What's new in Syria

[Schmelzer]

Business as usual in Latakia too - a mountaintop village named Touma on the way to Kinsabba was taken by the Syrian army - as well as around Kuweiris, where (following the 1 village per day rule) the village Tal Maksour has been taken from ISIS. http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/tiger-forces-advance-in-east-aleppo-tal-maksour-captured/

ISIS has, unfortunately, been successful too - they have killed a lot of civilians, at least 30, in two suicide attacks in Damascus. Less successful was their attempt to attack, again, in Deir Ezzor, where they have reached nothing but huge losses. I do not trust claims about enemy losses in general, but simply for comparison with the claims in Damascus, ISIS is claimed to have lost around 60 fighters.

Last but not least, a nice article http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...i-tech-shock-to-west-and-israel-a6842711.html about the Russian "rusty" military. Some points they have not understood - namely the guiding system for dumb bombs, which allows to use old dumb bombs thrown by old fighters as precision bombs - but in comparison with joepistole they do not need much to look like experts.

 

[joepistole]

If you don't understand even this, I'm sorry for you.
But, ok, for the stupid: Find the difference between saying "If the oil price is falling by a factor 2 you can buy 2 times less for your oil", which is what I have actually said, and “Oil price falling by a factor of 2", what you claim I have said.

Oh I understand "this" just fine. That isn't the problem. You are evading the issue, that is the problem. The fact is the price of oil has dropped by more than 80 percent and Russia is highly dependent upon oil to fund its economy and its government. Your hypothetical isn't relevant. And as previously and repeatedly noted, your knowledge of basic macroeconomics is, to be mild, nonexistent. As you have been repeatedly told, just because the price of oil falls, it doesn't mean that in and of itself will create more demand for oil and that increased demand will cause prices to revert back to historical highs. That belief, the belief you have asserted, reflects a profound ignorance of basic macroeconomics.

Dreams about further falling oil prices (actually they even rise) and about US oil as a game changer deleted. You would better care about how the US oil producers survive the low oil price. http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=79687&p=irol-rigcountsoverview suggests that the rig count is seriously going down, now being 619, down -924 in comparison with last year. Of course, once the rig is working and the oil comes out, one will not stop this because of a lower price. But nobody invests into new rigs, so with some delay in time the supply goes down.

Well, here is the thing, the US continues to bring new oil production online even at these low prices. Because the US is much more productive, it can out produce Mother Russia. Don't forget, thanks to Putin's military adventurism, Mother Russia has problems investing in and drilling new wells. And as previously and repeatedly mentioned, Iran will begin bringing new oil production online this year. Iran has stated it intends to bring an additional 2+ million barrels per day to the marketplace this year. That alone will more than offset any real or imagined decline in US oil production.

Not yet, but there seem to be a lot of indicators that this has to be expected. If this does not happen, fine. But if it happens, then the prices of all raw materials tend to go down.
And then, of course, oil would remain down or even go further down during the whole crisis time.

You have a knack for ignoring inconvenient facts.

Electric cars seem quite stupid, first one creates electric energy, when one has to store it in batteries, when one has to travel them around - a lot of loss in each step, instead on a single loss burning gasoline. Such stupidity survives only based on state support. It is, of course, very good for mankind in the long range if one can get rid of the much too big dependence on oil. But this in no way means that oil producers become poor guys. And you fantasies that Russia has changed nothing remains propaganda nonsense. It exports now grains, weapons, atomic power, even software, and has also shifted toward selling oil products instead of oil itself. Saudi Arabia seems in much bigger financial trouble.

And that kind of thinking comrade is why Mother Russia is always behind the 8 ball. If Mother Russia exported all those things in significant quantities, it wouldn't be so dependent upon oil and oil prices. It's that reality thingy again comrade. More and more automobile manufacturers are offering and selling electrical cars. They are not only cheaper to operate, they perform better as well and they don't need government subsidies in order to survive.

The fact is global warming is real, and virtually every country in the world, except for Mother Russia, realizes our dependence upon oil as an energy source is coming to an end.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/12/world/asia/china-us-xi-obama-apec.html?_r=0

The point being? A positive trade balance means the land, as a whole, gains from foreign trade, gets more money from export than it has to pay for imports. If the price for the main export product falls a lot, one would expect that this changes. It hasn't.

The point being, your assertion that a positive balance of trade was some kind of protection from a depression. It isn't. Russia is in a depression.

A little bit, when it was very much down. Later, during the last year, there was even a time when they have sold rubles. What one has to do to make profit - to buy rubles when they are very cheap, to sell them when they are worth more.

The reserves have been reduced, by 27,1%, to \$371,3 billion. But similarly the things one has to care about have been reduced too, and even more. One criterion for sufficiency of reserves is if they are sufficient for 3 months of import. This criterion has been reduced by 33,6% to \$78,0 bill. Another one is the amount of foreign debt which has to be paid next year. Reduced by 42,8%, to \$134,1 bill. http://aftershock.news/?q=node/368568 for the numbers.

As was previously demonstrated, Russian officials don't share your optimism. I guess Russian government officials are part of that vast NATO propaganda conspiracy you keep promulgating.

Nice to see that it makes you happy if some people are not getting paid. So, don't worry, you will always have a good chance to become happy, because it always happens that some people do not get paid because their firms have problems and go bankrupt, and the Western press will always find them, once one can make propaganda with this. Of course, if there is some crisis, there will be even more such cases. So, nice times for you. If the big world crisis comes, it will hit Russia too, even if it is prepared quite nicely for this, because it depends now much less on the rest of the world than two years ago.

Who said I was happy people (i.e. Russians) aren't getting paid? You are setting up yet another illogical argument, a straw man to be more specific. I'd much rather have Russia as a modern, prosperous, stable, democracy and a responsible member of the international community. It's a tragedy Russia, and more specifically Putin, has decided to repeat all the mistakes of the Soviet Union.

And it's not just private companies who are not paying their workers, the Russian state isn't paying some of its workers. In many cases workers are working for free for extended periods of time as they did during the Soviet era. So are you advocating the Russian state should go bankrupt? It wouldn't be the first time.

The fact is things are not rosy in Mother Russia as you would have people believe. Contrary to your previous assertions, conditions in Mother Russia are dire and getting worse by the minute.

 

[Schmelzer]

Oh I understand "this" just fine. That isn't the problem.

Yes, the only problem would be that you have lied about what I have said (by omitting the "if", you have suggested that I have made a claim which I have not made), but this is, in your case, not a problem, we are already used to this.

You are evading the issue, that is the problem. The fact is the price of oil has dropped by more than 80 percent and Russia is highly dependent upon oil to fund its economy and its government. Your hypothetical isn't relevant.

It is, because for those who have understood the particular factor 2 was only an example, it could have been 5 or 10 or 20 or whatever else.

As you have been repeatedly told, just because the price of oil falls, it doesn't mean that in and of itself will create more demand for oil and that increased demand will cause prices to revert back to historical highs. That belief, the belief you have asserted, reflects a profound ignorance of basic macroeconomics.

Yet another lie, because I have not made statements about any particular highs, even less about historical highs, thus, you accusations, as usual, are based on lies.

If Mother Russia exported all those things in significant quantities, it wouldn't be so dependent upon oil and oil prices.
...
The point being, your assertion that a positive balance of trade was some kind of protection from a depression. It isn't.

As usual, you are unable to get the points. The point is that Russia would be as dependent from the oil price as you claim, then it would be close to impossible to imagine a reduction of the oil price for more than 80% but the trade balance remaining positive. The reason why this is possible is that Russia exports a lot of the things I have mentioned. Of course, another reason is that imports have been reduced - in part intentionally, by deliberate counter-sanctions, in part because imports became more expensive. And another reason is that even if industrial production has been reduced, industrial exports have been rising. But the main reason is, of course, that Russia's dependence on oil is simply exaggerated in the propaganda.

As was previously demonstrated, Russian officials don't share your optimism.

The point being? The claim that I believe in everything some Russian official claims is your fantasy. It is an error to confuse own propagandistic claims with reality.

Who said I was happy people (i.e. Russians) aren't getting paid?

This is the impression which has been created by your posts. I would be happy if this would have been an error.

It's a tragedy Russia, and more specifically Putin, has decided to repeat all the mistakes of the Soviet Union.

But not a single complaint about what Jeltsin has done. Because this was what the West liked to see to happen in Russia, not?

Don't forget, it was the Jeltsin time when the Russian people have named "democracy" "dermocracy", which means something like "shitocracy".

And it's not just private companies who are not paying their workers, the Russian state isn't paying some of its workers.

Some local problems, as far as I understand. What happens in the US, if some town or state goes bankrupt? Does the federal government automatically pay everything?

So are you advocating the Russian state should go bankrupt?

