• Vergissmeinnicht@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 hour 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.