LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksHow disgusting! Abnormal! Those crazy Swedes! Thank God our goverment spend a huge amount of GDP instead of stupid things like social care and so, on things like this:Originally Posted by Ramil
http://www.oldsaltblog.com/2009/10/0...ds-submarines/
How disgusting! Abnormal! Those crazy Swedes! Thank God our goverment spend a huge amount of GDP instead of stupid things like social care and so, on things like this:
http://www.oldsaltblog.com/2009/10/0...ds-submarines/
Please, correct my mistakes, except for the cases I misspell something on purpose!
It's true. You cannot spend so much on social needs or your state would risk going bankrupt. There are many other things you need to spend on. Perhaps, Sweden can afford that, but a country like Russia cannot. There are also fundamental science, culture, roads, industry and infrastructure, army and borders, food security, external debt and many other things. You will run out of money pretty fast if you spend so much on pensions, medical and social insurances. Economics is hard sometimes.If Johanna sounded like a US Democrat earlier, you now sound like a US Republican.
USSR as you remember tried that and we all know what happenned. We had free medicine, free education, universal employment and many other wonderful things in USSR but we also had 60% of GDP spent on the defense. Oil prices were high and we paid the bills. They dropped and destroyed the Soviet economy. The infrastructure was built for planned economy and it was totally unprepared for a market economy. Thus the industry giants have collapsed leaving thousands (if not millions) unemployed and the country ended up in chaos.
Imagine you have a job (oil mining) and stable income (export revenues) but desperately want a new car (good social welfare) - you go to the bank (issue obligaions) and ask for a loan. A miracle happens and you get one (banks are eager to give you money, by the way). You buy a new car (free education, medicine, etc) but suddenly you get fired (oil prices dropped) you find it hard to keep up with the interest (but you cannot sell the car back because nobody wants it). You ask for more loan, for prolongation, you borrow from friends, etc. and gradually your life goes down the hill (faster and faster). To your dismay, as if all of this was not enough, you fall ill (got a political crisis). What will happen to you next? Right. You will die and your children (we, the people of modern Russia) will have to pay against your bills.
That's what happenned with the Soviet economy (in simple words).
I don't see your point. The purchase of these toys cost the buyer's country nothing. Quite the opposite - they got taxed thus providing additional revenue for the state.
Send me a PM if you need me.
It's not that I disagree, it's just so unusual to hear that from an anarchist. All this government's business: taxes, spending, etc. The notion of the government is disgusting in your opinion, isn't it? It's much better without the government, right?
Sure, you don't have to convince me. I agree. But what would you tell our fellow communists? The ones who wish to have the planned economy?
И в чём прикол раскрывать факты если никакого обсуждения не состоится? Ну, давайте раскроем... И чего? Иранские выборы (TM) версия 2.0.1? С нетерпением жду выступления местного Аятоллы для утверждения состава Мосгордумы. :"":
Как правильно где-то было подмечено — у нас выборы честные, а не справедливые.
ЕР честно зарание всем дала понять, что победит и с каким счетом, и теперь честно выполнила обещанное.
Явно установка была: пропустить только ЕР и КПРФ. Остальных отбросить за 7% барьер путем приписки доли ЕР.
Не первый раз такое слышу, но мне кажется, что тогда нефть стоила 3 копейки (образно). Где бы узнать за сколько продавал СССР нефть и газ в 70-е/80-е?
Thou must know thy foe. We live in real world and you can't just say goodbye to such things in a moment. The plan is in gradual transformation of the institute of state, it's not that I'm willing to put a machine gun on my roof and say 'Anarchy is a mother of order" (although, to be honest, this solution looks very appealing sometimesIt's not that I disagree, it's just so unusual to hear that from an anarchist. All this government's business: taxes, spending, etc. The notion of the government is disgusting in your opinion, isn't it? It's much better without the government, right?)
I will say they're dinosaurs and must die. Their time is at an end. No planned economy is in store for them. We must learn how to create flexible and self-regulating systems in economics that require little or no human intervention at all.Sure, you don't have to convince me. I agree. But what would you tell our fellow communists? The ones who wish to have the planned economy?
Send me a PM if you need me.
Я думаю, что по мировым ценам:P.S. Oil Price History:
http://www.wtrg.com/prices.htm
Вот и не верится, что падение цены на нефть разрушило всю советскую экономику. Я не спец, но мне кажется, что Джружба 1 и 2 гнали нефть только странам СЭВ, а на них особо не наживешься; буржуям мы гнали только газ по Уренгой-Помары-Ужгород. Хотя, я могу и ошибаться.
According to the graph above (http://www.wtrg.com/oil_graphs/oilprice1947.gif) the relative crude oil price went steadily down from 1981 till 1986 (and was kept low until the 9/11 pivotal point). I think that Perestroika designers just had no choice other than trying to reform the economic system which heavily depended on oil exports at the time. Why would Politburo had been trying to change what they had? Didn't they have enough?