Bankrupty of states are a good idea. Unfortunately, this seldom happens, and does not lead to what it should - the destruction of the state, giving its parts a chance to survive alone.

The fact is things are not rosy in Mother Russia as you would have people believe. Contrary to your previous assertions, conditions in Mother Russia are dire and getting worse by the minute.

The things are not rosy in Russia, they are not rosy in the whole world. And we can be all very happy if we survive the next 20 years.

 

[Schmelzer]

Today was quite interesting. One the one hand, the terrorists in Latakia have started a counteroffensive and recovered one village near the Turkish border. I'm not sure if the two things are closely related, but the Turks have been caught on video using artillery to bomb Syrian territory. https://www.rt.com/news/330858-turkey-shells-syrian-territory/ and at least roughly it seems to fit that the target was around the village taken back by the terrorists. The series of one village per day in East Aleppo seems to have stopped now - only a small advance on the M5 highway toward Aleppo has been mentioned.

But there was an even better replacement: A surprise attack in a slightly different area, namely Northern Aleppo.

The attack direction is interesting, it goes in two directions, North and South. The danger of attacking toward South (this is not shown on the map - the success there has been the latest news) is clear - blocking the last supply route for the terrorists in Eastern part of Aleppo. Here, some farms have been taken by the Syrian army - does not sound much, but there is not much else but farms up to the important supply route to Eastern Aleppo itself. The more interesting is the Northern direction - because what one would be expect in that situation would have been the Western direction, toward the encircled Shiite towns Al Zahra and Nubl. This would also cut a very important supply line from Turkey to Al Qaida and friends. But attacking the North makes sense too - as a preliminary operation. One can expect that the defenses of the terrorists have been weaker there, given that this did not look like an immediate danger. But, then, attacking from North toward West could be easier, against less serious defense lines. Here two villages have been taken.

Thus, on one day on two different parts, above dangerous, the Al Qaida defenses have been broken. I would not like to be an Al Qaida commander now to decide which part needs more support. Especially given that once they have decided which part to support. the Syrian army can much easer and faster transfer their attacking power to the other side, while the way for Al Qaida will be longer and dangerous because the transport lines of the whole area is now under airforce attack.

In the past months, the Western end of the frontline, Bashkui, has been several times heavily attacked by the terrorists, who see, of course, the danger of such a cut, but they have never reached success.

 

[joepistole]

Yes, the only problem would be that you have lied about what I have said (by omitting the "if", you have suggested that I have made a claim which I have not made), but this is, in your case, not a problem, we are already used to this.

It is, because for those who have understood the particular factor 2 was only an example, it could have been 5 or 10 or 20 or whatever else.

Yet another lie, because I have not made statements about any particular highs, even less about historical highs, thus, you accusations, as usual, are based on lies.

As usual, you are unable to get the points. The point is that Russia would be as dependent from the oil price as you claim, then it would be close to impossible to imagine a reduction of the oil price for more than 80% but the trade balance remaining positive. The reason why this is possible is that Russia exports a lot of the things I have mentioned. Of course, another reason is that imports have been reduced - in part intentionally, by deliberate counter-sanctions, in part because imports became more expensive. And another reason is that even if industrial production has been reduced, industrial exports have been rising. But the main reason is, of course, that Russia's dependence on oil is simply exaggerated in the propaganda.

The point being? The claim that I believe in everything some Russian official claims is your fantasy. It is an error to confuse own propagandistic claims with reality.

Hogwash! As previously pointed out to you, your quibbling over the word "if" and your "if statement" is nonsense - complete nonsense for the previously given reasons.

The unfortunate fact for you is Mother Russia is hurting. As has been repeatedly proven, Russians, including government workers, are not getting paid and many haven't been paid for months - reminiscent of what happened when The Soviet Union collapsed. Mother Russia is in dire straights. Russia cannot afford Putin and his military adventures. The fact is the price of oil has dropped by more than 80%, and that along with the sanctions imposed by the West, has dearly hurt Mother Russia. Contrary to your assertions, the price of oil is down and it's not going back (i.e. up to 50 dollars per barrel or more) any time soon given Iran is about to bring 2 million or more barrels a day to market in the very near future. That's why Mother Russia is desperately running around trying to reconstruct something resembling OPEC. And as previously pointed out to you, that isn't going to work either. First, because OPEC member states, Venezuela aside, have shown no interest in participating in Russia's proposal. And even if it did, a price of 50 dollars per barrel would bring about a huge surge in US oil production, and the US is the world's largest oil producer. Thank's to Putin, Mother Russia is in dire straights.

And contrary to your assertions, the evidence is very clear, Russia is very dependent upon oil. Whither you want to recognize it or not, everyone else does, including Russian leadership. As previously pointed out to you, Russia has budgeted for 50 dollar per barrel per oil when oil was selling for 30 dollars per barrel or less. Russia has continued to use unrealistically high oil prices in its forecasts and budgets. And Russia is very dependent upon oil prices. Oil exports fund the lion's share of the Russian government. Oil exports account for 66 percent of Russia's exports and when you throw in other commodities like diamonds, gold, aluminum, etc., Russia's economy is almost entirely (99%+) dependent upon commodities. http://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/rus/#Exports

The truth isn't propaganda. But given you are accustomed to living in the Soviet state, I guess you can be forgiven for your inability to distinguish between propaganda and truth. The truth is Russia's exports have fallen dramatically. It's balance of trade has fallen dramatically and continues to decline. The truth is Mother Russia is repeating all the mistakes which led to the demise of the Soviet Union.

But not a single complaint about what Jeltsin has done. Because this was what the West liked to see to happen in Russia, not?

Well, probably because Yeltsin has been out of office for almost 2 decades and been dead for almost a decade. That's probably why people aren't complaining about Yeltsin. When the Soviet Union collapsed, the West didn't select Yeltsin as Russia's leader. Russians did that. At some point, Russians need to be held accountable for their government. Russians need to govern themselves. When the Soviet Union collapsed, the West helped Russia and continued that aid right up until Mother Putin began illegally invading and annexing neighboring states.

Don't forget, it was the Jeltsin time when the Russian people have named "democracy" "dermocracy", which means something like "shitocracy".

Yeah, we get it. You don't like democracy. You would much rather have a dictator tell you what to think and what to do. It's what you are accustomed to.

Some local problems, as far as I understand. What happens in the US, if some town or state goes bankrupt? Does the federal government automatically pay everything?

Well, what happens in the US isn't relevant. The issue is the Russian state isn't paying its workers. American workers do not work for free. In the event of a bankruptcy workers are given the highest priority and their wages are paid from the assets of the bankrupt party. Workers don't work for months or years without pay as they do in Mother Russia. If workers are laid-off, they receive a stipend from the state. It's called unemployment insurance and they are required to look for new work.

Bankrupty of states are a good idea. Unfortunately, this seldom happens, and does not lead to what it should - the destruction of the state, giving its parts a chance to survive alone.

So Mother Russia would rather stiff its creditors than pay its bills? That sounds about right.

 

[Schmelzer]

Hogwash! As previously pointed out to you, your quibbling over the word "if" and your "if statement" is nonsense - complete nonsense for the previously given reasons.

Means, for no other reason that you name it nonsense. Which is no reason at all.

And contrary to your assertions, the evidence is very clear, Russia is very dependent upon oil.

It is one of the big oil sellers, so that it is clear that its income changes if the oil price changes.

Russia's economy is almost entirely (99%+) dependent upon commodities. http://atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/rus/#Exports

The first error is that you mingle economy with exports. Then, what means "depends"? Maybe in the sense that the prices of everything depend upon commodities. Then your number becomes plausible. Else, weapons and, say, atomic power stations are not depending on commodities.

The truth is Russia's exports have fallen dramatically. It's balance of trade has fallen dramatically and continues to decline.

Of course, once one computes them in \$, this looks dramatically. In ruble it looks not that dramatically. And you forget that what one would have to expect in case of a serious decline of the price of the most important export good is not a declining balance, but a switch from a proficit to a deficit with a raising tendency for the deficit.

Well, probably because Yeltsin has been out of office for almost 2 decades and been dead for almost a decade. That's probably why people aren't complaining about Yeltsin. When the Soviet Union collapsed, the West didn't select Yeltsin as Russia's leader. Russians did that. At some point, Russians need to be held accountable for their government. Russians need to govern themselves.

Yes, the Russians made a serious error electing Jeltsin, and have paid for this in a very serious way. But they have understood their error and corrected it. Live with this.

Well, what happens in the US isn't relevant.

It is, because if it would be different, you would consider it being relevant.

The issue is the Russian state isn't paying its workers. American workers do not work for free. In the event of a bankruptcy workers are given the highest priority and their wages are paid from the assets of the bankrupt party. Workers don't work for months or years without pay as they do in Mother Russia. If workers are laid-off, they receive a stipend from the state. It's called unemployment insurance and they are required to look for new work.

