Posts by gentlestag15

urbanotter said:And what exactly is the core of the issue?
Those energy assets are under Russian ownership, which means they'll sell them off to whoever they please, at whatever price they decide fits their agenda.
The people across Europe are starting to make quite a lot of noise lately, shouting from the rooftops and threatening to cut off all imports of Russian gas and oil entirely. It feels like we're watching this massive, collective outcry build up in real time.
It feels like no matter what happens, the narrative shifts just to keep the criticism going. Even now that Russia has supposedly "delivered on what was asked," people are still finding reasons to complain, claiming that Russia is somehow blackmailing us instead. It’s one of those situations where the goalposts seem to move the moment you actually reach them.
I wouldn't go so far as to say I have a personal vendetta, but you have to look at the reality of the situation: that "old man" in the White House essentially acts as the owner of those energy resources. When he made the call that payments had to be settled in rubles, he wasn't just making a suggestion; he was setting a hard line. It reminded me of a time back when my old boss used to change the terms of our contracts overnight without any warning—you either played by his specific rules or you were left standing empty-handed. In this case, it was much more high-stakes. Those who refused to follow his lead and pay in rubles simply didn't get their energy shipments. He made it very clear that if you wanted the fuel, you had to accept his terms, plain and simple.
Those who were rooting for paying their energy bills in rubles ended up getting exactly what they asked for.

At the end of the day, what exactly defines a market price? To me, it’s simply the value I decide to set for my own goods, and then I choose exactly who I want to sell them to. It really comes down to that personal agency—deciding the worth of your own work and picking your own customers.
If I decide to walk away from a deal, those folks are going to have to find someone else to source from—and they'll be doing it at whatever price that next guy decides to set. It reminds me of a situation I dealt with back when I was working in logistics; there was this one supplier who thought they held all the cards, but once we realized we weren't playing by their rules anymore, the market shifted overnight and they were the ones left scrambling. At the end of the day, you can't force a partnership if the terms aren't right, and if they miss out on my supply, they’re essentially handing over their leverage to the next bidder.

I went ahead and included that link to the World Bank page for you, which contains all the data from 2021.
I’m really not looking to base my perspective on some questionable data pulled from a Wikipedia entry back in 2017 that you've decided to cling to.

Here is the link to the World Bank site; I can see those figures you were talking about right here.

I was spending some time browsing through the latest datasets on the World Bank website earlier today, specifically looking at various global indicators, and I found myself falling down a bit of a rabbit hole. It’s one of those things where you go in looking for one specific data point—perhaps something regarding GDP per capita or inflation trends—and before you know it, you’re two hours deep into comparative development metrics and socio-economic shifts across different continents. There is something quietly meditative about staring at these massive, organized spreadsheets. I remember back when I was studying economics in college, I used to spend entire afternoons just trying to wrap my head around how these macro trends actually translated to the lives of everyday people in places like rural Alabama versus downtown Chicago. Looking at this link now, it brings back that same sense of curiosity. It’s easy to get lost in the sheer scale of the information provided, but if you take the time to parse through it, you start to see the underlying stories of how the world is changing. It really makes you stop and think about the momentum of global progress.

Europe isn't going to sit there and let itself be blackmailed or manipulated.
There are market prices and there's the Stock Exchange for a reason.
Are you actually rooting for Russia to pull this stuff?
WTF, do you live in Russia or something?

