You need to ask yourself what fuelled the 4% GDP growth in 2023 and 2024. I think it was probably the ramp up in military production. If that reached its maximum level in Q1 2024, that would explain the dramatic drop in GDP growth between Q1 2024 and Q1 2025.
Well, you do like to regurgitate that their economy is doing bad but not as bad as the west.You need to ask yourself what fuelled the 4% GDP growth in 2023 and 2024. I think it was probably the ramp up in military production. If that reached its maximum level in Q1 2024, that would explain the dramatic drop in GDP growth between Q1 2024 and Q1 2025.
2.2% unemployment is indicative of a serious lack of labour to service an economy's demand for labour. Many hundreds of thousands left Russia when it invaded Ukraine and later to avoid conscription. Additionally several hundred thousand Russians of working age are in Ukraine or have been killed or disabled after being sent there.
While stubbornly high, the inflation rate is falling in Russia. It is believed that VAT will increase from 20% to 22% in the forthcoming budget which may prove inflationary - or not so since economic growth is expected to drop sharply this year and a drop in growth rate generally dampens inflation.
Medvedev? I don't take this propagandising 'attack dog' seriously. To me he talks as much unfounded nonsense as Trump.
Well, you do like to regurgitate that their economy is doing bad but not as bad as the west.
Russia's economy not doing as badly as the west? Russia's capital has been redirected from investment in the economy to investment in the arms production economy. An economy using its capital to produce arms at the expense of non-military production is not creating wealth. Produce a house, a car, a washing machine, an airliner and you have produced things that satisfy consumers. Producing a tank or a fighter aircraft or a missile to destroy another country's wealth does not make your own country wealthier. A missile used to destroy part of another country's wealth and in so doing is itself destroyed has not created wealth. It is economic madness to apply land, labour and capital to destroying rather than creating wealth.Well, you do like to regurgitate that their economy is doing bad but not as bad as the west.
Are you the same guy or was it the user 500 that embarrassed himself that the rubble was falling while it went back up and continued to fluctuate?
can you provide statistical proof excluding the fact their economy is doing better than the west? This sounds like a long explanation to just saying, "no"Russia's economy not doing as badly as the west? Russia's capital has been redirected from investment in the economy to investment in the arms production economy. An economy using its capital to produce arms at the expense of non-military production is not creating wealth. Produce a house, a car, a washing machine, an airliner and you have produced things that satisfy consumers. Producing a tank or a fighter aircraft or a missile to destroy another country's wealth does not make your own country wealthier. A missile used to destroy part of another country's wealth and in so doing is itself destroyed has not created wealth. It is economic madness to apply land, labour and capital to destroying rather than creating wealth.
not to embarrass you but that is because Europe is paying 3 times the amount for Russian gas from China. Why do you think Germanys industrial production capabilities has cost them to fire over 100,000 people a few weeks ago? I am just sticking around if we will escalate to a nuclear war, 4 territories or all territories to the dniepr river.there are no shortages of gasoline.
It is not as easy as it was to ascertain what is happening in the Russian economy. Some data and stats that were previously published by the state are no longer published. When the data is bad, why publish it? It only punctures the facade of all being well in the Russian economy that the Kremlin seeks to maintain.can you provide statistical proof excluding the fact their economy is doing better than the west? This sounds like a long explanation to just saying, "no"
not to embarrass you but that is because Europe is paying 3 times the amount for Russian gas from China. Why do you think Germanys industrial production capabilities has cost them to fire over 100,000 people a few weeks ago? I am just sticking around if we will escalate to a nuclear war, 4 territories or all territories to the dniepr river.
not to embarrass you but that is because Europe is paying 3 times the amount for Russian gas from China.
MOSCOW (Reuters) -Sergei Aksyonov, the head of Russia-controlled Crimea, said on Thursday that disruptions in fuel supplies were related to the closure of some oil refineries as a gasoline crisis widened across Russia.
No I'm not. If you read my analysis of the value of the ruble I was arguing that it was to the Russian government's financial advantage for the ruble to fall in value. I have explained my view once. Not spending time repeating myself.Are you the same guy or was it the user 500 that embarrassed himself that the rubble was falling while it went back up and continued to fluctuate?
It is not normal for banks to convert deposits into IOU's without the depositors' agreement. This move sets a precedent threatening confidence in the western banking system. Is it worth doing just to save finding $300 Billion USD? I don't think that is a good idea. Better for 'the West' to fund Ukraine out of its own pockets than to undermine confidence in its banking system IMO.The European Unionis conspiring to create the most significant funding pool for Ukraine to this point in the war. Out of the nearly $300 Billion usd in frozen Russian assets stuck in Western banks, $175 Billion usd of funds are in Belgium's Euroclear. Those funds have now become liquid and can become legally transferred.
To avoid the claim that the EU is trying to illegally steal Russian assets, a plan is being created to remove the Russian money in the form of "cash" and replace it with equivalent of low interest IOUs. The cash would then be used as follows. $45 Billion usd would be used to immediately pay back the loan that the G7 floated Ukraine earlier this year, that was due to be paid back using the profits from the frozen assets. That would leave roughly $130 Billion usd that could be then transferred to Ukraine, giving them plenty of additional cash for weapons and ensuring that the budget shortfall that Ukraine was expecting in 2026 and 2027 is fully covered.
Germany, one of the biggest hurdles towards the implementation of this plan lent their support for it today. EU leaders will meet in Copenhagen next week to discuss further details of how to put the plan into action.
![]()
Germany backs EU’s ‘creative’ plan to send frozen Russian cash to Ukraine
Talks will come to a head during an informal meeting of EU leaders in Copenhagen next week.www.politico.eu
Europe is stupid, and famous for shooting themself in their own foot, what did you expect?It is not normal for banks to convert deposits into IOU's without the depositors' agreement. This move sets a precedent threatening confidence in the western banking system. Is it worth doing just to save finding $300 Billion USD? I don't think that is a good idea. Better for 'the West' to fund Ukraine out of its own pockets than to undermine confidence in its banking system IMO.
This move sets a precedent threatening confidence in the western banking system. Is it worth doing just to save finding $300 Billion USD? I don't think that is a good idea. Better for 'the West' to fund Ukraine out of its own pockets than to undermine confidence in its banking system IMO.