So Mother Russia would rather stiff its creditors than pay its bills?

Russia is not a candidate for going bankrupt, there are others, say Greece and a lot of Third World states. If many of them would declare themself bankrupt, this would be a hit - for the West,

 

[joepistole]

Means, for no other reason that you name it nonsense. Which is no reason at all.

And you think that makes sense....seriously?

It is one of the big oil sellers, so that it is clear that its income changes if the oil price changes.

As has been repeatedly pointed out to you, oil accounts for 66 percent of Russia's exports. Oil exports fund the Russian government. Without oil sales, Mother Russia doesn't have the foreign currency it needs to pay its debts and buy the goods it needs to buy.

The first error is that you mingle economy with exports. Then, what means "depends"? Maybe in the sense that the prices of everything depend upon commodities. Then your number becomes plausible. Else, weapons and, say, atomic power stations are not depending on commodities.

Except I haven't. As has been repeatedly explained to you. Russia's oil exports largely fund the Russian government. Russia's oil exports provides Mother Russia with the foreign currency it needs to pay its debts. As much as you dislike it, and as much as you want to misrepresent facts, the truth is Russia's economy is heavily dependent upon its oil exports. Russia is a one horse economy, and that horse is oil. Without Russia's oil (i.e. petroleum) exports, Russia crumbles. It doesn't have the money it needs to fund its government, prop up its currency and pay its debts.

Of course, once one computes them in \$, this looks dramatically. In ruble it looks not that dramatically. And you forget that what one would have to expect in case of a serious decline of the price of the most important export good is not a declining balance, but a switch from a proficit to a deficit with a raising tendency for the deficit.

That makes no sense. The fact is Russia's trade balance has and continues to shrink, and that's a big problem for Mother Russia because Mother Russia's ruble isn't a reserve currency and Mother Russia needs foreign currencies in order to pay its bills and prop up its currency.

Yes, the Russians made a serious error electing Jeltsin, and have paid for this in a very serious way. But they have understood their error and corrected it. Live with this.

Then stop complaining about it and blaming others for you failures.

It is, because if it would be different, you would consider it being relevant.

And you think that makes sense? The fact is the Russian government along with many private companies are not paying their workers. As previously pointed out to you, what is happening in Russia doesn't happen in the USA. Additionally, state-owned enterprises in Mother Russia are not covered by Russia's bankruptcy laws.

The issue is the Russian state isn't paying its workers. American workers do not work for free. In the event of a bankruptcy workers are given the highest priority and their wages are paid from the assets of the bankrupt party. Workers don't work for months or years without pay as they do in Mother Russia. If workers are laid-off, they receive a stipend from the state. It's called unemployment insurance and they are required to look for new work.

You have plagiarized my previous post. I wrote the above in response to your question on this subject.

Russia is not a candidate for going bankrupt, there are others, say Greece and a lot of Third World states. If many of them would declare themself bankrupt, this would be a hit - for the West,

Except it is, Mother Russia's debt is rated as "junk" by bond rating agencies. If Mother Russia was not viewed as a default risk, its debt wouldn't be considered junk. The fact is the Russian government isn't paying all of its workers. It's reminiscent of the collapse of the Soviet Union.

"Western sanctions, capital flight and depressed oil prices are taking their toll on Russia's economy, leading a major credit rating agency to downgrade the country's sovereign rating to "junk" territory. Ratings agency S&P said Monday it had slashed Russia's debt rating to BB+ from BBB-, adding that the outlook for Russia's economy was darkening. The move not only is a blow to Russia's prestige, it also raises the country's borrowing costs at a time it can ill afford higher outlays."

http://www.nbcnews.com/business/economy/s-p-downgrades-russian-debt-junk-status-n293886

Greece is being supported by the EU, so as long as that continues there is little chance Greece will default on its debt. Additionally, Greece is a small country and its debt is relatively small. It presents no threat to the West or to the world. The fear of Greek debt default a few years ago was rooted in the fear that a Greek default would cause an unraveling of the Euro, that other countries would leave the Euro. It wasn't about Greece's debt, because in the overall scheme of thing Greece's debt was but a pittance.

* Just a note: fully sovereign governments do not declare bankruptcy. They just default on their debts. There are no good reasons why a reserve currency nation should ever default on debt, because reserve currency nations can print new currency to pay their debts. Nations without reserve currency statues, nations like Mother Russia can default and do default on their debts. Non reserve currency nations cannot print new money to pay their debts because many, if not all their, debts are denominated in foreign currencies. So it's a misnomer to say as you have done to apply the notion of bankruptcy to a fully sovereign state like Mother Russia.

 

[Schmelzer]

And you think that makes sense....seriously?

Your justification of presenting my "If A then B" as "A" makes no sense.

As has been repeatedly pointed out to you, oil accounts for 66 percent of Russia's exports. Oil exports fund the Russian government. Without oil sales, Mother Russia doesn't have the foreign currency it needs to pay its debts and buy the goods it needs to buy.

So what? The Russian government does not have to by many things in the West. And the debts of the Russian government are almost irrelevant. Whenever the debts are considered today, it is the sum of the debts of whole Russia, including all the private firms. For the government debt, the dollar reserves alone would be sufficient.

That makes no sense. The fact is Russia's trade balance has and continues to shrink, and that's a big problem for Mother Russia because Mother Russia's ruble isn't a reserve currency and Mother Russia needs foreign currencies in order to pay its bills and prop up its currency.

There is not much the Russians (all of them) have to pay, and they have no need to prop up its currency.

The fact is the Russian government along with many private companies are not paying their workers.

Again, there are different subjects in the Russian Federation, all with own budgets. So, there is no "the" Russian government not paying, but some unspecified by your source local part of the Russian state which has failed to pay its workers. And how many are "many" private companies? There will always be some of them. There will always be more of them in a time of recession. These are trivialities.

As previously pointed out to you, what is happening in Russia doesn't happen in the USA.

Fine. So, if, say, Chicago goes bankrupt the school teachers in Chicago do not have to bother at all, they will be paid by Washington D.C.? Nice to hear.

Additionally, state-owned enterprises in Mother Russia are not covered by Russia's bankruptcy laws.

I have not cared about such details of Russian law, and will not start to do it. Of course, law of a state are, for me as a libertarian, always only quite arbitrary rules, which are typically in a lot of points completely unjust. This holds for every state, Russia as well as US and all of Europe. So here the only thing which matters is where the laws are less unjust.

You have plagiarized my previous post.

I'm very sorry - unfortunately, the editing time is already over. Horrible, to think that now somebody can, by error, believe that I have written such nonsense.

Except it is, Mother Russia's debt is rated as "junk" by bond rating agencies. If Mother Russia was not viewed as a default risk, its debt wouldn't be considered junk.

LOL, this is political game, part of the economic war, because it makes it harder for some Western firms to use Russian obligations as securities. Anyway it is almost irrelevant.

Additionally, Greece is a small country and its debt is relatively small.

The Russian government debt is smaller (18% of GDP vs. 180% of GDP, but with Russia having less than 10 times the Greek GDP). So it is even absolutely small.

 

[Schmelzer]

The offensive of the Syrian army in North Aleppo is continuing, another village has been taken, Tal Hardetnin. This village is already West of Tal Jabin, which was taken yesterday, and this already creates an immediate danger of connection with the encircled Al Zahra and Nubl enclave. The remaining distance is 6 km, and there is even a 3 km wide corridor without even a single village inside, and if one prefers a road connection on the North of this corridor, there would be only one small village, Maareset Al Khan, along it.

The Syrian army is actually going Southwest from Tal Hardetnin toward the greater neighbour village Ritian, and has sized there already some buildings in the Eastern part, and taking this $1km^2$ village seems a question of time.

At least if there do not appear any reinforcements. And this is what one, of course, has to expect, given the importance of this place. The Syrian army had taken these two villages already earlier, before the time of the Russian engagement, and then they were forced to retreat the next day after strong reinforcements came from Turkey. We will see if this repeats now, with the presence of Russian airforce, too. One should not exclude this possibility - this place is certainly important enough that there clearly will come a lot of reinforcements. If they will suffice to prevent the connection and to take back these village is the open question.

PS: Actually it is claimed that Ritian is controlled already by 75%, and Maareset Al Khan is attacked now. But these are only twitter-level informations.

PPS: What the best friends of the US, the Saudis, do at the same time is described in http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/saudi-warplanes-bomb-childrens-amusement-park-sanaa/
it is bombing a child amusement park in Sanaa.

 

[joepistole]

Your justification of presenting my "If A then B" as "A" makes no sense.