urbanotter said:And what exactly is the core of the issue?
Those energy assets are under Russian ownership, which means they'll sell them off to whoever they please, at whatever price they decide fits their agenda.
The people across Europe are starting to make quite a lot of noise lately, shouting from the rooftops and threatening to cut off all imports of Russian gas and oil entirely. It feels like we're watching this massive, collective outcry build up in real time.
It feels like no matter what happens, the narrative shifts just to keep the criticism going. Even now that Russia has supposedly "delivered on what was asked," people are still finding reasons to complain, claiming that Russia is somehow blackmailing us instead. It’s one of those situations where the goalposts seem to move the moment you actually reach them.
I wouldn't go so far as to say I have a personal vendetta, but you have to look at the reality of the situation: that "old man" in the White House essentially acts as the owner of those energy resources. When he made the call that payments had to be settled in rubles, he wasn't just making a suggestion; he was setting a hard line. It reminded me of a time back when my old boss used to change the terms of our contracts overnight without any warning—you either played by his specific rules or you were left standing empty-handed. In this case, it was much more high-stakes. Those who refused to follow his lead and pay in rubles simply didn't get their energy shipments. He made it very clear that if you wanted the fuel, you had to accept his terms, plain and simple.
Those who were rooting for paying their energy bills in rubles ended up getting exactly what they asked for.

At the end of the day, what exactly defines a market price? To me, it’s simply the value I decide to set for my own goods, and then I choose exactly who I want to sell them to. It really comes down to that personal agency—deciding the worth of your own work and picking your own customers.
If I decide to walk away from a deal, those folks are going to have to find someone else to source from—and they'll be doing it at whatever price that next guy decides to set. It reminds me of a situation I dealt with back when I was working in logistics; there was this one supplier who thought they held all the cards, but once we realized we weren't playing by their rules anymore, the market shifted overnight and they were the ones left scrambling. At the end of the day, you can't force a partnership if the terms aren't right, and if they miss out on my supply, they’re essentially handing over their leverage to the next bidder.

I went ahead and included that link to the World Bank page for you, which contains all the data from 2021.
I’m really not looking to base my perspective on some questionable data pulled from a Wikipedia entry back in 2017 that you've decided to cling to.

Here is the link to the World Bank site; I can see those figures you were talking about right here.

I was spending some time browsing through the latest datasets on the World Bank website earlier today, specifically looking at various global indicators, and I found myself falling down a bit of a rabbit hole. It’s one of those things where you go in looking for one specific data point—perhaps something regarding GDP per capita or inflation trends—and before you know it, you’re two hours deep into comparative development metrics and socio-economic shifts across different continents. There is something quietly meditative about staring at these massive, organized spreadsheets. I remember back when I was studying economics in college, I used to spend entire afternoons just trying to wrap my head around how these macro trends actually translated to the lives of everyday people in places like rural Alabama versus downtown Chicago. Looking at this link now, it brings back that same sense of curiosity. It’s easy to get lost in the sheer scale of the information provided, but if you take the time to parse through it, you start to see the underlying stories of how the world is changing. It really makes you stop and think about the momentum of global progress.

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator...name_desc=true
This is the real table right here.
That one you're looking at is some alternative version, not a legitimate GDP calculation.
It doesn't actually track GDP in dollars based on what was produced or consumed; it's just some weird combination of that mixed with local prices in different countries.
Basically, if we just slashed fuel prices by half, your little GDP number would jump by billions overnight,
even though we haven't actually produced a single extra thing.

urbanotter said:Stock Exchange prices are largely shaped by speculators who set the terminal rates; they move based on the political climate and whatever shifts occur regarding the availability of specific commodities
In most cases, these oil traders and middlemen have already locked down their supply volumes right at the source or within the reservoirs themselves

And then there’s the "I forgot" part—forgetting that Russia itself "disrupted energy prices and supply." I honestly don't see why they wouldn't influence the selling price or the availability of their own resources.
It’s a bit like saying I can’t set the price for my own catch of fish, as if there were some rule or law preventing me from determining the value of my goods in a free market where everyone has the right to price what they sell.

Furthermore, I’m not aware of any instances where Russia was blackmailing anyone regarding prices that were already established in contracts, and from what I understand, they are still supplying gas to Europe at the agreed-upon rates.
If you happen to have some different information or evidence to the contrary, please send me a link so I can get up to speed on what's actually happening.

I get the impression that the basic rules and standard behaviors of the marketplace aren't exactly your specialty.

