• Kachajal@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Russia posted a first-quarter deficit of almost 2.4 trillion rubles amid the war in Ukraine.

    Putin has absolutely destroyed Russia’s economy and population for decades to come, for absolutely no reason and no benefit.

    That’s just tragic.

    • 133arc585@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Just FYI, 2.4 trillion rubles is only about $28 billion USD.

      The USA alone has spent about $40 billion on the war. If we look at the state’s deficit as a whole, not just war spending: the USAs first-quarter deficit is about $230 billion.

      If you calculate the first quarter deficit as a fraction of the country’s GDP, the difference between Russia and the USA is negligible. If you wouldn’t say that the USA is “destroying the economy and population for decades to come” on the monetary front, it makes no sense to make that statement about Russia either.

      • Rinox@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s a bit different though. The fall for Russia is actually massive, since last year they were still having a big surplus, while now they are facing a pretty serious deficit. Moreover this deficit comes at a time of increased spending and decreasing oil revenue, which makes up a very big part of the Russian GDP and most of the government’s budget.

        A shrinking economy with higher expenses and growing deficit is a potent combination and will probably call for even more taxes as the government tries to find a substitute to falling oil revenues.

        • 133arc585@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Can you give a citation for “decreasing oil revenue”? From my understanding their oil revenue has not decreased, it’s just that it’s not to the same partners (or at least not without passing through intermediaries like India where people can then buy it and not feel guilt by association).

  • tinwhiskers@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Belousov told RBC, a business channel, that the companies themselves proposed the taxes.

    Yes, yes. I’m sure they did :-/

  • ghost_laptop@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    To think this is some sort of bad scenario for Russia is to be blind. They are starting to effectively tax the national bourgeoisie, the thing the Usonian “left” prides so much they should do to fix all of their homeland issues regarding quality of life, and here is painted, under the lenses of a right wing news site, as a bad thing. Under any logical circumstance if a country needs money, what makes the most sense if you don’t want to hurt the people, is to tax companies, otherwise you will end up having low wages, or you will cut spending on some other form of social welfare, which in turn then produces inflation and destabilises the country since the spending power of the working class gets diminished.

    This is what Seishi Hinada, National Executive Committee member of ZENKO and the International Strategy Center, has to say about plans for the re-militarisation of Japan as a strategic geopolitical landmark in the eyes of the US to control East Asia:

    The Japanese government is making the most of the war in Ukraine and the rocket launch by DPRK is getting the general public behind its policy of massive military expansion and acquiring the capabilities to attack foreign bases. Regarding the military buildup by the Japanese government, the general public seems to be in support of those policies, but there are weak points. When it comes to a tax hike for the sake of military expansion, the approval ratings will drop. So Kishida cannot talk out loud about the tax hike, and the only option he has left is to cut the budget in every other field: social welfare, health care, education, and the rest of it. In addition, the Japanese population is shrinking quicker than anticipated. So the government is asked to take drastic measures to deal with this issue too. But again, they cannot finance it because they allocate a large share of the budget to military expenses. By exposing these contradictions, more and more people will realize the necessity to radically shift the policy of military alliance and military buildup toward peaceful dialogue and disarmament. The general public’s consciousness is changing. Kishida’s support base is not so strong.

    And he’s not some sort of “tankie” or radical left wing person, he’s someone that for decades has opposed the US occupation of Okinawa with military bases. In any circumstance, even if Russia is economically in not such a great position, this is the correct move to either get a grip, or gain some strength, not the move of a delirious and dying government.

    • zombuey@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Putin has maintained power by keeping a grip on the distribution of wealth to the oligarchs. If he starts taking money from them they will cease any support. They are the keys to his rule and if he doesn’t keep them fat and happy they no longer have a reason to continue to support and will turn on him.

    • Terminarchs@lemmy.fmhy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s a lot of fancy paragraphs just to miss the point that he could have done this, not because his finances are in the red since he made the abysmally stupid blunder of invading Ukraine, but to benefit society within his borders.