem to figure out is that cheap credit caused a lot of shit for Russia that she is still trying to get rid of - high debt. Companies weren't competitive even with cheap credit.
This is a lie. Give some numbers or take a hike. You are claiming here that $540 billion in gross private and government debt
in Russia is excessive. On what basis? You make it sound like there should be zero debt in Russia. This is so ignorant
it is breathtaking. Just by the nature of capitalist economics there will be a minimum debt level (well above zero) which
scales with the size of the GDP and reflects the annual innovation turnover. If Russian companies never had to retool for
new models of production then they could run zero debt. Since this is a nonsensical economic regime, they need "cheap
credit" to retool. Some companies require long term debt to avoid bankruptcy and your instant gratification philosophy
is idiotic. For example AMD. It is always swimming in red ink but without it Intel would be a monopoly. As long as AMD
can keep paying the interest on its debt, that is good enough. Zero debt zealotry is gross economic incompetence.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_position_of_the_United_States
So the US gross debt (public and private) hit 300% of GDP in 2008. Even with $740 billion 2013 gross debt, the figure
for Russia was about 33% in 2013. And Russia has a debt problem? BTW, the roughly $200 billion drop in Russia's gross
debt after 2014 reflects unloading by all entities that could not afford the servicing with the reduce forex rate. So the
current $540 billion is sustainable since it is obvious that the debt holders are in no hurry to unload. In fact, as posted
by Austin the debt is starting to increase. This is normal since Russia is returning to GDP growth.
The superstructure of a robust all-weather portfolio to preserve wealth in the coming collapse and mitigate an ice-nine asset freeze looks like this:
Physical gold and silver, 10 percent (coins and bars, no numismatics)
Cash, 30 percent (some in physical notes)
Real estate, 20 percent (income producing or agricultural)
Fine art fund, 5 percent (museum quality only)
Angel and early venture capital, 10 percent (FinTech, natural resource, water)
Hedge funds, 5 percent (global macro, long-short equity, or arbitrage)
Bonds, 10 percent (high-quality sovereigns only)
Stocks, 10 percent (natural resource, mining, energy, utilities, tech only)
A family business should not be counted among investible assets. It should be held outside this portfolio. All of these assets, except cash, stocks, and bonds, can be held by direct title in physical or contractual form without reliance on banks brokers, exchanges, or digital records. Those assets cannot be hacked. Some are illiquid. Most are immune from ice-nine lockdowns. This allocation offers protection from inflation, deflation, and panics.
Importantly, investors must be vigilant and nimble. The time will come when the cash allocation needs to be moved quickly into another category, perhaps land, gold, or art. Likewise bonds may need to be sold once inflation emerges. This is not a “set it and forget it” portfolio. Still, it’s a good starting place for uncertain times.
Austin wrote:Ministry of Finance of the RF budget revenues from the oil industry in 2025 will be reduced by 1 percentage point GDP
Economy & Business April 22, 8:53 update date: April 22, 9:21 UTC + 3
oil reserves structure is changing and more and more share passes on as reserves, said Finance Minister Ilya Trunin
Share
2 2
KRASNOYARSK, April 22. / TASS /. The revenues of the Russian budget from the oil industry in 2025 will be reduced by 1 p. P. Of GDP due to the changes in the structure of oil reserves and allowances, he told reporters Deputy Finance Minister Ilya Trunin within the Krasnoyarsk Economic Forum.
"If you do not change rates, the 2025 revenue will be reduced by 1 percentage point of GDP structure of oil reserves is changing and more and more share passes on. (As reserves - TASS approx.) Firstly, the sector's share in GDP ceteris paribus reduced. and secondly, the preferential rates applied more widely because of exhaustion ", - he said.
According to the law on the budget for 2017 is scheduled arrival of about 5 trillion rubles oil and gas revenues (37%) of the 13.5 trillion rubles total. The proportion was about the same last year - 35.7%. Earlier, when the oil price was approximately $ 100 per barrel, the share of oil and gas revenues in the budget of more than 50%.
Подробнее на ТАСС:
http://tass.ru/ekonomika/4203476
Russian Ministry of Finance misleadingly refers to the “federal budget”
I must, however, here alert to a discrepancy in the figures that a keen reader could possibly spot. In fact, the Russian government reported that the oil and gas revenue had fallen to comprise 37.4% of the federal budget revenue and not the 21% of which I wrote above. The key word here is federal. For some archaic reasons, which I cannot fathom, the Russian Ministry of Finance publishes its reports in reference to the misleading “federal budget”. The correct reference would be the consolidated budget. Thing is that due to an accounting convention and administrative rules the Russian budgetary system is divided into three main categories: the federal budget, the regional budgets, and the state social security funds. The various types of taxes flow into one of these budgets, and only a consolidation of them all in one will show what is the total revenue of the state. All of the personal income tax and approximately two-fifths of the corporate profit tax as well as the social security contributions (referred to as ‘payroll taxes’ in economic speak) stay outside the federal budget. It is easily conceivable that this division is changed from one year to another, indeed what has frequently happened over the years.
