World refuses Russian bonds

He's laughing because it is an absurd idea. Russia and China have no hope of defeating us in a war. The best they can possibly hope for is mutual annihilation.

Russia has nothing to gain from a conflict with the US because they already have limited resources, and such a conflict would deplete them even more, even if they did not get destroyed in the process. It would also isolate them from the world economy even more than they already are, and they are almost bankrupt as it is.

China has nothing to gain from a conflict with the US because they own a LOT of our debt, and any war with us would effectively erase that debt...which would dramatically help us and dramatically hurt them. Bonus: We are also one of their main customers, and they would lose all of those exports as well.

There is no upside for either of them (well, maybe China...if they could manage to swipe Taiwan in the process...but it would be a hollow victory if the cost was their entire economy)

 

#1, only idiots think owning nukes matters when both sides have them.

#2, Russia doesn't have 8,000 nukes anymore.
http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/Nuclearweaponswhohaswhat

Russia has about 1,500 active strategic warheads, with another 1,000 in storage and 2,000 "tactical" warheads.

U.S. has a similar amount: 1,,585 active strategic warheads, another 2,800 in storage and 500 "tactical" warheads.

You know what would really make your economy better? If Putin stopped trying to invade and destabilize his neighbors, and did something about the massive corruption in Russia. Then sanctions would be lifted, and investors would feel confident investing in Russia again.

 

i laugh because EVERYONE knows there won't be a WW3 any time soon, especially a nuclear one, as no one can ever win it.

 

by no effect that oil prices have on my life and others around me.

she is not; who told you she is?

really?.. then Russia has no nukes.

not at all, private business hasn't much to do with oil.

firstly, 0.3% is not 'significantly higher' and secondly, Russian budget cites the data concerning only official taxpayers while leaving out those avoiding taxation. Russia has got two budgets.

neither i do.

 

didn't read the article in the OP, huh?

 

So you are saying you have no source for that number other than your own opinion. Ok.

The Russian Finance Ministry.

They rejected offers to buy their bonds because people were asking for too much money. The reason people are asking for too much money is because it is a high risk investment (there is a good chance that Russia will not pay the bonds when they come due). It is high risk because Russia's economy sucks.

Really.

Russia has lots of nukes. Almost as many as the US.

http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/Nuclearweaponswhohaswhat

LOL. It is when you have such a crappy economy. Every cent counts.

That is a 7% difference btw...IMO that is significant.

 

Not even close. In the course of 50 years Russia butchered over 60 million of its OWN PEOPLE. That's more then the entire death toll of ww2 and the holocaust combined. The US has not existed for a thousand years, thus you can not make that assumption. You have no idea what would or would not have happened. My observation is genuinely based off of Russian history in which my original post is quite accurate.

 

It's an expression. But you do know it snows in Russia right?? In fact weren't you the one made a thread attacking "nazi propaganda" because a western news source had a story about the first snowfall in Moscow earlier this year and had a couple pictures of the kremlin shown?

 

We may go bankrupt. What if China will loose any hope to get their money from USA? Nuclear war is an absurdity. Things are changing rapidly. China and Russia are up to the arms and both are growing economically. Together, these two countries make a formidable force. If we want peace and democracy in the world, we should work with Russia and China.

 

Well, to be fair we did quite a number on the Native Americans. And our long history of slavery was nothing to be proud of.

Still, we never intentionally killed thousands and millions of our own citizens, as Russia did on several occasions.

 

What do you mean our?

 

I read his columns in the Asia Times and he is knowledgeable, especially when it comes to economics and trade with Russia and China and he does attend the meetings there. He did mock the sanctions and said Putin will go off the petro dollars in response and he was right, and he did. Besides he's a brilliant satirist. He's the one who called the US the Empire of Chaos and called Kerry as being part of Obama's Juvenile Delinquent School of Diplomacy. I mean come on, the guys a genius.

