30% of Russians drink themselves to death

That's right...I think you told me.

North, South, East, West?

By the New Papa John's Pizza?

Or by the new Papa Gino's?

AboveAlpha

 

By the way...if you have the money and the mean's....you have GOT to Travel!!!


A person really can't grow and evolve if they are always in the same place.


AboveAlpha

 

center.

Jagannath

too lazy for that, my bad...

 

yes, Russia does have some serious problems

 

Jagannath???

As in Vishnu?

AboveAlpha

 

that might be... i'm no expert in Induism.

 

1. Some Biology
The northern nations are vulnerable to alcochol. Southern nations biologically have the ability to get use of reasonable amounts of red wine. But northern nations don't have any use of it. The state of complete drunkness with northern people comes later. This is why they are able to drink huge portions of vodka and look happily at astonished western european who would die of this amount and is not even thinking of drinking that many. Hours later the body will get the poison strike and the fool who tried to act as a big boy (tough guy?) will have a terrible effect. This pause between the time when a person feels sober but is definitely going to be drung as pig is deadly... for is mostly used for drinking more (even more) or some deadly adventures (drunk driving, extreme sport, fighting with the people around for alpha male position etc).

This is why the only reasonable amount of alcochol for a russian (norwegian, swede, fin, northern asians including Alaska inhabitants is 0 (zero). But for a french or italian drinking wine can be good even at a young age.

2. Some history.
Russian culture and tradition hasn't had any heavy alcochol for centuries. Spirit has come to Russia in late middle ages and was firstly accepted only as a medical solution. Vodka started to come to russian people in modern times. And only in the 20th century it has become somewhat a brand of Russia worldwide.
Russian peasants (99% of population since the beginning of russian state in 10th century ro almost a middle of 19th century) drank only light alcochol drinks. 3-4% spirit solutions and no actual spirit used. Russian drink 'pivo' is completely different of european 'beer' although it is translated with the word. Such drinks (made of fruit, berries or cereals) were available several times a year. 5-6 times. They were available only for celebrations for the whole community and couldn't last for more than 2=3 days. The people who drank such a drink more often were considered to be a drunky... So I myself drinking nothing but about 10 times a year having some wine or cocktails would be a drunkie in a 18th century village. At the same time I am one of the most sober people among people of my age - clasmmates, university fellows, co-workers etc.
The dramatic change started with an abolishment of peasant rule in 1860s. Large groups of former peasants went from their local neighbourhood and traditional life to a new society in the towns and cities. Not only alcocholism got a huge spread then. Also the prostitution and the following illneses followed. Then a huge spread of alcocholism happened during the revolution. With a start of WWI there was a ban on selling of any alcochol. But every manufacturer was still producing it for a stash where it was hidden until the time when civil war started. A civil war is a war which brings nothing but self=destruction. And all the people who encountered with new conditions turned into heavy drinkers. Something of the same kind happened after Gorbachev's alcochol ban in the 90s. Lots of people having lost their jobs started to drink heavily everything that resembles alcochol and can be purchased, taken, borrowed or stolen.
At the moment the situation gets better. For everyone who wanted to drink their lives off are already at the cemetry. And those who had tough health are being destroyed at the moment. Looking around I don't see any romantics or culrutal value in drinking alcochol. There are logical bans for the movies to show that a good character is drinking. There is no total ban for alcochol but its consumption is reduced by certain rules, which don't work 100% (as any law) but reduce the problem and give a lot of people a possibility to survive.

3. Some policy.
There is no murderer and villain in history in the universe who killed more people than progressists who ruined traditions because of some good intentions. The road made of good intentions is leading to hell and it is a well-known fact to any politician and manipulator. The genocide of american indians was mostly done not in death camps or at battlefields. Even the luckiest sculp hunter who earned a thousand bucks (e.g.) haven't killed that many of them as a young and pretty lady giving these indians alcochol as a payment for some job done did... Indians mostly died of diseases they haven't had the immunity and... of alcochol. Notably the indians in the south even under the cruel rule of mentally ill conquistadors remained in serious quantities. But the northern indians were not even available in quantities enough for the growing demand of slaves for planatators economy. This is why having had an abundant local population there started a huge market of buying africans on a different continent. The process which happens with russians resembles what happened to indians as twins resemble each other. Since Yeltsin times vodka has become 20-30 times more expensive compared to an average salary. But it is still the cheapest vodka in EU. And any sharp political ban will lead just to an increased popularity of surrogate alcochol. Whether Russia succeeds or not depends on the people. If russians want to survive a nation they need to give up drinking (and smoking). If not they (we) will just disappear as hundreds of other nations did before us and hundreds will still do.

 

He just had the courage not to hide what he really thinks... Some think the same but act as if they are nice, which is much worse. If the devil that day told Eve "Hey. Bite this fuit and you will get out of heavens, start bearing kids in pain, have one of your sons killed by another and ultimately die being blamed for a start of numerous crimes..." But unfortunately the Snake really tried his best to be nice to people...

 

The tide is going out on Putin

http://www.newsweek.com/tide-going-out-putin-418835

 

Canada is northern and we don't hold a candle to the alcoholism in Russia.

Complete rubbish. Stalin alone was responsible for the deaths of 50 million and his buddy Mao outdid him with as many as 70 million. No country (and yes I'm including Germany, both times) has committed as much evil in the world as Russia and its agents.

 

You have a different history, different culture. If you were put under the same historical path - the problems will be the same for all the people are different, but no nation is any superior to any other. You just need to compare apples with apples.

