Comments by "Nattygsbord" (@nattygsbord) on "Paul Warburg" channel.

  1. The proper name for this war is not the "russo-ukrainian war". Rather I would call it the war of russian aggression
    60
  2. That guy is a genius. I hope he starts an university one day where they can teach out Tuckeronomics.
    7
  3. I am also a veteran that fought in Vietnam and lost my best friend during operation desert storm. And I totally agree with you and russia.
    2
  4. russian bot
    1
  5. Weimar could have paid the war reparations if they wanted to. But for political reasons they did not create deflation by keeping the old taxes on the rich. Instead they did the opposite and gave rich people big tax cuts that caused massive inflation when that was not met with government spending cuts. And all price controls Germany had done under the war had worked well. Russians and Germans have historically been good at such stuff. However, when Germany got peace then it removed the price controls, and the inflation started to skyrocket into the air - just like a big air ballon that you push hard deep under the water, and the harder you push it down the more violently do it want to jump up.
    1
  6. Russia can make price controls and save up money... but those are just treating the sympoms of inflation for a while
    1
  7. The difference is that USA and Japan are exporting lots of stuff while russia is not. And in exchange for stuff do America get some money. And when have a stable income you can repay a debt. Russia does not have the same large income. And yes they are selling some oil, but that small amounts of money they get for that is not enough to cover the costs for this war. And it is also a difference why someone takes a loan. If someone borrows money to go to school to study and become a doctor, then maybe 5 years in the future this person will be a doctor and earn a big wage and can repay a big loan pretty easily. So if USA is behaving the same way of investing money into infrastructure, research and promoting new companies... then it will lead to more economic growth in the future. But if you borrowing money and then just buy plasma tv, gold plated toilets and luxury cars that you damage... then of course it will not be long term substainable to borrow money. And russia is behaving the same way. They borrow stuff that they use up. And instead of making the country richer with more bridges and schools built, are the war doing the opposite to them with all buildings destroyed in Kursk. And all money that could have gone into better schools and bridges are wasted on building tanks that gets blown up by cheap enemy drones. And young men who might had become scientists, doctors and engineers gets killed. Or they get arms, legs and eyes blown out so they cannot work at a normal job after the war is over. So the russian economy is at a flatspin. Giving up the war is the only way to plane from a hard crash landing. But it seems like the Captain wishes to go down to the bottom togheter with his ship so to say.
    1
  8. He can fool the russians all he wants with price controls and such. He can say that a ruble is worth this or worth that. And maybe he can somehow even keep the black market in russia somewhat calm. However he cannot fool foreigners. He cannot increase money supply a mllion fold, and then say he wants to buy stuff from a foreigner and pay him with rubles and claim that they are worth the same amount of rubles as before. Foreigners will see this scam for what it is and demand payment in their own currency, Chinese Yuan or Indian rupies or whatever it may be. And when you create inflation, you discover that imports becomes more and more expensive for your own country. And that is not substainable for a country that desperatly needs to find more money to pay for an expensive war. Every little source of income needs to be used, and every little amount of waste needs to be minimized. So inflation is something that one wants to avoid.