Anyway I do get my opinions from different sources...but not the corporate media because the spins and lies literally make me sick. I mean do they think we are all idiots? Why can't they give us the whole news and not just bits and pieces of it? Also instead of giving us their interpretation of what Putin or Lavrov said, why don't they just quote them verbatim and let us form our own opinion.

 

They won't. Because the US has a really good economy with a long track record of stability. China knows this, which is why they continue to buy our debt...they know it is very likely they will be paid back.

LOL, no they arn't. Russia's economy is in the toilet and China's is slowing down.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/102144410

Together they still have a smaller economy than the US. California alone has a larger economy than Russia.

Explain how "working" with them will result in them becoming more democratic.

 

Umm. The US can.

 

Eh. The usual number of estimated Native Americans "killed" is between 5 and 10 million. About half of which were killed long before the US was even a nation and most were killed by either the English, French or Spanish. So while it was still bad what we did between 1776 and the late 1800s, it's still no where near the average Russian century.

And every nation, race and creed throughout history throughout the entire globe has had some form of slavery at some point in their time. Once again, bad on us doing it, but that was that and what we did to the natives was just what was considered the norm back then. It's usually a losing battle to try and apply today's morals and ethics to those of people from hundreds of years ago. It was just different times. Different mindsets.

But the point is, nowhere even remotely close to Russia.

 

So he's a reliable source because he agrees with your rhetoric COMPLETELY and has no bi-partisanship whatsoever? Gotcha.

No, you get your opinions from the authoritarian government run media. Big Brother never stopped watching you.

 

Which sources give you your opinions?





​

 

Here's a video of the US's foremost expert on Russia:

[video=youtube;-VgIc2eJbIU]https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=-VgIc2eJbIU[/video]

 

nice scare tactics.

 

These are my American sources:

http://consortiumnews.com/about/
http://www.moonofalabama.org/
http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/
http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/about-us.aspx

If I want news about Ukraine and Russia I go on these:

http://rt.com/
http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.com/
http://russia-insider.com/en
http://sputniknews.com/

Sometimes I will go on these:

http://www.atimes.com/
http://www.voltairenet.org/en

This is what Voltairenet wrote about what happened at Brisbane:

The Atlanticist media is categorical: Vladimir Putin was isolated at the G20 because of his aggressive behavior towards the Ukrainian crisis.

However, at no time, did Washington and its allies dare to broach their differences with Russia at the G20, with the "rest of the world" standing together behind Vladimir Putin. The word "Ukraine" is not mentioned in any of the G20 documents.

How is it then that almost every major newspaper in NATO Member States has indulged in the same lie?

 

so all very biased, very partisan, very bigoted sites.

 

Pick up a paper the Americas are pumping out fossil fuels and the bottom fell out of the energy market.

- - - Updated - - -

Kookoo for (*)(*)(*)(*)ing cocoa puffs.

 

of course i did; its another horror story they have only had for Russia all these thousand years... the country has been there with bonds since long ago, and never done well in that sense; the article could have said just the same as it says now about any period of Russian bonds.

one should not go by West media publications, because their all lies and distortions.

just looked out of the window: there's no snow.

your not good at maths... the WWII lasted only 4 years, and the Russian Civill War - 5 years; so where's 50 years?

and what do you mean by 'own people'?.. to the Nazis we were 'owned' for sometime, not own; the Bolsheviks did not consider the tsarists as own people either.

the thing is the US never had a history of changes, whereas Russia went through transformations and transfiguration on a scale not seen before.

then nukes don't cost a dime, very cheap to service, once you had built them; no personnel is needed, only push buttons.

you overestimate the role of economy in real life of a society; the very notion of economy is only a mass media tool with which the authorities control you.

 

Because no nation want's bonds from a state that is about to go full-blown communist.

Why the hell would anyone take any investment from a socialist nation?

Russia doesn't exist just like North Korea doesn't exist... At least not on a geoeconomic scale...

 

At least not in the West, but then again the West is the past now isn't it?