Your "if A then B as A" makes no sense. As has been previously pointed out to you, just because prices for a commodity have fallen it doesn't mean they are going back-up. You, along with your Mother Russia, are hoping for a recovery in oil prices. Because the Russian economy is very dependent upon oil exports. Oil exports largely fund the Russian government. Without oil exports, Mother Russia cannot pay her bills. She cannot pay pensions or pay her employees (e.g. what has happened in Russia and continues to occur in Russia).

So what? The Russian government does not have to by many things in the West. And the debts of the Russian government are almost irrelevant. Whenever the debts are considered today, it is the sum of the debts of whole Russia, including all the private firms. For the government debt, the dollar reserves alone would be sufficient.

Well, once again the facts don't support your beliefs. Mother Russia imports more than 300 billion dollars a year from the West. Where do you think Mother Russia gets medicaments (i.e. medical equipment, drugs and supplies), cars, vehicle parts, broadcasting equipment, and computers? It gets them from the West.

As for Russia's debts, your assertions are just not supported by facts. The truth is Mother Russia has more than 500 dollars in foreign debt. According to Russia's central bank, Russia has about 300 billion in foreign currency reserves. So you are once again just factually incorrect. And we haven't even discussed how the Russian central bank needs foreign currency to prop up the plummeting value of the ruble. And then, per previous references, there is the fact Russian officials have admitted their reserve fund will run dry by year end.

There is not much the Russians (all of them) have to pay, and they have no need to prop up its currency.

Except that just flies in the face of reality, not that it matters to you, because clearly it doesn't.

Again, there are different subjects in the Russian Federation, all with own budgets. So, there is no "the" Russian government not paying, but some unspecified by your source local part of the Russian state which has failed to pay its workers. And how many are "many" private companies? There will always be some of them. There will always be more of them in a time of recession. These are trivialities.

Well not getting your paycheck is a triviality until it becomes your paycheck. So teachers are unnamed? Teachers aren't government employees in Mother Russia?
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/22/w...-aim-at-putin-as-economy-exacts-its-toll.html

Well that's good to know. I would hate to think Russian government entities don't have budgets. The fact is every government agency has a budget. That isn't new, that isn't unique. And it doesn't mitigate the fact that Russian employees are not getting their paychecks. There is no good reason why Russian government employees should work without pay.

Yeah, there are private enterprises which go bankrupt, but they generally pay their employees and they certainly don't work for free in the West. The problem is in Mother Russia, per previously referenced materials, the numbers in Russia are large and growing larger.

Fine. So, if, say, Chicago goes bankrupt the school teachers in Chicago do not have to bother at all, they will be paid by Washington D.C.? Nice to hear.

No. If the City of Chicago would become bankrupt, Chicago school teachers would not be affected. Because schools are not owned, controlled, or financed by the City of Chicago. If the City of Chicago were to become unable to pay its bills, it would file a bankruptcy petition in the US bankruptcy courts. City employees would continue to be paid and continue to go to work. However, some creditors, namely bondholders, would not be paid in full or may never get paid.

A trustee would be appointed and the city's creditors would be notified. A plan would be created in conjunction with creditors to put the city back on secure financial footing and implemented. If additional financing would be needed, that financing would be secured either through private sources or the state government (not the federal government). But employees would be paid, a few may be laid-off. But all employees would be paid in full. That's what would happen in the US. Clearly, that isn't what happens in Mother Russia. In Mother Russia, employees go unpaid and work for free.

I have not cared about such details of Russian law, and will not start to do it. Of course, law of a state are, for me as a libertarian, always only quite arbitrary rules, which are typically in a lot of points completely unjust. This holds for every state, Russia as well as US and all of Europe. So here the only thing which matters is where the laws are less unjust.

Yeah, I know. You don't care about details or facts. That's very obvious.

I'm very sorry - unfortunately, the editing time is already over. Horrible, to think that now somebody can, by error, believe that I have written such nonsense.

LOL...

LOL, this is political game, part of the economic war, because it makes it harder for some Western firms to use Russian obligations as securities. Anyway it is almost irrelevant.

Except it isn't political. Credit rating agencies are paid by creditors to evaluate and rate debt. It's how risk is evaluated and how debt is priced. The fact is Russian debt is rated as junk. That means Mother Russia has to pay very high interest rates on her debts. And just how do Western firms use Russian "obligations" as securities? You clearly don't understand the words you are using. When Mother Russia issues debt, it issues a security. And as previously and repeatedly demonstrated, you knowledge of Russian debt just isn't consistent with reality.

The Russian government debt is smaller (18% of GDP vs. 180% of GDP, but with Russia having less than 10 times the Greek GDP). So it is even absolutely small.

As previously pointed out to you, Greek debt is irrelevant. What is relevant is Russia's ability to pay its foreign debts. It clearly doesn't have enough foreign currency reserves to pay-off its foreign debt. And its only source of foreign currency is declining and significant double digit rates. That's a problem, that's a big problem for Mother Russia whither you want to recognize it or not.

 

[Schmelzer]

Your "if A then B as A" makes no sense.

That you are unable to understand elementary meaningful sentences does not give you the right to reduce them to simpler parts you are able to understand and then claim that I have made this.

Well, once again the facts don't support your beliefs. Mother Russia imports more than 300 billion dollars a year from the West. Where do you think Mother Russia gets medicaments (i.e. medical equipment, drugs and supplies), cars, vehicle parts, broadcasting equipment, and computers? It gets them from the West.

Some of them it imports, other it produces itself.

The truth is Mother Russia has more than 500 dollars in foreign debt. According to Russia's central bank, Russia has about 300 billion in foreign currency reserves.

Yes, that's well-known, and includes the corporate debts.

And we haven't even discussed how the Russian central bank needs foreign currency to prop up the plummeting value of the ruble.

Actually not at all, if the ruble goes down to values where the Russian government thinks are too low they will use some currency reserves. The point being? If one considers what people can buy for a ruble in Russia, the ruble is already much too cheap, thus, there is nothing which would force the ruble further down, except speculation about further oil price decreases.

Well not getting your paycheck is a triviality until it becomes your paycheck. So teachers are unnamed? Teachers aren't government employees in Mother Russia?

Never cared who pays them - the federation, the republics, or the communes.

Well that's good to know. I would hate to think Russian government entities don't have budgets. The fact is every government agency has a budget. That isn't new, that isn't unique. And it doesn't mitigate the fact that Russian employees are not getting their paychecks. There is no good reason why Russian government employees should work without pay.

Of course, there is none. They should not work. If they don't get paid, they will stop working, at least after some time. The point being?

Except it isn't political.

Of course, you will think so, without any doubt. So what? I couldn't care less about your beliefs.

What is relevant is Russia's ability to pay its foreign debts. It clearly doesn't have enough foreign currency reserves to pay-off its foreign debt. And its only source of foreign currency is declining and significant double digit rates. That's a problem, that's a big problem for Mother Russia whither you want to recognize it or not.

The pure government debt it can pay completely from the currency reserves. What it is actually obliged to pay is, of course, much less, simply the interest rates. And the fact remains that Russia has a positive trade balance, thus, makes income, which, even if nobody would give Russia any credits, would allow to reduce the debt. Of course, a propagandist (or stupid propaganda victim, hard to decide) like you will at least claim to believe something very different, but so what.

 

[joepistole]

That you are unable to understand elementary meaningful sentences does not give you the right to reduce them to simpler parts you are able to understand and then claim that I have made this.

As has you have been repeatedly told, I understand. And the fact is, just because oil prices have gone down, that doesn't mean they are coming back up. Your ignorance is showing comrade.

Some of them it imports, other it produces itself.

As previously pointed out to you and contrary to your assertions, Mother Russia is heavily dependent upon imports from the West. Mother Russia cannot produce those goods, even if it wanted to. And as previously pointed out to you Russian workers are incredibly inefficient when compared to their Western counterparts. An American worker is 5 times more productive than a Russian worker. Those are really basic facts comrade. That's why Mother Russia imports them. Mother Russia wouldn't import those goods if it could make them.

Yes, that's well-known, and includes the corporate debts.

Yes, it does. That doesn't change anything. Russia's companies need to convert their rubles into dollars through the Russian banking system in order to pay those debts. If those companies default, what little foreign investment coming into the country stops and the Russian economy falls further into disrepair and chaos.

Actually not at all, if the ruble goes down to values where the Russian government thinks are too low they will use some currency reserves. The point being? If one considers what people can buy for a ruble in Russia, the ruble is already much too cheap, thus, there is nothing which would force the ruble further down, except speculation about further oil price decreases.