Which is pure propaganda. Stalin and Mao were revolutionaries. Every revolutionary is a murderer. But these round figers are not based on anything but propaganda. The first 'revelation' of Stalin's crimes was performed by Solzhenitsyn, who was convicted of making an anti-communist organisation (being a soviet officer he wrote that the decision of commander was wrong and his friend agreed with a statement) and... and he spent some years in Siberia and returned. Alive. So he himself is the best argument against a propoganda statement.

Good boy. You were made to think so and it seems you never thought out of the box.

 

The good old Cold War. It's nice going to the war and be sure that your opponent is rubbish. Hitler said that Russian pig.

 

Stalin's most horrific murderous years were in the early 1930's when he organized the murder of 6-8 millions Ukrainians in the great famine that the Russians committed against Ukraine. Stalin was no longer a revolutionary at that point in time he was a piece of bacteria that killed.

 

Come on, if it wasn't for Russian drinking themselves to death, we wouldn't have those videos on YouTube, where drunks beat each other up. We laugh at first, then we giggle uncomfortably, then we just feel bad.
But, we'll click on another one of those videos.

 

This is a propaganda and lie.

After the revolution the economy was made in a rough capitalist way. The approach was called 'new economic policy'. The actual power belonged to local semi-criminal semi-capitalist figures - 'kulaks' ('fists') and their trade partners 'meshocnhik' ('bag carriers'). Almost the only product produced and spread this way was grain and other food, which was produced in different regions of Russia including Ukraine. It was supposed that state owned collective farms (kolkhoz) would win the competition with kulaks the natural way. First kolkhozes appeared right after revolution, but in a young corrupt state, which has just passed civil war the idea didn't work as it was planned. Kulaks easily won the competition by possessing more criminal, productive and capital power. Besides, kolkhozes depended on any demand of communist party, which main interest was to feed the cities. So they had to sell off their products at a low price allowing the kulaks to wait for a better marginal profit. This is why kulaks were winning market competition and were becoming a political power which was possible to outplay the bolshevik party. This is why Stalin decided to make a true revolution in economy and a counter-revolution in policy.

The methods of Stalin were the methods of revolutionaries. He just grabbed every piece of property from kulaks and passed it to kolkhozes in every region of Russia. At first this strategy worked well. Kolkhozes were able to collect the harvest which was seeded by kulaks and to sell quite a lot of grain to the cities at a low price. A lot of people had to go to the cities where they were needed for construction of large soviet industrial complexes. But the problems started within 2-3 years since the revolutionary reform. As long as kolkhoz management was based not on production logics but on political one - a lot of pieces of means of production were misused. Kulaks were not at all acceptive of the loss of their property. They still had some power and tried to bring the competitors to failure in order to return everything. Besides, a regular draught (it happenes every 4-5 years in Russia and Ukraine is no exception - in fact every black earth region is black earth as long as there is not enough rainfall to wash the organic matter out of the soil) made the things worse. At that moment Stalin hasn't really cared about kolkhozes, because he thought that the job is done already and the system works. In the beginning of the catastrophe local party members told that everything is all right. These criminal revolutionaries cared about their personal carreer and tried to use methods of civil war, which was to steal the grain from the peasants... For some reason they couldn't forsee that having no land and means of production all the grain is possible to find only at kolkhozes. At that moment USSR was trading grain to the west while getting machinery in return. The trade plan was the only motivation for local party officials, but... Soon it became obvious that there is no grain to steal and the more grain was found - the worse the famine became. My own family lost quite a lot of people during that time, because Tambov region was ruled by extreme revolutionaries after the Tambov revolt. And it is not at all Ukraine. In my opinion the tradegy is surely the responsibility of communist party and Stalin, but it was for sure not planned genocide. It was a terrible and typical revolutionary mistake - thinking of policy and ideology these guys know nothing about economy and production management.

As for political cleansing - it was counter-revolution. Stalin removed a great many of former key figures of a civil war. His purge is something which has very contraversial evaluation. At one hand the liberals (descendants of the most bloodiest commies) ignore the fact that former Russian empire lost during a civil war twice as much people as ALL the parties of WWI. This blood means nothing to them. But when it comes to those who killed this many people, when their turn came and with their own blood they closed the bottle of civil war they opened and filled themselves - it becomes a terrible crime. Although we talk about members of communist party, about butchers and killers. I find this evaluation very stupid and unfair. Every hater is doomed. Every killer is doomed. And when a murderer dies due to his own choice I find no point for feeling sorry. It will happen with every revolutionary and plot-maker. There is nothing to worry about. In my opinion every maidanner or a part of Department of State gang will meet a very cruel end. Even the memories of them will be cherished only by the most enemies of their own people. It is obvious and normal. It always happened. It will always happen. The guys who stay in history as heroes are never ready to kill for their principles, but always are ready to die for it.

 

[video=youtube;6VK-mQBO83Q]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VK-mQBO83Q[/video]

 

Russian buy Dash Board Cam's due to drunk drivers???? Ha-ha-ha

You're funny man

 

Yes, I know - you killing your middle class now and that process is very successfull - new jobs are rather in fastfood
That is what you called 'FIX PROBLEM'

 

But not the willingness.

 

Have the Russians train muslims.

 

No, we train bears.

 

This is a cultural thing, it does not matter if Russia was the number one economy in the world. Vodka is the life blood of the nation.

 

and that is disgusting

 

All depends. I personally go for Russian Standard, which is quite good.

 

It's none of your business.