    1
  9. Tariffs do work and history shows so. Which was the fastest growing economy in the world 1780-1820 and had the highest tariffs in Europe? It was Britain. Which country had the worlds highest tariffs 1820-1890 and was the fastest growing economy of the world at that time? It was USA. Which country had the worlds highest tariffs on manufacturing goods and the fastest growing economy measured in GDP per workhour 1890-1914? It was Sweden. And later on have you seen the worlds fastest growing economies like Japan, South Korea and China repeating all these economic wonders. So the free trade dogma is based on stupidity and ignorance. And not all jobs are worth saving because not all jobs are equally valuable. If you wanna make a poor 3rd world country rich, then you need to replace all low paid jobs with higher paid jobs. And when different parts of the economy inside a country is competing for workers there will be winners and losers. South Korea used to be the largest shoe manufacturer in the world during the 1990s. However later on would South Korea see a strong rise in its high technology sector, and Samsung was performing strongly and needed more workers and was prepared to pay high wages to get more workers to help it make smartphones. However this pushed up wages not just in industry but in all parts of the South Korean society, and that was good for South Koreans that now would get better paid and get a higher standard of living than before now when their high tech industry was rising. But the shoe industry was the loser as it could not compete with Samsungs higher wages. And higher wages harmed the profits of the shoe industry, so the shoe factories moved to other countries instead. And this is the typical development of things when a country is transitioning away from jobs with lower wages to jobs with higher wages. There will always be losers. And we should not try to prevent every job from being lost. We should do the opposite and try to destroy as many low paying jobs as possible and replace them with high paying jobs, and we should try to speed up technological development as fast as possible. If you do want every job from being lost, then you should make the tax payers save every old outdated industry that could not handle competition... save the horse and buggy industry jobs that cannot handle competition from cars, save the Kodak analog cameras that cannot handle competition from digital photography, support ice harvesters that are getting outcompeted by refridgerators, and help the typewriter industry that have a hard time since the innovation of modern computers. Personally I think that we should help some jobs and destroy other jobs. We should support high tech jobs by all means... including tariffs and government support, and regulations favoring them. While we should try to despose of old dying industries. If some poor country in the 3rd world wanna make money from taking over our low paying jobs and then ship those products back to us for a low cost - then fine, let them do that. We get cheap products and they get a steady income. Maybe they don't earn that much from their primitive industries making beer, milk, toys and such. But it is at least better paid than non-manufacturing jobs. And yes manufacturing jobs are more valubale than other jobs. Because they got higher productivity than jobs in say farming, raw material extraction and service sector jobs. You can invent more effiecent production methods in industry and use robots and machines that can upscale production to become 400 times more effiecent. But you cannot do that in farming, because it takes time for chickens and potatoes to grow. And trees need say 30 years to grow. And service sector jobs like chefs and hairdressers cannot do 400 times more job in a workhour... because that level of productivity is simply not possible in the service sector. A roman barber can probably make roughly as many haircuts in an hour as a modern barber can. And a chef cannot increase his output 400 fold without the meals he serves gets lower in quality. And producitivity matters if you want your country to go from poor to rich. No medium sized country have managed to become rich without increased productivity. So the talk that manufacturing doesnt matter is just ignorant nonsense. Tourism does earn a country foreign cash that allow it to import foreign goods, unlike manufacturing does. And neither can a country like USA with 300 million people just live off tourism. And selling raw materials is not making countries rich, since the global competition is strong as many countries in the world got coal, wood, copper, cotton and sugar. And new materials are constantly invented that can replace those materials - like for example artificial sweaterners instead of sugar, synthethic vanilla, and optic cables are invented to replace old copper cables which makes the global price of copper to fall like a rock and hurt copper exporting countries in africa. But knowledge based products in manufacturing does not have does products. If your country is one of the extremely few countries that knows how to make high tech products, then the competition is low and you can charge high prices for your exports and make big profits that allows for high wages and large tax income for the government. And when your country is making the newest most hot thing, then of course is global demand for that product enormous - which allows you to sell massive quantities at a high price which means enormous profits. And by being a world leader in aircraft manufacturing, creator of jet engines, and stealth aircrafts do USA gain massive amounts of wealth. And by the US government with state support (and not the free market) helped to create the internet, GPS, semi-conductors, and so on did USA manage to create some of the largest companies in the world like Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Facebook and so on. Europe does not have anything similiar. So it makes sense for USA to just to temporarily curve the free market, even if it means short term costs for society. Sure did it cost money for Japans consumers to have tariffs that forced them to buy inferior japanese cars at an overprice instead of buying European and American cars back in the 1950s. But today have Toyota managed to grow into one of the most succesful car manufacturers in history thanks to that, instead of getting crushed by foreign competition. Had you been an economic advisor of Japan in the 1950s you would have told them to not do any protectionism. You would have said it would be insane to think that a poor 3rd world country just destroyed by a big war should try to compete with the worlds largest economic super power in car manufacturing. You would have told japan to save its money by not helping Toyota, and instead should Japan have followed the free market and continued to do things it was good at. And continue to sell silk, fish, porcelain, soy and textiles. And with your advice had Japan continued to remain a poor agrarian society instead of an industrial powerhouse. And we consumers in the western world would never have enjoyed playing any Nintendo, driving any Toyota, or any electronics from Sony.
