“Signs of imbalances in the economy are increasing," said Heli Simola, a researcher at the Bank of Finland, but "Russia will still be able to continue financing the war for some time. The war won’t end because Russia is running out of money.”

Really? I've looked at it in a reasonable amount of detail for an amateur and it seems dire to me. Another 2 full years would be impressive.

[–] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

A lot of people seem to forget, what countries can take. Seriously WW2 was most everybody being willing to be bombed, have way higher casulties at the front, while rationing at home. That was true for everybody. Right now Russia has spend its war chest on the war, which means few cuts in pensions, education, infrastructure and so forth. A lot of money went to soldiers and workers in the arms industry. Millions of Russians got a better life due to the war. What we see right now is the war chest running low and that forces Russia to make cuts. So the question is how deep can Putin cut, before the systems collapses.

But Russia has a lot of natural resources and a fairly sufficent economy, while being able to trade with China. It is not perfect, but that can last a long time. Also Russia can just print Rubel. It hurts the economy long term, but Putin does not care.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Yes, but political support is also in the equation. Stalin might have been able to keep this up forever, since his power was based on ideology and fear. Putin's power is based on greed and fear, and he's actively encouraged political apathy, so once people start personally hurting I have trouble imagining him sticking around for long.

(Meanwhile, the West is so ideological it doesn't even know it's ideological, so it's all down to a stupid election on our end)

Also Russia can just print Rubel. It hurts the economy long term, but Putin does not care.

A good point. It's a subtle difference, but so far he's resisted making any cuts. He's spent on the war on one side and handouts on the other, and just taken the resulting inflationary pressure. If he keeps that pattern up it will be hyperinflation that marks the end of his capabilities.

[–] MrMakabar@slrpnk.net 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Sorry to be so negative, but people being angry, still requires them to be organized and work on overthrowing Putin. Unfortunately Putin killed all opposition leaders.

This makes Putin falling more likely, but it needs a spark of hope and that will be hard to find in Russia.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 day ago

I don't expect a popular revolution, more like a series of coups. Right now it doesn't happen, because Putin is still preferable to instability for the Russian elites. Once that's no longer true, I'd think any kleptocrat would be in danger.

In a way, that's actually more negative than what you said. I suppose he could just give up on the war, too, but Kamil Galeev says that's politically impossible and he's actually Russian, while I'm just a vaguely international Westerner.

[–] The_Che_Banana@beehaw.org 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

He just has to maintain it until his ally Trump wins in November.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Sadly, accurate. If Trump is going to win, Zelinsky has already passed the optimal end date for Ukraine.

If Kamala wins, he's got a solid 4 years to chip away at them.

[–] InternetCitizen2@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I think we forget just how long things can stay shitty and teetering on collapse.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I mean, definitely, that describes their military situation thus far. This guy is qualified enough to know something I don't, too.

It would seem that at some point they'll just straight up have less stuff in Russia than the Russian government is ordering. They've been solving it by squeezing borrowers so far, but they're at credit card levels of interest right now, and you'd assume that lever gets diminishing returns at some point, once people stop bothering with central bank loans entirely.

I have trouble picturing the Putin regime as the kind that can power through hyperinflation and empty shelves on ideological fervour alone. It's pretty greed-based. (They could also do austerity and try to buy less, but so far they've gone for inflationary pressure between the two; it's easier to blame someone else for)