But the USSR was so big that it could practically produce anything it needed internally, couldn't it?
Crocodile - LOL - don't even put me on the same scale as American Republicans OR democrats!USSR as you remember tried that and we all know what happenned. We had free medicine, free education, universal employment and many other wonderful things in USSR but we also had 60% of GDP spent on the defense. Oil prices were high and we paid the bills.
I wasn't complaining about those Swedish policies - just stating a fact. I think they are fundamentally good, although annoying at times. Their alcohol politics, ROFL!!!
True.. Impressive that you knew about that. The budget deficit was a concern but it's hugely improved now. At least the money was spent on "good things" Not for example going to war against "terrorists in oil-rich countries and strategic locations..." like certain other countries did.... which are now deeply in debt to China...Yes, but as it was with Sweden the result is usually a budgetary deficit. It's not normal when 60-70% of the GDP is spent on social subsidies.
Actually it's a LOT easier for me to like socialist idealsbecause unlike you, I never saw the "dark side" of it, it was a free choice and there was no dramatic shift, or massive scandals like Russia/USSR had.. Just a gradual change of policy away from socialist practices, starting in the early 1990s. Some things are almost impossible to change though - such as government regulated rents and allocation of flats for people in public housing.
In my view, "the fall of communism" just killed ideological politics - after that politics became pure cynicism / egoism "what's in it for me?" The only possible ideological vote is Green or Christian. People stopped caring about what's best for all of society.
There must be millions of people in Russia who believed in Socialism and were left very disillusioned and confused. Frankly it's very hard to understand that the communists haven't made a comeback in light of the problems with capitalism outside of the big cities.
If somebody had asked me when I was about 12 if I'd rather live in the USA or the USSR, I probably would have picked the USSR! The the USSR as it was in the 1980s seemed the more decent of the two. At least from the outside, from TV!And think how much the USSR helped in the third world - without expecting anything materially useful in return. At the same time the US was invading and installing right wing dictators in South America and exploiting these countries.
Russia during perestroika had had a tremendous coolness factor when I was a teenager, particularly the rock music - hard to get hold of, therefore cooler. Nobody could imagine this country would dissappear - only that it was changing for the better.
What happened next is tragic - the results of so much hard work practically stolen from the people and turned into cash stored away at private Swiss accounts. While those who had worked for it had to sell their personal belongings in the street market to be able to buy food. How disgusting!
1990s Russia seemed like vultures eating from a corpse...
Anybody and his dog tried to get their share, from big businesses to regular people. Even university friends of mine travelled to RU and the Baltics and bought random stuff for "nothing" and then sold it at good profit. For instance sewing machines, skates, stationary. These products were not bad! My Soviet sewing machine worked for 10 years until I gave it away. Every time you turned on the news there was a new horrible scandal from Russia - environmental, ghastly orphanages, poor hospitals or shocking revelations from the Stalin era...
In my opinion (irrelevant, I know!) they (you) should have reformed gradually - it still would have been MUCH faster than China, and starting from a much better position. It would have been much more dignified and people and organisations would have had more time to adjust and make sure they did not get ripped off.
If a country spends capital abroad, it also needs to bring enough capital from abroad.
Yeah, but what exactly did they need to buy abroad?
The USSR had ALL minerals, plenty of agricultural lands and skilled technicians....
It's not exactly Belgium or the UK which MUST import to feed people and keep warm.
To "buy" is a very simple notion of spending capital. For a soft example, how would USSR maintain their "friendly help" to the third-world countries?
Neither have I. I was too young (I was only 15 in 1991) and didn't know what it's like to live differently. I was brought up in socialistic traditions and honestly believed (up to the age of 12-13) that I live in 'the best country in the world'. Then, in addition to soviet propaganda I got under the 'western' one. Of course, the uglier sides of the soviet reality began to pop up compared to the shining image of the 'enlightened west'. I also didn't the the 'dark side'. (Technically, I remembered the soviet propaganda about 'rotting capitalism' but at that point I had already stopped believing anything they kept telling me).[b]Actually it's a LOT easier for me to like socialist ideals
The old farts that ruled USSR were too old and weak to do it properly, but they were the last ones who at least remembered what was the cost of creating such country as USSR. The young didn't care about anything but their personal gain. The soviet ideals (rather worthy ones) were ridiculed openly and the government became too weak.In my view, "the fall of communism" just killed ideological politics - after that politics became pure cynicism / egoism "what's in it for me?" The only possible ideological vote is Green or Christian. People stopped caring about what's best for all of society.
