this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2026
223 points (97.0% liked)

World News

57265 readers
1838 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
NewsAutoMod@lemmy.world
Tenthrow@lemmy.world
little_cow@lemmy.world
lemmyAtom@lemmy.world
jordanlund@lemmy.world
223
Endgame: Russia’s war economy hits its limits (www.kielinstitut.de)
submitted 3 weeks ago by EatingOnions@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world
131 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Photonic@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I read, but the only thing I don’t understand is your stupidity and stubbornness.

And sure, they used up their NWF. War is expensive. Who would have thought? Does that prove anything about sanctions?

And a 300B+ (rubles not USD) expense is not the same as an economy being ruined. Especially when the GDP of that country is about 200 trillion rubles. And you’re trying to tell me I don’t understand how this works? Riiiiiight…

And talk about ignoring:

Early in the war, the broad consensus was that the new sanctions would devastate the Russian economy. By some metrics, though, Russia’s economy has proved resilient to date.

From the US government

Following Russia’s full-fledged invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Western countries imposed unprecedented economic sanctions. Yet there is limited evidence that these measures have inflicted substantial economic pain on Russia, as the recent slowdown has largely reflected factors unrelated to sanctions.

From the ESCP geopolitics institute

Why are you ignoring this?

Edit to your edit: yes the “triangle” –which is actually not a triangle but a Greek capital letter delta, the more you know– symbol gave you away. A human commenting online would just spell out delta. So did the language that is completely different to your other comments.

[–] Vergissmeinnicht@lemmy.ca 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

War is expensive. Who would have thought? Does that prove anything about sanctions?

Yes, because war spending is still spending, and acts as a stimulus, increasing GDP. The amount of increased spending accounts for a bigger share of GDP than their GDP growth figures account for, so without this extra spending their GDP growth would be negative, due to sanctions.

And a 300B+ (rubles not USD)

You're right, I had my numbers mixed up. The NWF spending accounted only for $70B (5.3T Rubles)

It's the gutting of the liquidity of Russia's banks that accounted for the majority of the stimulus and was even higher than the $300B that I remembered, at $446B (36.6T Rubles) by early 2025 https://navigatingrussia.substack.com/p/russias-hidden-war-debt-full-report

This plus the NWF spending accounts for 20% of GDP, or roughly 5% per year over 4 years. Russia's growth numbers were significantly lower than that at between -2.1% and + 4.3%. So on average, without the stimulus spending not a single year since the beginning of the war would have been positive economic growth.

A human commenting online would just spell out delta.

Admit you don't know calculus without telling me you don't know calculus. You write the letter, you don't spell it out.

And the non-monetary consequences of sanctions, that you also keep ignoring. From your own source:

Russia’s military has difficulty procuring key components

Which is why the Iskander production figures are fluctuating for example, and are much lower than they would be without sanctions. To come back to your favourite weapon, the ballistic missile.

[–] Photonic@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Yes

That’s funny, because:

Yet there is **limited evidence** that these measures have **inflicted substantial economic pain** on Russia, as the recent slowdown has largely reflected factors **unrelated to sanctions**.

And I never claimed the sanctions were having no effect at all. So another bad faith argument by you. So let’s stick to the discussion. The thing we are discussing is:

My claim, (in other words) that:

Early in the war, the broad consensus was that the new sanctions would devastate the Russian economy.

But that (and again, I quote, not my exact words, but VERY similar):

there is limited evidence that these measures have inflicted substantial economic pain on Russia, as the recent slowdown has largely reflected factors unrelated to sanctions.

So that now (this is a self-quote):

I’ll believe it when I see it.

So you don’t have to try to make a case against something I never claimed, which is that the sanctions are not having any effect at all on the Russian economy. They are and I never claimed the contrary.

They just weren’t draining the economy in 2022, like Von der Leyen (and many others) claimed. For this I have provided ample evidence, against your: “nah uh!” without any evidence to back it up and endless straw man arguments.

You write the letter, you don't spell it out.

Yeah in a work document, paper or math assignment. Nobody does in an online discussion with some other guy. Also the entire language was completely different from the rest of your comments. It was clear it was LLM output. Stop embarrassing yourself, triangle boy.

the non-monetary consequences of sanctions, that you also keep ignoring.

I have not been ignoring it. It’s just that I never claimed anything about it, nor that it is part of a discussion about draining the economy. You’re just making another straw man. This discussion is entirely about the economy draining in 2022, or have you forgotten that in all your wisdom?

Why is it so hard for you to say: “yeah, okay, with all this evidence, I see that you’re right. Von der Leyen and many others have indeed been claiming similar things about the Russian economy since 2022 and they haven’t come true, so let’s indeed wait and see before we believe another such message.” ?

And maybe apologise for acting like a jerk right off the bat too, Mr. “asking questions“.

That would get you way more respect than this mindless rambling, this pathetic whining, this narcissistic behaviour, trying strawman after another that all fail miserably.

[–] Photonic@lemmy.world -1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Nothing more to say to embarrass yourself? Or simply admit you were wrong?

And you had the audacity to accuse me of arguing in bad faith…

[–] Vergissmeinnicht@lemmy.ca 0 points 1 week ago (2 children)

wow, living rent free in your head, eh?

don't worry, I'm just caught up with a thing called "responsibilities"

[–] Photonic@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Come on, do a little better… you were soooo funny! With your little straw man arguments and thinking you actually had a real argument