You clearly don't get how the EU works. Russia has been trying to pull strings in various European countries through energy, and basically, whoever is sucking up to Putin (like Viktor Orbán) gets cheaper gas, while everyone else pays a premium.
You seem to want some old guy in the White House to dictate policy and influence in Europe via energy, rather than letting the market regulate the price.
Not everyone in Europe is an idiot.

urbanotter said:I honestly have no idea what you mean by those numbers, 12,500 and 17,300.

When you take a look at the list of countries ranked by GDP per capita—which is widely considered one of the primary indicators of a nation's standard of living—an objective observer would notice that Russia and the United States are actually quite close in terms of GDP per capita.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_per_capita

Furthermore, one must also account for purchasing power parity and the actual amount of disposable income an average citizen retains after covering their essential cost of living.

I won't bother commenting on your crystal ball predictions, but I will reiterate my own point: the availability of cheaper emerging markets provides a massive advantage to countries that didn't join the sanctions against Russia. Those who did implement sanctions are forced to buy energy on the open stock exchange, often paying up to 40% more.

And as for those fears regarding the exodus of roughly 300,000 Russian citizens moving abroad—when you consider they have a population of 140 million, that migration is statistically insignificant. It would be like if ten thousand people left a mid-sized American city; it doesn't change the fundamental scale of the nation.

I gave you a link to the World Bank site with data from 2021.
That’s a bit better than the sketchy 2017 Wikipedia stats you decided to post.

urbanotter said:The topic isn't just about China and its economy, but rather how interconnected the world is—how the growth of individual economies is tied directly to sanctions against Russia.
The European Union is China's largest trading partner, yet the EU is also feeling the sting from a lack of various essential products coming out of China.
Furthermore, China has a massive reserve of growth potential within its huge population; if you raise wages by even a small percentage, that growth keeps moving forward.

If a projected growth rate of 2.7% for 2022 and 2.3% for 2023 (on an EU level) constitutes a "precipitous drop in standards" to you, then fine, I guess things are crashing.

That’s true nominally, but when you subtract inflation—which is rising faster because of the shortage of Russian oil and other raw materials, hitting double digits—the picture changes.
Some people just don't seem to grasp that a modern economy is fundamentally built on energy usage, and sanctions have significantly hampered availability while driving energy costs through the roof.
You can't avoid incorporating those costs into the price of goods and eventually passing them onto the consumer.
I don't want to turn this into an economics lecture, but if Western nations end up paying much more for energy than Eastern nations do,
there's simply no way they can maintain their current level of competitiveness. Meanwhile, the easy access to cheaper Russian energy and resources will only serve to boost the competitive edge of Eastern economies.

That has more to do with the overall cultural achievements of a society rather than just not having enough money for gas.

I can agree with that.
The Danes use bicycles quite a bit, yet they certainly have the money to buy fuel.
Unfortunately, we aren't Danes, and what might be a choice there could easily become the daily reality for many of our citizens—a sight we'll likely see on our own streets soon enough.
But anyway, moving on...
let's go watch Milić; he's old school, but always interesting, even his reruns.

Look, even before the sanctions and the war kicked off, energy prices were jumping all over the place, and supply was already shaky because Russia kept trying to bully everyone into these long-term contracts.
Russia actually started messing with energy prices and supply chains last winter, way before all those famous Western sanctions even hit the scene.
Did we all just collectively forget that part?

Anthony Hill5 said:When you sit back and read the comments from Putin's fan club—those people who desperately try to brand themselves as "realists"—you start to get the distinct impression that every single Russian individual holds at least a ten percent stake in ExxonMobil or Gazprom, making them completely immune to any sanctions whatsoever. Apparently, they are all becoming obscenely wealthy while the rest of us are left scavenging for scraps.

Since this whole war kicked off, over 300,000 Russians have bailed, mostly the highly educated types—basically huge waves of software engineers and tech pros
A ton of them ended up in Mexico, just people fleeing nowhere towns
And now, for them, Western Mexico is basically home😁

Around 20 to 30 thousand “economic refugees” from Russia have found sanctuary in Mexico, and you've probably noticed the Russian language popping up more often on the streets of the capital.

