China involved in all of this....

[Mottie]

apparently Russia asked china to delay the invasion

Eh?
I reckon China, seeing how Russia has been ostracised by the rest of the world, wouldn't want the same to happen to them. They need to remain trading partners with the rest of the world so I think they'll slowly distance themselves from them.

 

[Deleted member 18243]

Russia is one of the few countries (and I mean really few), who can produce domestically everything from a screwdriver to space rockets, tanks, jet fighters, airplanes, fridges, TVs, cars, and the only country to have a fleet of icebreakers that can navigate through the north pole as if it were a highway.

That's the most important thing a country can have, self-sufficiency. Britain used to have it before the loony left made us believe that Britain should be abolished.

 

[AngleEyes]

That's the most important thing a country can have, self-sufficiency. Britain used to have it before the loony left made us believe that Britain should be abolished.

Britain has never been self sufficient.

 

[AngleEyes]

That is nonsense.

Quote.

Widen your thinking a little bit more!! I will help you with that by a simple question: can Spain produce what Russia can?
The answer is NO, Spain’s GDP is mostly about services, Russia GDP is not.
Russia is one of the few countries (and I mean really few), who can produce domestically everything from a screwdriver to space rockets, tanks, jet fighters, airplanes, fridges, TVs, cars, and the only country to have a fleet of icebreakers that can navigate through the north pole as if it were a highway. Spain, on the other hand, cannot produce everything that Russia can, even though they have a similar GDP. That’s because GDP or GDP PPP are measured by quantity of goods produced by country.

So, for example, let’s say Spain produces only olives (50 tons) and they sell them for 1 $ billion, Russia is producing 10 tons of olives and 1 tank, 1 space rocket, one TV and selling them for 1$ billion. The GDP here is the same, it’s 1$ billion dollars. But of course you can clearly see who is stronger here, simply because Russia can during an emergency or a war or in case of a demand raise the production much much easier than Spain can diversify its production from olives to tanks

Russia is an economic dwarf:

Russia is a small country. From an economic perspective, that is. According to the IMF the gross domestic product (GDP) of Russia amounted to $1,648 billion in 2021. This is about the same size as the combined GDP of Belgium ($582 billion) and the Netherlands ($1,008 billion) in the same year. Even if you add those two countries together, you still have a small country. Russia’s GDP represents barely 10% of the EU’s GDP. Russia is an economic dwarf in Europe.
The tanks and combat aircraft that must be produced to wage the war are investments that are economically useless. This contrasts with investments in machines (and other production factors) that make it possible to produce more in the future. Tanks and fighters will not allow one extra ruble of production in the future. They will, however, crowd out productive investment. The economically small country that Russia is today will therefore become even smaller in the future.
The fact that Russia has such a small GDP while the country has 146 million inhabitants (more than 5 times the population of Belgium plus the Netherlands) hides the fact that most Russians live in relative poverty. Putin will have to push them even further into poverty to realise his megalomaniac ambitions. It is doubtful whether this policy will strengthen his dictatorship.
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2022/03/02/russia-cannot-win-the-war/​

 

[ajohn]

Britain has never been self sufficient.

Depends how far back you go and what is meant by being self sufficient. My view is that the trading balance is a good way of looking at that and what aspects are causing it to be positive.Manufacture needs a solid domestic market - not easy to achieve when imports are cheaper.

 

[AngleEyes]

Depends how far back you go and what is meant by being self sufficient.

How far back do you want to go? Pre-Roman invasion, or earlier, before Britain was an island?

About 950,000 years ago
A broad natural land bridge connects southeast Britain to mainland Europe. Footprints and stone tools at Happisburgh, Norfolk, were left behind by members of an unknown human species who crossed this bridge, becoming the first known Britons.

About 450,000 years ago
At the peak of the harshest glaciation, Britain is too cold for humans to survive. Thick ice sheets extend across northern Europe.
An enormous glacial lake builds up to the east. When it finally breaks free, its force rips through the land, forming the beginnings of the English Channel.

About 400,000 years ago
Temperatures have warmed and the ice has thawed. The sea has risen to present-day levels, but Britain is still connected to northern Europe by a narrow land bridge. This has allowed early Neanderthals, Homo neanderthalensis, to colonise Britain.
Over the next 350,000 years Neanderthals retreat from and return to Britain as temperatures fluctuate.

About 60,000 years ago
Sea levels drop as water freezes into ice caps and glaciers, creating a vast grass-covered plain between England and the continent.
Neanderthals finally return. A jaw bone found deep in a cave near Torquay on the south coast reveals that within 20,000 years the species Homo sapiens also arrives in Britain.

About 20,000 years ago
The most recent glacial period is at its most severe. Ice covers much of Britain again.
As conditions start to deteriorate about 25,000 years ago, humans disappear from Britain once more.
After a prolonged absence that lasts more than 10,000 years, our species eventually returns.

etc.
https://www.nhm.ac.uk/discover/the-making-of-an-island.html#:~:text=About 950,000 years ago,southeast Britain to mainland Europe.

Britain has never been self sufficient, even the earliest humans were migrants.​

 

[ajohn]

Russia is an economic dwarf:

You will probably find that those GDP's are like ours - amount spent by the population. It's not that simple in practice but essentially true,

Look at trade balances. 2019 to avoid covid and other aspects. Russia $128b, Belgium $3b, Netherlands $16b which is one hell of a lot more than previous years for some reason, could be services the way it's mentioned. Previously similar to Belgium. UK minus $35b. China $165b

That can then be compared with population to get an idea of productivity but it may not be that simple. Take China - they need to be fed and all working in services or manufacture would need a far larger market out of their country.

Then buried in it all is cost of living. Tough one as it can vary widely.

 

[ajohn]

Here we go. Some one in the USA who reckons they can establish a no fly zone. Not over all of Ukraine and not shooting down Russian planes unless they wont get out of it.

 

[AngleEyes]

You will probably find that those GDP's are like ours - amount spent by the population. It's not that simple in practice but essentially true,

Look at trade balances. 2019 to avoid covid and other aspects. Russia $128b, Belgium $3b, Netherlands $16b which is one hell of a lot more than previous years for some reason, could be services the way it's mentioned. Previously similar to Belgium. UK minus $35b. China $165b

Where do you get your figures from?

That can then be compared with population to get an idea of productivity but it may not be that simple. ...
Then buried in it all is cost of living. Tough one as it can vary widely.

Productivity is obviously very low in Russia when compared with the poplation:

The fact that Russia has such a small GDP while the country has 146 million inhabitants (more than 5 times the population of Belgium plus the Netherlands) hides the fact that most Russians live in relative poverty.
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2022/03/02/russia-cannot-win-the-war/
​

It isn't that the cots of living varies widely as much as the massive discrepancy in wealth of Russians.
Some have vast wealth, while the majority of others are living in poverty.

 

[AngleEyes]

Here we go. Some one in the USA who reckons they can establish a no fly zone. Not over all of Ukraine and not shooting down Russian planes unless they wont get out of it.

There is some worryingly vague and perhaps untrue excuses for not introducing a no-fly zone:
1. Russians are not using many planes. Yet we see on our TVs, planes flying over Ukraine and sending missiles. We also see helicopters hit.
2. Most Russian weaponry is shelling not missiles from planes, so a no-fly zone wouldn't affect that. Well shelling is far more indiscriminate than missiles. But the missiles are also obviously being used indiscriminately.
3. Russians are not using many planes. So why send anti-aircraft weapons to Ukraine?