It is therefore quite nonsensical to rip big headlines out of what the oil and gas revenue is of one of the parts of the state budget. This is damaging for the economy as decision makers will wrongfully believe in too big a dependence on those sources, and indeed it feeds the Russophobes with a juicy argument.
kvs wrote:They keep referring to some narrow definition of the federal budget as "the budget". BS. I swear TASS, Sputnik, etc. are all infested
with 5th column elements. The only meaningful budget number that should be used for Russia is its consolidated budget:
https://www.awaragroup.com/blog/share-of-oil-and-gas-in-russias-tax-revenue-dropped-to-21/
Russian Ministry of Finance misleadingly refers to the “federal budget”
I must, however, here alert to a discrepancy in the figures that a keen reader could possibly spot. In fact, the Russian government reported that the oil and gas revenue had fallen to comprise 37.4% of the federal budget revenue and not the 21% of which I wrote above. The key word here is federal. For some archaic reasons, which I cannot fathom, the Russian Ministry of Finance publishes its reports in reference to the misleading “federal budget”. The correct reference would be the consolidated budget. Thing is that due to an accounting convention and administrative rules the Russian budgetary system is divided into three main categories: the federal budget, the regional budgets, and the state social security funds. The various types of taxes flow into one of these budgets, and only a consolidation of them all in one will show what is the total revenue of the state. All of the personal income tax and approximately two-fifths of the corporate profit tax as well as the social security contributions (referred to as ‘payroll taxes’ in economic speak) stay outside the federal budget. It is easily conceivable that this division is changed from one year to another, indeed what has frequently happened over the years.
It is therefore quite nonsensical to rip big headlines out of what the oil and gas revenue is of one of the parts of the state budget. This is damaging for the economy as decision makers will wrongfully believe in too big a dependence on those sources, and indeed it feeds the Russophobes with a juicy argument.
We know the Russian Ministry of Finance is infested with 5th column elements like the CBR.
Austin wrote:kvs wrote:They keep referring to some narrow definition of the federal budget as "the budget". BS. I swear TASS, Sputnik, etc. are all infested
with 5th column elements. The only meaningful budget number that should be used for Russia is its consolidated budget:
https://www.awaragroup.com/blog/share-of-oil-and-gas-in-russias-tax-revenue-dropped-to-21/
Russian Ministry of Finance misleadingly refers to the “federal budget”
I must, however, here alert to a discrepancy in the figures that a keen reader could possibly spot. In fact, the Russian government reported that the oil and gas revenue had fallen to comprise 37.4% of the federal budget revenue and not the 21% of which I wrote above. The key word here is federal. For some archaic reasons, which I cannot fathom, the Russian Ministry of Finance publishes its reports in reference to the misleading “federal budget”. The correct reference would be the consolidated budget. Thing is that due to an accounting convention and administrative rules the Russian budgetary system is divided into three main categories: the federal budget, the regional budgets, and the state social security funds. The various types of taxes flow into one of these budgets, and only a consolidation of them all in one will show what is the total revenue of the state. All of the personal income tax and approximately two-fifths of the corporate profit tax as well as the social security contributions (referred to as ‘payroll taxes’ in economic speak) stay outside the federal budget. It is easily conceivable that this division is changed from one year to another, indeed what has frequently happened over the years.
It is therefore quite nonsensical to rip big headlines out of what the oil and gas revenue is of one of the parts of the state budget. This is damaging for the economy as decision makers will wrongfully believe in too big a dependence on those sources, and indeed it feeds the Russophobes with a juicy argument.
We know the Russian Ministry of Finance is infested with 5th column elements like the CBR.
Just to clarify if I got that right if he is trying to say that Russian Fedral Budget must include the regional federal and state social security funds etc as takes flow into these budgets in one form of the other and so much be called cosolidated budged.
Such thing does not happen in India , We have Federal Budget or Budget of Union Government as we call it here and then we have State Budget which is budget of individual State of India , there is also Muncipal Budget which is huge but lets leave that aside......During Budget Formulation they have separate Union and State budget , There is nothing like consolidated Budget of both.
Union Budget have their own revenue and expenditure , State have their own Revenue and expenditure , There are taxes from Companies , Products , Individuals that flow into both the budget sometimes the Union Government will tax X on some produce and State will Tax Y on the same product so it becomes revenue for both but we dont have different Union and State Budget.
|
|