    1
  10. baseless russian conspiracy theory
    1
  11. Peter Zeihan just seems to make things up as he speaks, and make claims without providing sources so its basically just "trust me bro" he followers got to cling on to.
    1
  12. Well russia have suffered from the dutch disease ever since 1941 when the military industrial complex had to expand to fight Germany. And when resources was transferred from the civilian sector to military production it did of course lead to some good things for the russians like more effiency in military production thanks to economies of scale and more talented big brained people got involved in making weapons... so weapons became better, cheaper and took less time to make. So this led to deflation in the military industry. However the effect was the opposite in the civilian sector when it lost big brained workers and workers and resources that enabled economies of scale. That led to less effiency, less production and higher prices and increased amount of inflation of that part of the economy. Of course can a government use price controls to hide the ugly truth to some extent. But if things are becoming too extreme will not even they be able to slow down inflation, which will beginning to speed up on the black market. And shortages of daily consumer goods will be felt by the average person.
    1
  13. You are wrong and I think you are doing Ukraine a disservice. The reason why Ukraine has not mobilized more men has more to do with it not being popular among the Ukrainian population, and moving young men from work into uniform will harm the economy. And the west has been half assed with its economic and military aid... so its not obvious that Ukraine would get full compensation from the west if it actually did what it was being told. So that will of course harm the economy while getting soldiers without training and equipment. But on the other hand, Ukraine needs more manpower like women and young men. Those could be used in non-combat roles, so your view that the conscription is the same thing as a death sentence is extremely ignorant. Ukraine can continue to use its elderly men for combat roles just like before, while women and 18 year olds just drive military trucks, handle the anti-aircraft systems defending the cities long behind the frontlines, help with guarding russian prisoners of war, and patrolling the border towards Belarussia, or guarding the entrances to military bases and airfields. By doing so do Ukraine no longer need its elderly soldiers to do those tasks, and more elderly men can be freed up to use at the frontline, or using them as reserves so that some units can get some home leave so they can for once visit their own families after 3 years of war.
    1
  14. Russian bullshit without proof. And funnily enough do satellite photos before 2022 not show any damages of artillery shells. And today are those places just ruins because of russian shelling. Russia is killing more russian speakers than Ukraine ever has. Russia murdered 200.000 russian speaking Ukrainian civilians in Mariupol alone. That shows us how much russia cares about russian speakers.
    1
  15. I don't think it is cowardice. Its more a long list of things... Many german politicians wanna cling on to the idea of "Ostpolitik" and "handel durch wandel" no matter how brutally this illusion was shattered in 2022. I guess many German economic interests dislike the painful changes the cut ties to russia have brought Germany. Some German politicians are bribed scum like Schröder and many AFD boys. I also guess Scholz selfishly tries to save the socialdemocrats from total destruction the next election by winning back some voters that have walked over to AFD, and he is willing to throw Ukraine under the bus to save his beloved party. Giving away the favorite toys of your military to another country makes your military personnel feeling a little sad in their hearts, even if they also happens to be Swedish officers that strongly supports Ukraine and feel much pride in helping Ukraine and think it is the right thing to do. And I imagine that many German officers feels the same way. And a few of them might not feel the positive feeling gained by helping Ukraine, and some might have some sincere fears that the country is giving away too much and leaves Germany undefended and vulnerable. And some might (wrongly) also believe that the war in Ukraine is a lost cause and that donating weapons will just waste them without changing the outcome of the war. And then there is this thing that military aid might feel unusal and in opposition to modern German political tradition of pacifism. There are many things to melt at the same time. German weapons are killing russian soldiers. And things happens slowly because Germany do not wanna act alone without going hand in hand with allies like America. Germany is feeling very ambivalent towards the idea of taking over the role as the leader of the EU and Europe. Its scared over the use of military force. But on the other hand do it not want to let allies down, and some might also feel a moral obligation to now stop genocide and a country making wars of aggression. Regardless is this a new thing and many feel uncomfortable, and have mixed feelings about Germanys new role. And then have the Bundeswehr been regarded as a joke for decades. And now when things are getting real, do Germans have to start asking themselves uncomfortable new questions regarding their own military. And putting more money into it and hire more soldiers and taking things seriously will bring Germany some challanges. So this war has been difficult for Germany to melt. And I think there are many perspectives at play here. For a country with over 200 years of peace and neutrality, like Sweden have our own way towards Nato felt un-fun. I am ambivalent towards it. But like all other Swedes do I back Ukraine 100% and it is really a no brainer to give military aid to Ukraine.. because there are no other realistic enemy that might wanna invade Sweden so we might just as well allow the Ukrainians to do the job for us. Because it seems very unlikely little Denmark will invade Sweden again. I do not take the threat from any baltic country seriously either. Norway is pacifist and their military is too weak to invade Sweden even if it had wanted to. Getting invaded by Poland again because their royal family would marry Sweden's royal family, and then later on fight over who have the right to own Sweden... now seems like far-fetched scenario. And Germany doesn't seem interested in invading us either.