Yeah, the Russian government has bought and continues to prop up the ruble with its foreign currency reserves. The point being that depletes Russia's dwindling foreign currency reserves. So contrary to your assertion that Mother Russia has ample foreign currency reserves, it clearly doesn't. It doesn't have enough foreign currency reserve to pay off Russia's debt as you asserted and it doesn't have enough foreign currency reserves to prop up its currency on an extended basis. Mother Russia is in a between a rock and a hard place.

Never cared who pays them - the federation, the republics, or the communes.

Well, that's the problem isn't, Russians don't care until it's your paycheck or your pension check. The fact is, the Russian state isn't paying all of its workers. Russian companies are not paying their employees. That's indicative of a problem, and reminiscent of the collapse of the Soviet Union, you remember Yeltsin time.

Of course, there is none. They should not work. If they don't get paid, they will stop working, at least after some time. The point being?

But they do work without pay, probably because they don't have alternatives. They don't have other jobs they could take. So they continue to work on the hope that someday they might get paid. That's said. That's desperate.

Of course, you will think so, without any doubt. So what? I couldn't care less about your beliefs.

Well this isn't about my beliefs. It's about facts. The fact is credit rating agencies rate Mother Russia's debt as junk..meaning the risk of default is high. And that isn't political. Investors around the globe use these same credit rating agencies to rate debt, so they are better able to assess risk and invest accordingly. Russia's high risk credit rating makes debt very expensive for Mother Russia.

The pure government debt it can pay completely from the currency reserves. What it is actually obliged to pay is, of course, much less, simply the interest rates. And the fact remains that Russia has a positive trade balance, thus, makes income, which, even if nobody would give Russia any credits, would allow to reduce the debt. Of course, a propagandist (or stupid propaganda victim, hard to decide) like you will at least claim to believe something very different, but so what.

Well, at the very least your assertion is questionable. If the Russia used all of its foreign currency reserves to pay down just government debt, it wouldn't have the currency it needs to fund all the other things it needs to do like exchange rubles for foreign currency to keep Russian oil producers producing oil.

As for balance of trade, let's look at Russia's balance of trade.

Russia's trade balances are rapidly declining. And since Mother Russia's economy is hugely dependent upon oil, its balance of trade will continue to decline as oil prices decline. Russia's trade surplus isn't enough to sustain Mother Russia. A declining 4 billion dollar trade balance isn't going to provide the foreign currency Mother Russia needs to fund all of its foreign currency needs. That's just a simple fact, even Russia's finance minister understands that fact.

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/27/russias-reserve-fund-could-run-empty-in-2016.html

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...09-11e5-85cd-5ad59bc19432-20160113-story.html

So while you don't want or cannot understand Russia's dire financial predicament, Russia's finance minister can and does. Per Russia's finance minister, Russia could deplete its reserves by year end.

If the trend continues and there is no reason to expect it won't, it will not be long before Mother Russia will revisit Yeltsin times.

 

[Schmelzer]

And the fact is, just because oil prices have gone down, that doesn't mean they are coming back up.

I have no doubt about this, so what is the point of repeating this triviality?

Mother Russia is heavily dependent upon imports from the West. Mother Russia cannot produce those goods, even if it wanted to.

LOL.

If those companies default, what little foreign investment coming into the country stops and the Russian economy falls further into disrepair and chaos.

ROTFLBTC. There was all the time more money going out of Russia than coming in. So, if there is an economy which does not depend on foreign investment, it is the Russian.

Yeah, the Russian government has bought and continues to prop up the ruble with its foreign currency reserves.

That it has some short time during the fall of the ruble a year or so ago I know. Actually it does not. If you want to claim it actually does, sources, please.

It doesn't have enough foreign currency reserve to pay off Russia's debt as you asserted and it doesn't have enough foreign currency reserves to prop up its currency on an extended basis.

As explained, they would be sufficient to pay the pure government debt, but not all the corporate debts. And there is no need to support the currency if the policy is to replace imports to make the state more independent given the repeated attacks from the West.

But they do work without pay, probably because they don't have alternatives.

Maybe. I don't know what happened in these particular cases, I would guess that these are only some temporary problems and the wages are simply paid too late. If there would be really serious problems, I would have heard this, in the Russian internet all the problems are discussed a lot, that's why it is almost impossible to spend there some time without getting information from various sides about currency reserves, debts, oil and its role and so on. So somehow your poor workers working without wages have not made it into memes of the runet. So I think it is a quite irrelevant problem.

The fact is credit rating agencies rate Mother Russia's debt as junk..meaning the risk of default is high. And that isn't political.

Given that it has economic consequences which are enforced by the government - namely, the overregulated Western banking sector depends, by law, for the evaluation of its reserves on these ratings, so that giving Russia a credit now, if not forbidden by some sanctions, becomes more costly, not because of any risk, but by law, it is really funny to think that it is not political.

Investors around the globe use these same credit rating agencies to rate debt, so they are better able to assess risk and invest accordingly. Russia's high risk credit rating makes debt very expensive for Mother Russia.

After I have learned that to give an evaluation of a firm they give half a day to one of its workers, it seems quite stupid. But, of course, that's better than nothing, so why not use it.

If the Russia used all of its foreign currency reserves to pay down just government debt, it wouldn't have the currency it needs to fund all the other things it needs to do like exchange rubles for foreign currency to keep Russian oil producers producing oil.

Currency reserves have not the purpose to fund something. Supporting the currency if its price goes speculatively completely down and buying dollars if it is too high to endanger the export industry is, by the way, an income source, if one accepts for usual circumstances the market price and acts only in extremal situations.

As for balance of trade, let's look at Russia's balance of trade. Russia's trade balances are rapidly declining.

As I have repeatedly said, as expected in a situation with rapidly falling oil prices and other commodities not going high as well.

And since Mother Russia's economy is hugely dependent upon oil, its balance of trade will continue to decline as oil prices decline.

Yes, but they will not. And don't forget, what Russia exports are real things. If the price is to low, one can use all this oneself.


That's just a simple fact, even Russia's finance minister understands that fact.

Russia's trade surplus isn't enough to sustain Mother Russia. A declining 4 billion dollar trade balance isn't going to provide the foreign currency Mother Russia needs to fund all of its foreign currency needs.
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/10/27/russias-reserve-fund-could-run-empty-in-2016.html

By the way, your own source tells this:

The Reserve Fund had also been used recently (in May) to buy foreign currency in order to prevent the ruble from strengthening too much against the dollar (hindering the competitiveness of Russian exports).

So they have used this fund to buy dollar, at a time when the ruble was too high, or, in other words, when the dollar was cheap. Russia can use these dollars now to spend them for rubles and gets a nice profit from this. But your source presents this as if all this was lost. Instead, they are simply in another pocket.

If the trend continues and there is no reason to expect it won't,

There is, the two big things which have caused the crisis cannot continue for a longer period. In the worst case, after some time the oil price remains where it is. It cannot continue to fall. The reduction of the oil income has a natural end - zero oil income. Similarly for the other reason. The Cold War can be started, sanctions can be imposed, but that's all. There is also a natural end of this - no trade with the West.

Can Russia survive after these two limits have been reached? Of course it can. Russia itself produces almost all what it really needs for survival: commodities, wheat, weapons to defend all this it has enough. It remains a main exporter of wheat, weapons, atomic stations, rockets, and the world is full of states interested to buy all this even without the West. So there will be enough income to buy what it does not produce itself. One may think that Chinese production is worse quality than German production, ok, but this is a luxury problem (and it is not clear at all if Germany will follow the US in the Cold War for long, anti-americanism is on the rise in Germany).

So, the Russian leadership has to do a lot. And, in particular, it has also to cut its own expenses. They also think about selling some state property. But these are short term problems. And even if things go very much worse, the the world trade collapsing completely, Russia has everything it needs to survive.

 

[Schmelzer]

The "one village per day" rule of advances against ISIS around the Kuweiris airport, which I have yesterday mentioned as stopped, has been recovered. Today two villages have been taken - Rasm Al Alam and Al Sin. This is into the same direction as during the previous days, so that the danger of encirclement of some quite important ISIS territory becomes greater, I would say even much greater. The remaining way to go would be 4 km, with only one village of the same size as Al Sin taken today on the way. If the Syrian army would, instead, follow the scheme of the last week, they would, instead, take first some more villages North and South of Al Sin before continuing going West again. We will see.

In Northern Aleppo a lot of reinforcements for Al Nusra (Al Qaida) have been arrived, so that the battle became really hard. Al Nusra yet controls the Western flanks of Rityan and Tal Mu’arasat as well as almost all the village Bayyanoun, following http://www.almasdarnews.com/article...o-hezbollah-syrian-army-prepare-final-attack/

But there is actually already a twitter message https://twitter.com/IvanSidorenko1/status/694894054136414210 that SAA has taken control of Mu'arasat Khan and meet there the defenders of Nubl and Zahraa. Thus, the siege of Nubl and Zahraa is broken, and the support lines from North (Turkey) to Aleppo for Al Nusra and friends are really closed. But, of course, this success has yet to be defended, and, given the importance of this connection for Al Qaida, this will not be easy.