Yes, there are sill many but they are too old to represent any significant political power. The children grew up and deposed the 'old farts'. After 1991 and right until 2000 I didn't hear anything good about USSR except from some orthodox communists. Of course nobody took them seriously. There were other talks on TV instead (about vast multitudes of murdered by Stalin, about other soviet atrocities, etc). Many so called liberals were throwing sh|t at anything soviet, good or bad.There must be millions of people in Russia who believed in Socialism and were left very disillusioned and confused. Frankly it's very hard to understand that the communists haven't made a comeback.
I've made some research and learned that there was only about 2 million prisoners in 'bloody Gulag' in 1939 and only 450 thousand were sentenced by political reasons. During the whole time of Stalin's reign the number of prisoners has never exceeded 2,7 million people (about 1% of population total and only 0.3% political prisoners).My Soviet sewing machine worked for 10 years until I gave it away. Every time you turned on the news there was a new horrible scandal from Russia - environmental, ghastly orphanages, poor hospitals or shocking revelations from the Stalin era...
At the peak of 'Stalin's terror' in 1937 there were only 353 074 death sentences, and when Khrushev came to power the 'shoking truth' stated that during the whole Stalin's rule (1924-1954) there were only 642 980 death sentences.
(This including murderers, thieves, rapists and other ordinary criminals)
WHAT MILLIONS OF DEAD I WANT TO ASK?
Send me a PM if you need me.
This issue might be very controversial for the obvious reasons. I would have started by mentioning the Soviet famine of 1932–1933 as result of collectivization. The present Russian Duma on April 2nd, 2008 officially stated the follows:
So, the official state figure is 7 million people dead as a result of collectivization and industrialization of the 30s. That was officially recognized as the foundation of the USSR's (and some of today's Russia) industrial might. So, I think a person these days should really be ignorant to say they enjoyed the quiet Soviet times. That quiet time came at a price.
I was referring to some talks about millions that were killed or tortured to death in Gulag.
As for the famine - well, the official point of view is taken, but those were not the result of deliberate policy of extermination. Many deaths were due to the fact that in many cases peasantry preferred to destroy their crops instead of surrendering it for collective use. Poor policy led to catastrophe. This is a result of inepness and shortsightedness rather than deliberate actions. Terrible price - yes, but it was not the policy of terror.
Send me a PM if you need me.
Gulag was an organization that coordinated the work camps. Gulag wasn't built for the purpose of killing or torturing. The inmates were WORKING and building all that USSR might: canals, factories, beautiful Moscow and Peter's metros, etc.
I think you're mature enough to realize the numbers that the Duma would use in such case would be double- and triple- reconfirmed. So the figures are very conservative.
Perhaps. But you know what? I DON'T CARE!!! If the price for a quiet and stable country with the predictable future and stable jobs was [conservatively speaking] 7 million people, I'm out of that communistic company. The "poor policy" was established by the communists who sincerely wanted to make their country and people better. Terror or not terror - that demagogy is not working for me. Sorry about that.
It's probably hard to find out exactly why certain things happened during that era - and get confirmation of every fact.
But it's a long time ago, and didn't subsequent governments litararlly condemn Stalin's policies and try to make a lot of it right?
The UK for instance did some truly ghastly things in their colonies. But all that is left behind and nobody's feeling guilty or worrying about it anymore. Instead they've set up the British commonwealth which is working well for all the members.
The Stalin era mistakes were done by a generation that is largely gone now. The UK is not going to rule and exploit third world countries by force again, and Russia is not going to open any gulags again... Humanity and countries move on!
An Estonian made a documentary about the USSR, called "The Soviet Story" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Soviet_Story which I happened to watch on TV. The wiki entry is probably by an Estonian.
That documentary is surely their "revenge" for the ill-treatment of them in the 1940s but I really believe it was hugely exaggerated. It was so loaded with aggressive rhetoric that I'm surprised that UK TV would air it at all - they ought to have asked for some kind of verification of the claims that were made. I doubt it exists.
It accuses the USSR of pretty much every atrocity known to mankind with gruesome photographs, some of which I am almost certain are from Nazi Germany and have nothing to do with the USSR. Anybody who watches that uncritically will be suspicious of Russia for the rest of their lives. Which was probably exactly the intended effect.
Most of the claims were completely unknown to me at least.
If you want to get seriously p-d off, then watch that. I'm sure it's available on Youtube or bittorrent.
The Balts really should move on... During the USSR era they were not starving, they all had houses, jobs, education and many other worthwhile benefits. I met Estonians visiting Sweden from the USSR several times at family gatherings - (because my aunts husband's family were originally from the Swedish speaking minority there). Everything seemed completely normal. Likewise I visited Latvia in USSR as a kid, and it was not bad at all. Next!
Posting Permissions
Russian Lessons | Russian Tests and Quizzes | Russian Vocabulary |
Reply With Quote