    1
  16. The american people got the government they deserve
    1
  17. Well Iran involved military advisors long ago. Which makes putins complaints about western advisors in ukraine just hypocrisy.
    1
  18. We need to hit hard when we have the chance. We cannot save small countries like Georgia from russian imperialism, but Ukraine is another matter. Putin took a bite of something that is too much for him to chew. And by letting russia destroy itself militarily, economically, prestige wise, and its internatiional reputation and making its own people war fatigue and starting to fear leaders that drags them into imperialist wars... then we can finally have some peace in the world. And small countries might get a window of oppurtunity to steer things in the direction of their own want. With russias collapse it might be possible for Georgia to retake control over its own country and join EU or Nato. And Transnistria will fall upon itself. And Serbia cut their ties with russia. Hungary and Slovakia might no longer get any cheap russian gas and find themselves isolated in the EU, they can start taking in even more Chinese corruption money than they already do instead of money from russia... but I guess that their position is not long term substainable. The Visegrad alliance will not hold if Poland revoke its protection of Hungary. And if Poland wants more east european style politics in the EU, then it always got the Baltics, Ukraine, Romania and such to ally itself with instead of Hungary.
    1
  19. Russia pay people to say lies to western people. While the Ukrainian side do not pay anyone and get people to spread their message for free. I think that says a lot. We are the good guys, and you are not. We are motivated and you have to create a fake phasade. Seems like Pooty is running low on cannon fodder for his war that most russians no longer support. So I will laugh my ass off when its FSB trolls turn to stand in the frontline.
    1
  20. Inflation is when too much money chases too few goods. And hyperinflation only happens in poor third world countries (typically socialist ones) and countries at war. Russia suits both those boxes. Hyperinflation do not typically happen to rich countries because they are able to produce more stuff. Russia on the other hand are not producing much consumer goods, so it cannot smooth things out and create price stability. It rather instead produce tanks and bombs. And the bombs gets blown up and after that are no nothing left of all hours of work that was put into making that bomb. Russia are not getting richer and peoples lives have not been improved by the bomb explosion. And neither have normal russians standard of living improved to building new tanks that has been sent to Ukraine only to be destroyed by a cheap drone. Russia must find a way to produce more consumer goods or their inflation will start to spiral up out of control. The other alternative to avoid high inflation would of course be to not create money to spend it on this war. But if russia do that, then will it have to downsize its military by a huge amount and have a huge disadvantage on the battlefield in Ukraine and being too weak to go on any offensive actions. And perhaps being even to weak to defend the many areas it is controlling. If there are not enough money to keep so many troops at the frontline, and say half of them needs to go home to russia. Then will this leave large areas of Ukraine and russia totally undefended against Ukrainian attacks. So russia can lose this war with inflation. Or it can lose the war by making its army smaller, and too small to win this war. Or it can just give up this war today and just go home.
    1
  21. If the war ended now and Trump gets elected, and give russia all land they have stolen, return all frozen assets and end all sanctions... I still think that this war has been a disaster for russia and not worth the price it have paid to achieve this so called "victory". Its like giving away 15 dollars and getting 1 dollar in return. Russia would have been better off using that money on education, infrastructure, etc instead of wasting it on a war. This war is waste and not an investment.
    1