America Still On Top?

Anti Russians in mp.net are celebrating the apparent collapse in the russian automotive industry, how true is ths? They are presenting figures showing drastic and deep dive in car sales in Russia, is this real or are they over exaggerating the situation?

AbsoluteZero wrote:Anti Russians in mp.net are celebrating the apparent collapse in the russian automotive industry, how true is ths? They are presenting figures showing drastic and deep dive in car sales in Russia, is this real or are they over exaggerating the situation?

No it's quite true, car sales have dived; but they should gradually pick up once the situation with loans improves in the country.

As for celebrating the apparent collapse in the Russian automotive industry - a little premature, to be frank. Albeit it is the sector worst hit by the current economic situation; with GM and Opel announcing their withdrawals and many other factories having long switched to 3-4 day weeks.
However, I cannot help but feel that it was a long time coming, and that any recession in Russia (which in Capitalism are inevitable) would have led to the same situation - there has simply been too much production-capacity been built up in Russia over the past 10 years; on the back of the oil boom, government assistance programs and the formerly low-levels of car ownership in general in the country.

The car sales figures will rise back up to a level, lower than the previous one, but it would be a sustainable one - now that car ownership is approaching European levels, it's only natural that demand will ebb somewhat.

The worst-performing multinationals have suffered the brunt of it unfortunately. Also, people have turned more towards the cheaper car-brands due to the recession; which has been a great boon for AvtoVAZ which has increased market-share enourmously during the recession - but at the exepense of foreign car makers here.

One last thing I should note - is that under the heading of 'automotive industry' - one does not just figure in actual car-production; but also all associated economical activities, first and foremost the production of engines, parts, tyres, car electronics, etc...
As far as I can tell, there has been no hit to this segment of the economy; localization has proceeded and a few new car part factories have actually opened during the last year.

Do everyone a favour, and post this info on mp.net for the anti-Russian retards to consume. Someone needs to wipe the smugness off their ill-informed faces.

I somewhat agree with TR1. I don't think US is going to collapse anytime soon. That's conspiracy BS. You should not bet on that, at all. I find it very hard to believe that the US economy is fake it's going to suddenly collapse overnight, despite some major issues that were not there before. The world will become increasingly multipolar, that is true, and there are going to be more and more options, but it's likely that US will be atleast world power number 2 in 2050. It has a large population that is actually growing well. Its geographical position is pretty incredible and it covers a large area with massive natural resources and a solid technological base.

However, it seems to me that Russia is getting stronger and more stable, despite the current crisis. On the other hand, EU's future is somewhat uncertain and its demographics are pretty horrible. So it's entirely possible that Russia will become stronger vis-a-vis EU and even the US than it is now, as long as it economy grows faster than the US. I'd say Russia needs an economic growth of roughly 4% per annum (certainly atleast 3%+), on average and a population growth.

Russian population potential is just limited, and that's why I don't see it becoming a real peer competitor to China, US and India on a global scale, atleast not until the latter part of the century and worsening global warming (it's going to greatly benefit Russia, if I'm not mistaken). But does it really need to become one? Absolutely not. Russia can be the strongest country in Europe, number 4 globally and it should, IMO, be closely aligned with China and India, in particular.

I don't think US is going to collapse anytime soon. That's conspiracy BS. You should not bet on that, at all. I find it very hard to believe that the US economy is fake it's going to suddenly collapse overnight, despite some major issues that were not there before


I told that here in this post .

I don't think US is going to collapse anytime soon.

I think the game of Monopoly is illuminating in this regard... when the family plays monopoly and dad is the banker, but has not and will not read the rules and is prepared to openly cheat... what are the chances of dad losing the game?

I would say zero... especially when this dad can simply pay his own debts by printing more money...

In politics everyone sets rules for himself and they can be changed at any time.

What do you mean by collapse of the US btw? Balkanization? A civil war with massive damage to the economy but retaining the political structure afterwards? A cultural shift as a result of massive migration? Or some combination of the above? It is not easy to destroy a superpower - and unlike the USSR, US has a quite strong economy and a fairy coherent society when it comes to culture/nationality.

I think Russia should stop worrying if US economy goes off bust or not , My personal limited reading on this issue is US Economy will implode by end of this decade and USD would stop being the dominant reserve currency , not that Yuan will replace it but there would be basket of currency and gold along with IMF SDR replacing it.

In Any Case my recommendation for Russian safety is

Increase Gold Reserves to 40 % of Forex
Reduce USD content from 45 % to 15 %
Go for Yuan 20 % of Reserves
Go for Euro 20 % Reserves
IMF SDR , Indian Rs , Canadian/Brits Pound 5 %

So finally it should be

40 % Gold
USD % 15 %
Euro - 20 %
Yuan - 20 %
Indian Rs/IMF SDR - 5 %


Thats not because USD is bad or will die but due to simple fact that Euro and Yuan i.e EU and China would be largest trading partner.

Gold will eventually reach a new level in the next 5 years.

Russia also has worlds largest Gold mine Deposit if i am not wrong

Kimppis wrote:Russian population potential is just limited, and that's why I don't see it becoming a real peer competitor to China, US and India on a global scale, atleast not until the latter part of the century and worsening global warming (it's going to greatly benefit Russia, if I'm not mistaken). But does it really need to become one? Absolutely not. Russia can be the strongest country in Europe, number 4 globally and it should, IMO, be closely aligned with China and India, in particular.