PS: Yet another twitter, https://twitter.com/sayed_ridha/status/694892490101362689 says that in East Aleppo yet another village, Jub al Kalb, has been liberated from ISIS. So, they are now even better than one village per day, and have deserved a holiday tomorrow ;-)

 

[CptBork]

Can Russia survive after these two limits have been reached? Of course it can. Russia itself produces almost all what it really needs for survival: commodities, wheat, weapons to defend all this it has enough. It remains a main exporter of wheat, weapons, atomic stations, rockets, and the world is full of states interested to buy all this even without the West. So there will be enough income to buy what it does not produce itself. One may think that Chinese production is worse quality than German production, ok, but this is a luxury problem (and it is not clear at all if Germany will follow the US in the Cold War for long, anti-americanism is on the rise in Germany).

Ok, how do you not find it disturbing that Russia's main exports other than oil are all intended for murdering people? Do you believe this is how a normal, prosperous, peaceful country behaves? Does that indicate a position of economic strength, when you're only seen as useful by international criminals? The fact that Russians like you keep insisting that Russia makes everything it needs and then spout off a list of less than 20 products as "proof" shows utter desperation, not confidence; a basic functioning economy needs thousands of items on its product list, and it would be a complete waste of time to try writing them down on an internet forum or comments section.

You don't get it: Russia can't even produce wheat at reasonable prices and in sufficient quantities without importing parts, seeds, technology and other components from Western countries. Everything in Russia from top to bottom depends on some form of Western assistance and manufacturing. Even if everyone in Russia worked for free, they don't have the means to produce everything they currently produce while maintaining all of the machinery and supplying all the necessary materials, somehow simultaneously managing to feed themselves on a dwindling supply of free food, fix their leaking roofs and heat their freezing bedrooms, get their kids educated, get their cirrhosis livers replaced and the zillion other things they need to do with their lives.

You can't keep running deficits indefinitely with a contracting GDP and inflating prices, it's mathematically impossible. Some of your own top government economists have estimated that Russia can only survive like this for one year at the most before declaring bankruptcy, and that in itself may be an extremely optimistic estimate. China won't bail you out- they've got huge problems of their own similar to yours finally coming to the surface, and you forget how you carved their country into the shape of a chicken less than 150 years ago (they haven't forgotten anything, of course).

You speak of simply reigniting the old Cold War, but Russia is in a vastly weaker state today than it was at the very end of the last one. If you try resorting to living in boxes and eating lipstick, you'll simply run out of boxes and lipstick. Your government doesn't have unlimited state assets to sell off to frightened investors who already know that those limited assets were seized from previous investors. Maybe you think Putin can sell naked photos of himself online to raise cash, I dunno.

So, the Russian leadership has to do a lot. And, in particular, it has also to cut its own expenses. They also think about selling some state property. But these are short term problems. And even if things go very much worse, the the world trade collapsing completely, Russia has everything it needs to survive.

No, you have to abandon all the territories you've annexed and colonized against the wishes of the local populations over the last 2 centuries, and get out of Syria too.

 

[Schmelzer]

Ok, how do you not find it disturbing that Russia's main exports other than oil are all intended for murdering people?

Wheat is for murdering people? Atomic power stations are for murdering people? That's new for me. Ok, you mean weapons, but then learn to formulate your claims in a more precise, less propagandistic way.

And weapons are, BTW, not only for murdering people, but also for defense of people against murderers. And here Russian weapons will play an increasingly important role, as defense against the actually most important mass murderers, the NATO. With Iraq and Libya having had the S400 before the US/NATO invasion, there probably would have been no such invasion, and there would have been a problem with ISIS now.

Do you believe this is how a normal, prosperous, peaceful country behaves?

Yes, of course, if it is confronted with a superpower which wants to own its resources, it is quite natural that it has to invest a lot into weapons. And, once you have good weapons, it is meaningful to sell them to other potential victims of this aggressive superpower.

The fact that Russians like you keep insisting that Russia makes everything it needs and then spout off a list of less than 20 products as "proof" shows utter desperation, not confidence; a basic functioning economy needs thousands of items on its product list, and it would be a complete waste of time to try writing them down on an internet forum or comments section.

So, I see you know the reason why I do not write a list of thousands of products yourself - waste of time. Of course, I simply listed the few Russia is famous for exporting because it is one of the world leaders in the export of these things. There are, of course, a lot more things it simply exports, and even more it produces itself, but for the inner market.

You don't get it: Russia can't even produce wheat at reasonable prices and in sufficient quantities without importing parts, seeds, technology and other components from Western countries. Everything in Russia from top to bottom depends on some form of Western assistance and manufacturing. Even if everyone in Russia worked for free, they don't have the means to produce everything they currently produce while maintaining all of the machinery and supplying all the necessary materials, somehow simultaneously managing to feed themselves on a dwindling supply of free food, fix their leaking roofs and heat their freezing bedrooms, get their kids educated, get their cirrhosis livers replaced and the zillion other things they need to do with their lives.

You have a nice fantasy. But somehow Russia has managed to make advances in the domain of modern weapons, certainly without Western support, which are quite impressive. It is also somehow a world leader in atomic power techniques and rockets for spaceships. Or builds special planes which can land on water, take a lot of water there, start again and use the water against fire from the air. And you think they cannot even produce wheat without Western help? LOL.

You speak of simply reigniting the old Cold War, but Russia is in a vastly weaker state today than it was at the very end of the last one.

No. The Soviet Union was based on a stupid economic system, and much of the territory was like the colonies for Britain and France - not a source of income, but a financial burden - so it was even economically meaningful to let them go as France and Britain have done. Today it is a modern market economy.

PS: "Following the capture of Al-Si’in, the ISIS terrorists inside of Jubb Al-Kalb abandoned their positions and fled the village in order to evade the swarming Tiger Forces and to take the opportunity to utilize the last road leading out of the area before it was captured by the government forces. "
http://www.almasdarnews.com/article/tiger-forces-seize-jubb-al-kalb-east-aleppo/

So, it seems the moral is also no longer that high among ISIS, if they give up whole villages without a fight.

PPS: A nice conversation about cooperation of FSA with ISIS: https://twitter.com/witayim/status/694892952741515264

 

[joepistole]

I have no doubt about this, so what is the point of repeating this triviality?

LOL...then why do you keep contesting it.

Yes, oil prices are down, and they will likely stay down for the foreseeable future and will likely go even lower as Iran begins to bring millions of more barrels on to the market each day. Mother Russia has and continues to use overly optimistic oil pricing estimates.

LOL.

Keep laughing comrade, but facts are facts, and the fact is if Mother Russia could manufacture the 300 million plus dollars worth of goods it imports every year, it wouldn't be importing them.

ROTFLBTC. There was all the time more money going out of Russia than coming in. So, if there is an economy which does not depend on foreign investment, it is the Russian.

Well comrade, you had better keep the vodka flowing because you are going to need it. Mother Russia is very dependent upon foreign investment, probably more than any other country. The referenced article below explains why. Mother Russia doesn't have the resources or the knowledge to replace foreign investment.

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/ff20c294-c0f9-11e5-846f-79b0e3d20eaf.html#axzz3z95HEiDY


Whither you want to recognize it or not, those facts are not lost on Mother Putin.


"President Vladimir Putin is considering selling stakes in some of Russia’s state jewels to foreign buyers to raise cash for an economy brought to its knees by the collapse in oil prices and sanctions related to Ukraine. Investors are dubious." Bloomberg


http://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...court-foreign-investors-wary-of-past-stumbles


You and your fellow Russia comrades would be better off if you spent a little less time with the Vodka and rolling around on the floor laughing.

That it has some short time during the fall of the ruble a year or so ago I know. Actually it does not. If you want to claim it actually does, sources, please.

Last week the Russian Ruble lost 4% of its value in a single day. The Russian Ruble is on the ropes. It desperately needs help.

http://money.cnn.com/2016/01/20/investing/russia-ruble-record-low/

As explained, they would be sufficient to pay the pure government debt, but not all the corporate debts. And there is no need to support the currency if the policy is to replace imports to make the state more independent given the repeated attacks from the West.

As previously and repeatedly explained to you, your assertion is at best debatable. It isn't clear that the Russian central bank has enough cash reserves to pay off Russia's public debt. But even it your assertion were true, it doesn't have enough cash to do that any pay off corporate debts. And as previously explained to you, the reason why that is important, is because that corporate debt is denominated in foreign currencies and corporations will need to exchange their rubles for foreign currencies the Russian central bank may not have. That's a problem for Mother Russia. As previously and repeatedly explained to you, that's one reason why international credit rating companies have and continue to rate Russian debt as junk. That makes Russian debt very expensive for Russian debtors.