You can even hear "Spasibo" being tossed around at the Secretary of State offices or local Department of Justice branches, considering over 800 new legal entities founded by Russian citizens have popped up since April.

urbanotter said:That’s just your opinion, and it speaks volumes about your crystal ball.
You're entitled to it, even if it's wrong, and the future will soon prove that point.

As for us here in America, Russia has already overtaken us, and I am certain they will pull even further ahead.
Looking at GDP per capita, we find ourselves right alongside them on the charts,
with the reality that the purchasing power of an average Russian citizen is actually higher than that of an American citizen due to lower costs of living.
The sanctions, which have caused massive spikes in food and energy prices, will only serve to widen that gap.

China is currently the world's second-largest economy and is growing at a faster rate than any Western nation, so all serious analysts and economists expect them to overtake the US within two or three years.

According to World Bank data from 2021,
American GDP per capita was $17,300 while Russia's was $12,100.
So, we aren't exactly "neck and neck," and they haven't passed us yet either—there's still a massive third here.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator...D?locations=HR

The Russians got a little too ahead of themselves and started feeling pretty smug
it's like they've already got a choir of kids singing about how they’re going to hand Alaska back to Mother Russia 🎉
View on twitter

urbanotter said:That’s exactly why a pro-Russian outlet like the Kenyan Morning would claim the Chinese model is becoming the global gold standard.

Bad news for the West, as the ‘Chinese model’ becomes the most desirable: ‘Forget democracy, just feed us!‘

Funny enough, there are massive protests breaking out in China today because some bank collapsed.
Naturally, you’ve got hundreds of undercover cops swarming the area and things getting physical with the protesters.
Turns out even "paradise" has its issues. Who would've thought? 😁
View on twitter

By the way, Waste Management is still only picking up my trash once a week instead of twice like they're supposed to,
it’s been going on for over a month now
but honestly, who knows what's happening, since nobody from the sanitation department or even New York City bother to give us a heads-up so half the neighborhood doesn't end up leaving their bins out on the curb for nothing.

Casey Cook10 said:I guess the real question is just what kind of price tag we're looking at here.
I seem to recall someone mentioning somewhere that the new director turned down a 6% adjustment from ExxonMobil and decided to push for a whole new bidding process, where the prices might have ended up being even higher, maybe?

Yeah, I'm curious too. They rejected a 6% bump and pushed for a new tender, only for the best bid to come back at a whopping 60% markup.
Because of that move, Broadway has been stuck without any asphalt repairs for months.
If they went through a formal bidding process, they're basically forced to buy it at those inflated 60% rates now.

It’s the exact same thing that happened with natural gas last summer. Prices ticked up slightly, but the utility provider refused to pay the higher rate, so instead, the costs just skyrocketed way past the original increase.

Dana Robinson4 said:Would a little something like $200 or $300 a month actually solve the issue?

For now, those $300 billion in frozen Russian foreign exchange reserves should do the trick.
Once this war is over, we can use that money to kick the thief out of the house for good.

Amanda Allen4 said:Sure, someone can seize property through theft, but let’s be clear—that doesn't change their legal status as an owner! People used to pull stunts like this all the time during the massive privatization waves back in the day.

Look, you can definitely acquire property by being a crook, but that's not what we're looking at here.
No court and no country on this planet recognizes this theft.
Zero legitimacy, zero legality.
What we're seeing right here is just straight-up, classic robbery.

Amanda Allen4 said:Look, if you actually seize something, you become the owner—you don't get to act like some tenant!

Nah, then you're just a thief, not an owner.
Can I just barge into your house, kick you out, and claim the place as mine?
Am I suddenly the homeowner, or am I just some low-life criminal?

Dana Robinson4 said:Since when did it become standard practice for a tenant to decide how much rent they pay and how much stays in the landlord's pocket?

Russia basically squatting in an entire house—take Crimea, for instance—and they aren't paying a dime for their fleet to stay in San Diego.

Richard Wilson4 said:And the best part? If they weren't in NATO, Washington, D.C. and Paris wouldn't say a single word about the Baltic Sea...

