Comments by "buddermonger2000" (@buddermonger2000) on "Russia's war economy is unsustainable" video.

@milanmarinkovic3016 Because it inherited one from the Soviet Union. Also, France has a space program. I believe Britain did at one point as well. It's way less difficult than you'd think. India just went to the moon for less than many Hollywood movies. I mean, China had one since the 70s, even when it was absolute backwater.
6
@appakinggg It's arguably the most accurate. Even PPP has issues and comes short. Thus GDP is the most consistent. The problem is that Russia missed out on 10 years of growth in the greatest period of economic growth ever, it in fact actively declined during that period, and no longer had the resources of the former superpower of the Soviet Union. The USSR was a superpower. Russia isn't.
5
@TrevorCrook-c1s The Russian economy isn't based on production, but instead resource extraction. Just like Australia and Canada.
3
@TrevorCrook-c1s PPP is an imperfect indicator and nowhere near that large of an economy even in PPP
2
@milanmarinkovic3016 So... not quite. Yes the military investment on the whole of Europe is generally quite low in western Europe. However... you still have the major powers of Britain and France, and Germany is still a massive exporter of Military equipment. They just don't use it themselves. They also have a huge civilian manufacturing economy (not Britain lol), as Germany was a huge exporter of tons of products. Even now, Europe still does compete on the world market. They simply do so on quality rather than price. Which is why their goods are still very much in demand for many countries. Though Germany is now starting to de-industrialize as it's lost its gas connection from Russia.
2
Because it used to be one. So that attitude has lingered
1
@mikecrooks8085 Oh no I'm guessing the bomb damage and bullet holes were probably from the gang and political violence.
1
@TrevorCrook-c1s They don't use PPP
1
@milanmarinkovic3016 First off: no 30 years is not enough. The base still exists even if degraded (which, it in fact, is, especially now that the foreign investment is no longer forthcoming). The know-how isn't immediately lost. Though it does degrade. Also, Russia doesn't make their own machine tools anymore. They're imported from the west. Btw, also, that doesn't prove anything at all about what you were saying, lol. The question was, "Why do they have a space program?" and the answer is "A space program isn't actually that hard" since China's is 50 years old. What this highlights is, in fact, YOUR perfect measure of a space program. However, the greatest things that show are a combination of GDP and per capita as it's wealth. This wealth and size respectively lead to different ideas of how to discuss these things. However, when discussing war, you have only one specific thing you must discuss: the defense industrial base specifically. The inputs available to run it, from financial to material, and finally human capital. This leads into the other discussion about war: the population available and political will. All of these are separate from GDP and are not discussed when discussing "superpowers"
1
@TrevorCrook-c1s technically they use both
1
@TrevorCrook-c1s Incorrect. Russia is a massive importer of western and Chinese machine tools. It doesn't have its own CNC machines. Also the chips are also still overwhelmingly western in origin. They're still found in the missiles. They're just getting the sanctions through third party sources. NASA was using Russian rockets for a very long time since the space shuttle program ended. However, as stated before: all legacy systems from the Soviet era as these are Soyuz rockets. They also brought in crucial money to keep the Russian space program solvent. The reason Russia can even supply everything now is due to legacy systems in storage they're reactivating. I don't see why they'd be better than say... Britain or France under wartime conditions today as Pre-War they had similar production rates of heavy equipment. Especially since they've been unable to advance from the T-90M in the tank department.
1
@fsaldan1 No they shouldn't. It's itself an imperfect comparison due to it being unable to differentiate between quality of goods. That's why GDP is the preferred method more generally.
1
@fsaldan1 It is. PPP is a way to normalize costs among a fixed basket of goods. It's how they adjust it. The problem inherent to that is that the fixed basket of goods does not discriminate based on quality.
1
@milaro222 That's actually another one. Russia has a comparative advantage in things like agricultural goods due to being a grain exporter. So that'll come up in PPP despite it having little to do with the price of wages.
1