Maybe. I don't know what happened in these particular cases, I would guess that these are only some temporary problems and the wages are simply paid too late. If there would be really serious problems, I would have heard this, in the Russian internet all the problems are discussed a lot, that's why it is almost impossible to spend there some time without getting information from various sides about currency reserves, debts, oil and its role and so on. So somehow your poor workers working without wages have not made it into memes of the runet. So I think it is a quite irrelevant problem.

Yeah, you don't care that Russian workers are not getting paid. You don't care until its your paycheck. You can't find it on the internet...seriously? It's all over the internet. What you mean is you want to stick your head in the sand again for fear you might find evidence you dislike.


https://www.rt.com/business/314954-russia-factory-salaries-bricks/


http://capx.co/external/russia-still-hasnt-paid-space-station-workers/


https://meduza.io/en/feature/2016/0...nd-there-won-t-be-any-money-make-a-run-for-it


http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/22/w...-aim-at-putin-as-economy-exacts-its-toll.html


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/23/world/europe/russians-anxiety-swells-as-oil-prices-collapse.html

Given that it has economic consequences which are enforced by the government - namely, the overregulated Western banking sector depends, by law, for the evaluation of its reserves on these ratings, so that giving Russia a credit now, if not forbidden by some sanctions, becomes more costly, not because of any risk, but by law, it is really funny to think that it is not political.

That's gibberish. It doesn't make any kind of sense. The fact is Russia's debt is rated as junk and for a host of reasons including, but not limited to, political instability and trade sanctions. Those are very real risks. That isn't political. Frankly comrade, you don't even know what risk is or the kinds of risks involved. Yet, you just want to label the world's most credible ratings agencies as political foils in order to rationalize your cognitive dissonances. Investors want to make money, not political friends.

 

[joepistole]

After I have learned that to give an evaluation of a firm they give half a day to one of its workers, it seems quite stupid. But, of course, that's better than nothing, so why not use it.


Currency reserves have not the purpose to fund something. Supporting the currency if its price goes speculatively completely down and buying dollars if it is too high to endanger the export industry is, by the way, an income source, if one accepts for usual circumstances the market price and acts only in extremal situations.

Again comrade, you are not making any sense. You obviously don't understand what a central bank does. As you have been repeatedly told, in order for Russian companies to pay-off their foreign debts, they need the Russian central bank to exchange rubles for those foreign currencies, and the Russian central bank doesn't have enough foreign currency to pay off all Russian foreign currency debts. much less support the ruble.

As I have repeatedly said, as expected in a situation with rapidly falling oil prices and other commodities not going high as well.


Yes, but they will not. And don't forget, what Russia exports are real things. If the price is to low, one can use all this oneself.


That's just a simple fact, even Russia's finance minister understands that fact.


By the way, your own source tells this:


So they have used this fund to buy dollar, at a time when the ruble was too high, or, in other words, when the dollar was cheap. Russia can use these dollars now to spend them for rubles and gets a nice profit from this. But your source presents this as if all this was lost. Instead, they are simply in another pocket.

What does any of that have to do with price of tea in China? As I have repeatedly explained to you, Mother Russia is using its foreign currency reserves to prop up Russia's ruble. So? That has nothing to do with buying low and selling high. Russia earns foreign currency when it sells good to foreign countries. That has nothing to do with buying US Dollars cheaply and selling them at a higher price.


As previously pointed out to you and per my previous references, Russia's finance minister has said Russia's reserve fund will likely be depleted before year end.

There is, the two big things which have caused the crisis cannot continue for a longer period.

Oil prices can go all the way to zero, although that will likely not happen. But there is no floor. It's a free market. Just because oil prices have gone down it doesn't mean they have to go back up or even remain at current levels. Yesterday, oil prices fell by percent. Oil could easily fall another 10 or 20 dollars a barrel. It's all about that supply-demand thingy. There is no imaginary magical price, because Mother Russia needs one. The unfortunate fact for you is your Mother Russia is a price taker and not a price maker.

In the worst case, after some time the oil price remains where it is. It cannot continue to fall. The reduction of the oil income has a natural end - zero oil income. Similarly for the other reason. The Cold War can be started, sanctions can be imposed, but that's all. There is also a natural end of this - no trade with the West.

In worse case, oil goes to 10 dollars or less. In the best case for Mother Russia oil prices fully recover, although the latter is extremely unlikely. There is no rule prices cannot continue to fall because Mother Russia doesn't like it.


As for cold war, a cold war has already begun. Where have you been? It began when Mother Putin decided to invade and annex the lands of his neighbors as Hitler did and which led to WWII. And here is the thing about "no trade with the West", the West doesn't need Mother Russia. Mother Russia very much needs the West. While Russia is heavily dependent upon trade with the West, the West isn't heavily dependent upon Mother Russia. Mother Russia needs the West to sell its oil and natural gas.

Can Russia survive after these two limits have been reached? Of course it can. Russia itself produces almost all what it really needs for survival: commodities, wheat, weapons to defend all this it has enough. It remains a main exporter of wheat, weapons, atomic stations, rockets, and the world is full of states interested to buy all this even without the West. So there will be enough income to buy what it does not produce itself. One may think that Chinese production is worse quality than German production, ok, but this is a luxury problem (and it is not clear at all if Germany will follow the US in the Cold War for long, anti-americanism is on the rise in Germany).

Except it doesn't. If Russia wants to give up computers, medicines, and medical supplies and other critical goods, so be it. Russians can go back to the "Yeltsin days".

So, the Russian leadership has to do a lot. And, in particular, it has also to cut its own expenses. They also think about selling some state property. But these are short term problems. And even if things go very much worse, the the world trade collapsing completely, Russia has everything it needs to survive.

Keep deluding yourself comrade, and "Yeltsin days" will be on your front doorstep someday soon.

 

[Schmelzer]

LOL...then why do you keep contesting it.

I don't. I have not make any claims that oil will raise again toward its maximum or so. I see no reason to expect it will continue to fall, because already now there is a decrease in developing new sources. Iran is not that much. I'm not a specialist in making oil price estimates - in this case, I would try to make money by speculating, instead of writing posts for free. But the question who is better in professional prediction - the Russians or you - has a clear answer.

the fact is if Mother Russia could manufacture the 300 million plus dollars worth of goods it imports every year, it wouldn't be importing them.

Imports may be cheaper, or have better quality for the same price, or so. Trading is a good idea even if one can produce everything alone.

Mother Russia is very dependent upon foreign investment, probably more than any other country. The referenced article below explains why. Mother Russia doesn't have the resources or the knowledge to replace foreign investment.

LOL. Articles behind paywalls do not count as evidence.

Last week the Russian Ruble lost 4% of its value in a single day. The Russian Ruble is on the ropes. It desperately needs help.
http://money.cnn.com/2016/01/20/investing/russia-ruble-record-low/

LOL. It was already near 85/\$ and is now around 76/\$ according to http://www.xe.com/de/currencycharts/?from=USD&to=RUB&view=1M

At the time when it was around 85 the question if the central bank would support the ruble has been discussed, and it was said don't expect any such support below 90.

As previously and repeatedly explained to you, your assertion is at best debatable.

If even you are ready to accept it as debatable, there is no need to discuss this question.

And as previously explained to you, the reason why that is important, is because that corporate debt is denominated in foreign currencies and corporations will need to exchange their rubles for foreign currencies the Russian central bank may not have. That's a problem for Mother Russia.

This may be problem for a particular firm. It is not one for Russia as a whole. To have debt in \$ makes economic sense if one has also some income in \$, else it is stupidity based on speculation, and such speculation will be punished in this case by the market. Such is life in a market economy. If they have income in \$, they need, if at all, only some part of the \$ from market, and for this purpose the reserves are sufficient.

Yeah, you don't care that Russian workers are not getting paid. You don't care until its your paycheck. You can't find it on the internet...seriously? It's all over the internet. What you mean is you want to stick your head in the sand again for fear you might find evidence you dislike.
https://www.rt.com/business/314954-russia-factory-salaries-bricks/
http://capx.co/external/russia-still-hasnt-paid-space-station-workers/
https://meduza.io/en/feature/2016/0...nd-there-won-t-be-any-money-make-a-run-for-it
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/22/w...-aim-at-putin-as-economy-exacts-its-toll.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/23/world/europe/russians-anxiety-swells-as-oil-prices-collapse.html

Your examples are private firms - even in the case titled "Workers at Russian space centre go on hunger strike in protest of unpaid wages despite promise from Putin" they are workers of a subcontractor. And, fine, a number has been told. \$56 million is the amount of unpaid wages. Which makes less than 50 cents per person. So, if I would loose money spending time here, at the amount of, say, minimal Russian wage, I would already have lost much more answering these stupid claims.