The thing is, there have been thousands of NATO troops stationed there since 2015, including Germans
we had some of our guys there too, though I'm not sure if they're still around
but if a hundred Germans ended up getting killed, those leaders wouldn't say a damn word

Zachary Booth36 said:It is simply a byproduct of a backward society that feeds on such megalomania.
They indulge in the fantasy that they can intimidate others like a common bully.

It is quite alarming how little respect they show toward Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.
If it weren't for the Americans, Russia would swallow them whole without hesitation.

Latvia is 27% Russian and Estonia is 25%
which is way higher than the 17% in Ukraine—where they might get swallowed up before they even get attacked at 100%.
The people in those countries know exactly what's at stake, which is why they throw everything they've got into helping Ukraine.
The NATO alliance is basically becoming the ultimate safe haven; you end up in it whether you want to be or not, just to keep the big bear from knocking on your front door.

brighthound13 said:The truth is, the Ukrainians never actually wanted to take action, did they? They didn't want to preserve any part of the Soviet legacy; instead, they were just looking for ways to plunder the country, signing those agreements, contracts, and memorandums merely as a formality. Those papers aren't worth the ink they're written with, serving only to mask corruption that borders on treason against their own people.

Just look back at Yanukovych's "golden clamshells" bullshit. One of the main reasons the Maidan protests happened—the push to get rid of Yanukovych and move closer to the European Union—was because of that systemic corruption left over from the USSR. And obviously, nobody is mourning the loss of that kind of heritage.
Betraying your own people would actually mean keeping that twisted system alive.
Are you seriously claiming that international treaties between nations aren't worth the paper they're written on?
You're honestly being ridiculous with these takes.

brighthound13 said:As for the chemical weapons production facilities and equipment, I believe he sourced those from West Germany (though there were mentions of America as well). France sold him a nuclear reactor, while Gerald Bull and various companies in Belgium and Britain worked on converting conventional missiles into weapons of mass destruction. With their assistance, he even developed other WMDs, like the Super Top. He also bought naval mines from Italy. On top of all that, he received massive amounts of funding via American satellites in the Persian Gulf and directly from the USA itself.
The West didn't seem to mind Saddam's genocide against the Kurds because he was essentially doing their dirty work for Turkey, and since the Kurds were aligned with Iran, it just put them in a position where Saddam was given a free pass by the West.

Like I said, all of that is peanuts compared to what the Soviets were selling them.
And honestly, other players from America weren't exactly turning up their noses at making a quick buck off the blood of Kurds, Iranians, and everyone else.

rowdypilot53 said:The Americans funneled billions to Saddam? I was under the impression we always stood against aggressors...

I don't know, all I know is that about 90% of what was in Saddam's military arsenal was Soviet gear.
The other 10% came from France.
So basically, the Soviets/Russians were the biggest supporters of Saddam.
Plus, I can still recall the whole Iran-gate scandal, where the US was caught funneling weapons to Iran.

Lisa Jackson7 said:Nobody in the West actually gave a damn about the invasion of Iran... if anything, they were all for it.
Hundreds of thousands have been sacrificed in the name of these "principled battles for democracy"—which is really just code for using our sons and then tossing them aside like trash.

I mean, sure, they should’ve been losing their minds over the attack, especially after Iranians stormed their embassies and nationalized all their assets.
But that doesn't make Saddam's crimes any less of an atrocity, regardless of how much the attack on Iran was driven by nothing but a grab for those Iranian oil fields.

Nancy Gomez26 said:In Iraq, the objective was to find weapons of mass destruction, yet they were nowhere to be found. I suppose Saddam just hid them exceptionally well.

Iraq attacked Iran, which cost hundreds of thousands of lives, and then they moved in on Kuwait
and once again, hundreds of thousands died.
That’s basically how it should go for any aggressor nation trying to snatch territory from their neighbors.
I'm certainly not shedding any tears over what happened to Saddam.
Let's just hope Putin follows right in his footsteps.