Four years after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the Russian economy is showing clear signs of structural exhaustion. The contours of a genuine economic endgame are coming into view for Russia. This is the finding of a new Kiel Report published by the Kiel Institute for the World Economy and the Stockholm Institute of Transition Economics.
  • Vergissmeinnicht@lemmy.caEnglish
    11·
    6 hours ago

    So you didn’t read, nor understand. Which shouldn’t be surprising given that having basic understanding of simple math can only mean copying from an LLM to you. You too can learn what the scary triangles mean, it’s not that difficult.

    Why did the $300 billion from the NWF plus whatever hundreds of billions of QE drain out of the economy?

    You keep ignoring that part for some odd reason.

    • Photonic@lemmy.worldEnglish
      11·
      5 hours ago

      I read, but the only thing I don’t understand is your stupidity and stubbornness.

      And sure, they used up their NWF. War is expensive. Who would have thought? Does that prove anything about sanctions?

      And a 300B+ (rubles not USD) expense is not the same as an economy being ruined. Especially when the GDP of that country is about 200 trillion rubles. And you’re trying to tell me I don’t understand how this works? Riiiiiight…

      And talk about ignoring:

      Early in the war, the broad consensus was that the new sanctions would devastate the Russian economy. By some metrics, though, Russia’s economy has proved resilient to date.

      From the US government

      Following Russia’s full-fledged invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Western countries imposed unprecedented economic sanctions. Yet there is limited evidence that these measures have inflicted substantial economic pain on Russia, as the recent slowdown has largely reflected factors unrelated to sanctions.

      From the ESCP geopolitics institute

      Why are you ignoring this?

      Edit to your edit: yes the “triangle” –which is actually not a triangle but a Greek capital letter delta, the more you know– symbol gave you away. A human commenting online would just spell out delta. So did the language that is completely different to your other comments.

      • Vergissmeinnicht@lemmy.caEnglish
        1·
        4 hours ago

        War is expensive. Who would have thought? Does that prove anything about sanctions?

        Yes, because war spending is still spending, and acts as a stimulus, increasing GDP. The amount of increased spending accounts for a bigger share of GDP than their GDP growth figures account for, so without this extra spending their GDP growth would be negative, due to sanctions.

        And a 300B+ (rubles not USD)

        You’re right, I had my numbers mixed up. The NWF spending accounted only for $70B (5.3T Rubles)

        It’s the gutting of the liquidity of Russia’s banks that accounted for the majority of the stimulus and was even higher than the $300B that I remembered, at $446B (36.6T Rubles) by early 2025 https://navigatingrussia.substack.com/p/russias-hidden-war-debt-full-report

        This plus the NWF spending accounts for 20% of GDP, or roughly 5% per year over 4 years. Russia’s growth numbers were significantly lower than that at between -2.1% and + 4.3%. So on average, without the stimulus spending not a single year since the beginning of the war would have been positive economic growth.

        A human commenting online would just spell out delta.

        Admit you don’t know calculus without telling me you don’t know calculus. You write the letter, you don’t spell it out.

        And the non-monetary consequences of sanctions, that you also keep ignoring. From your own source:

        Russia’s military has difficulty procuring key components

        Which is why the Iskander production figures are fluctuating for example, and are much lower than they would be without sanctions. To come back to your favourite weapon, the ballistic missile.