The fact is Russia's debt is rated as junk and for a host of reasons including, but not limited to, political instability and trade sanctions. Those are very real risks.

There are, of course, certain political risks for a Western firm owning Russian debt papers, given the overregulation in the West and the possibility that in a Cold War they will be sanctioned by Western politicians. Here I have to agree, these are very real risks. As if political risks would not be real. But so what? These are risks for Western firms, not for others, say Chinese or so. And also not for the Russian oligarchs if they bring part of their money home.

You obviously don't understand what a central bank does. As you have been repeatedly told, in order for Russian companies to pay-off their foreign debts, they need the Russian central bank to exchange rubles for those foreign currencies, and the Russian central bank doesn't have enough foreign currency to pay off all Russian foreign currency debts. much less support the ruble.

And you, of course, think that nobody in the West has to pay dollars for debt given by the Russian oligarchs? And if Russian production is sold in the West, it is not sold for dollars? And who gets these dollars? Remember about the nonetheless positive trade balance.

As I have repeatedly explained to you, Mother Russia is using its foreign currency reserves to prop up Russia's ruble.

And repeating nonsense does not make it true. It has, at some moments in the past, actually it does not. Expect to start it again if the \S sells for 90 rubles.

That has nothing to do with buying low and selling high. Russia earns foreign currency when it sells good to foreign countries. That has nothing to do with buying US Dollars cheaply and selling them at a higher price.

The direct interventions of the central bank using its foreign reserves have to do a lot with buying dollars cheaply (near 50 rubles) and selling them high (near 90 rubles).

As previously pointed out to you and per my previous references, Russia's finance minister has said Russia's reserve fund will likely be depleted before year end.

This was a claim about a particular fond created from income from oil.

And here is the thing about "no trade with the West", the West doesn't need Mother Russia. Mother Russia very much needs the West. While Russia is heavily dependent upon trade with the West, the West isn't heavily dependent upon Mother Russia. Mother Russia needs the West to sell its oil and natural gas.

There are other countries in the world which are also interested in buying oil and gas. And don't worry, Russia has thought about its ability to survive in case of a real cold war against the West. And it has decided that it can live with this.

If Russia wants to give up computers, medicines, and medical supplies and other critical goods, so be it.

LOL, Russia has recently developed a vacation against Ebola. So, it has own abilities in this domain too. And, of course, it has also own computers. Or do you really think that the Russian nuclear weapons are controlled by Western computers or Western software? This would be really dangerous.

 

[joepistole]

I don't. I have not make any claims that oil will raise again toward its maximum or so. I see no reason to expect it will continue to fall, because already now there is a decrease in developing new sources. Iran is not that much. I'm not a specialist in making oil price estimates - in this case, I would try to make money by speculating, instead of writing posts for free. But the question who is better in professional prediction - the Russians or you - has a clear answer.

Yes, you have. You have made it many times....remember the whole "if then" tiff? You are not being honest comrade. No, you are not an expert in oil pricing, it's very obvious you have little if any knowledge of markets and in particular oil markets. Yes, there is a clear answer as to who is better, and it isn't you or your fellow Russians. As has been repeatedly pointed out to you, the facts are Russia has repeatedly overestimated oil prices. Mother Russia estimates oil well sell for 50 dollars per barrel this year, it's currently selling for less than 30 dollars a barrel...oops.

Imports may be cheaper, or have better quality for the same price, or so. Trading is a good idea even if one can produce everything alone.

As previously and repeatedly pointed out to you, if Mother Russia could produce the goods it imports from the West, it would. Mother Russia isn't giving hundred of billions to the West every year for goods it could produce domestically. Also has been repeatedly brought to your attention, foreign workers are at least 5 times more productive than Russian workers.

LOL. Articles behind paywalls do not count as evidence.

Except, they were not and are not behind paywalls. But even if they were, you cannot cough up a dollar? Are things that bad in Mother Russia? Contrary to your assertion, Putin is desperately seeking foreign investment, even going so far as sell the crown jewels of Russian assets.

You are not being honest comrade. Multiple sources were quoted verbatim and referenced.

LOL. It was already near 85/\$ and is now around 76/\$ according to http://www.xe.com/de/currencycharts/?from=USD&to=RUB&view=1M

At the time when it was around 85 the question if the central bank would support the ruble has been discussed, and it was said don't expect any such support below 90.

Well, you are being more than a little disingenuous comrade. There are large day to day variances in the value of the ruble which are largely attributable to Russian central bank interventions. But those spikes caused by Russian central bank interventions are not sustainable as has been discussed ad nauseum. Using your source, the fact is the ruble/dollar exchange rate has gone from 34 to 75 - 85 rubles to the dollar range it trade in today. That's a significant devaluation. Over the course of the last decade the value of the Russian Ruble has never been lower.

If even you are ready to accept it as debatable, there is no need to discuss this question.

Let's be clear here, I said your assertion that Russia's foreign currency reserves were sufficient to pay off Russian state debt is debatable, and I further said, even if that were so, it isn't sufficient and I explained why. Because Mother Russia has foreign currency needs that go far beyond just paying state debts.

This may be problem for a particular firm. It is not one for Russia as a whole. To have debt in \$ makes economic sense if one has also some income in \$, else it is stupidity based on speculation, and such speculation will be punished in this case by the market. Such is life in a market economy. If they have income in \$, they need, if at all, only some part of the \$ from market, and for this purpose the reserves are sufficient.

No, it's a problem for Mother Russia for the reasons which have been repeatedly explained to you. Foreign investors stop investing if Russian companies default. And that's a big problem for Mother Russia.

Let me give you a little remedial education here. Let's say you run a company in Russia and you need some equipment and technology made by a foreign company. So you enter into a contract with a foreign company to by that product. No country foreign company would be willing to enter a ruble contract in part because the ruble is such an unstable currency. So the contract would be denominated in a more stable currency like the US Dollar. Where does the Russian purchaser get the dollars needed for the purchase? If it is a multinational company with access to US Dollars, it may have foreign currency. But if it is like most Russian firms, it doesn't have that access. Most of its cash is vested in rubles. The only place those firms can get the foreign currency they need to pay their bills is from the Russian central bank. If Russian companies stop paying their debts, they will no longer be able to purchase foreign goods. Russian hospitals would no longer have access to Western medical supplies and pharmaceuticals.

Your examples are private firms - even in the case titled "Workers at Russian space centre go on hunger strike in protest of unpaid wages despite promise from Putin" they are workers of a subcontractor. And, fine, a number has been told. \$56 million is the amount of unpaid wages. Which makes less than 50 cents per person. So, if I would loose money spending time here, at the amount of, say, minimal Russian wage, I would already have lost much more answering these stupid claims.

You have been given numerous examples of state workers and private workers who have not been paid. Remember, you previously asserted, you could find no evidence on the internet that Russian workers were not being paid. Your assertion was and remains clearly wrong. The internet is littered with many examples of Russian employers, both state and private, who are not paying their employees and haven't paid them for many months - all reminiscent of "Yeltsin times".

There are, of course, certain political risks for a Western firm owning Russian debt papers, given the overregulation in the West and the possibility that in a Cold War they will be sanctioned by Western politicians. Here I have to agree, these are very real risks. As if political risks would not be real. But so what? These are risks for Western firms, not for others, say Chinese or so. And also not for the Russian oligarchs if they bring part of their money home.

Russia's credit worthiness has nothing to do with western regulation. It has everything to do with Russia's ability and willingness to pay off its debts. And the fact remains, multinational credit rating firms have rated and continue to rate Russian debt as junk (i.e. high risk).

And you, of course, think that nobody in the West has to pay dollars for debt given by the Russian oligarchs? And if Russian production is sold in the West, it is not sold for dollars? And who gets these dollars? Remember about the nonetheless positive trade balance.

As previously explained to you, Russia's small positive trade balance is quickly becoming a negative trade balance. Even if, the decline in Russia's trade accounts were to stop, its modest positive trade balance wouldn't be sufficient to cover Russia's debts and foreign currency needs.

And repeating nonsense does not make it true.

So why do you do it?

The direct interventions of the central bank using its foreign reserves have to do a lot with buying dollars cheaply (near 50 rubles) and selling them high (near 90 rubles).

When the Russian central banks intervenes to support the ruble, it buys rubles with its foreign currency reserve in order to prop up the price of rubles. These market interventions cost Mother Russia precious foreign currency and are very expensive for Mother Russia. It cannot get those dollars back.

This was a claim about a particular fond created from income from oil.

And? The fact remains; Russia's finance minister has warned Russia's reserve fund will be fully depleted this year.