That's what the Eurasian Union is for. With the population and markets of at least half of the rest of the ex-Soviet states; Russia will be able to take advantage of a large domestic market for its goods and plenty of population potential to expand upon, as Central Asians, etc... increase their education levels.

But really you are giving too much weight to population. China and India have been the world's most populous regions/countries for several centuries now - and where has it got them? Russia 100 years ago (granted, in its Imperial borders), had virtually the same population as the whole of British India at the time - and what? How did it fare in the 20th century? On paper I'm sure that some people back then were predicting the same things as you are now. But then the real world interfered; War, Revolution, Civil War, Famine, War, etc...

Why in the 21st century is a large population, and even overpopulation as the case may be - suddenly going to become an advantage?
It certainly holds the promise of great potential but it's as much of a curse as it is a blessing.

Russia right now is probably the world's 2nd most influential and powerful country - it's going to hold that place for a while; for one thing China doesn't really seem to be all that interested in displacing it - it's wisely occupying the position that America did in the pre-WW1 and inter-war period, where the US was profitting the most and securing the best trade agreements, playing king-maker to whilst directly staying out of the affairs of the competing and waring European powers.
If China keeps this up it could very well comfortably displace both America and Russia by the 2030s or so. But a lot of things can happen between now and then. It's also true that those who don't risk, don't stand to gain - and right now it's only Russia risking, and making efforts (semi-successful) to counter the Western encirclement of its borders as well as expand its influence in the Middle East and elsewhre; China meanwhile is laying low amongst a much more unfavourable strategic position - it's basically surrounded on all sides by US allies or potential allies - it's playing the long-game and hoping the problem will solve itself in the meantime; which may or may not work.

One thing I'm more certain of is that India, despite its potential, is beset by great challenges and will remain as a regional power for the first half of this century.
It is certainly rapidly rising in power though - it's gained supremacy over Pakistan and will soon dominate the whole of Souh Asia, possibly expanding its influence more into Afghanistan and Iran. It manages to enjoy good relations with both Russia and the US, and the Europeans - to some extent they are all competing for its favour. It's relations with China are gradually improving and it will have a lot of key influence among any Russia-China-India triangle or the rising BRICS organizations; if India joins the SCO then it will come to play a crucial role in that organization too.
But nontheless - it's missing a lot of things for superpower status. A self-sufficient defense industry, a mostly urbanized/educated population, modern civil/social infastructure, influence and diplomatic levers in countries around the world, economic levers of influence, etc... it's not going to join the club for a while

But does it really need to become one? Absolutely not.

You're right, it doesn't, and I personally hope that Russia will be able to isolate itself somewhat from world affairs and concentrate on its own development more.
This position is a most enviable one - as America proved in the last century and China is starting to prove this century. But it's not always possible.

Austin wrote:I think Russia should stop worrying if US economy goes off bust or not , My personal limited reading on this issue is US Economy will implode by end of this decade and USD would stop being the dominant reserve currency , not that Yuan will replace it but there would be basket of currency and gold along with IMF SDR replacing it.

In Any Case my recommendation for Russian safety is

Increase Gold Reserves to 40 % of Forex
Reduce USD content from 45 % to 15 %
Go for Yuan  20 % of Reserves
Go for Euro 20 % Reserves
IMF SDR , Indian Rs , Canadian/Brits Pound  5 %

So finally it should be

40 % Gold
USD % 15 %
Euro - 20 %
Yuan - 20 %
Indian Rs/IMF SDR - 5 %


Thats not because USD is bad or will die but due to simple fact that Euro and Yuan i.e EU and China would be largest trading partner.

Gold will eventually reach a new level in the next 5 years.

Russia also has worlds largest Gold mine Deposit if i am not wrong

That means 60% investment in unreliable and uncontrollable assets, very bad condition.

Gold is the best investment any one can put into , More reliable then any fiat currency......Reason CBR and China is holding and increasing Gold reserves they know what would be coming in years ahead

That's what the Eurasian Union is for. With the population and markets of at least half of the rest of the ex-Soviet states; Russia will be able to take advantage of a large domestic market for its goods and plenty of population potential to expand upon, as Central Asians, etc... increase their education levels.

That's a good point, and that's what I meant when I said that Russia is probably stabilizing. It seems quite likely to me that NATO and western expansion is mostly over, although the US will surely keep trying. It just remains to be seen, what exactly is the role and influence of EEU in the future.

But really you are giving too much weight to population. China and India have been the world's most populous regions/countries for several centuries now - and where has it got them? Russia 100 years ago (granted, in its Imperial borders), had virtually the same population as the whole of British India at the time - and what? How did it fare in the 20th century? On paper I'm sure that some people back then were predicting the same things as you are now. But then the real world interfered; War, Revolution, Civil War, Famine, War, etc...

Why in the 21st century is a large population, and even overpopulation as the case may be - suddenly going to become an advantage?
It certainly holds the promise of great potential but it's as much of a curse as it is a blessing.

You might be correct, of course. You asked where the big populations got them. Well, they were the two most influential countries/regions, especially economically, until the 16th (or even the 19th) century! And right now that is happening again. (There's a one difference, though. It's the US, a western off-shoot, that's a single country, with a population almost as big as the whole of western Europe combined.) Western domination, particularly during the last 2-3 centuries was actually an anomaly, and now we are just returning to 'normalcy'. The three most populated countries, China, US and India are already the three biggest economies in terms of purchasing power parity.  

Russia right now is probably the world's 2nd most influential and powerful country - it's going to hold that place for a while; for one thing China doesn't really seem to be all that interested in displacing it - it's wisely occupying the position that America did in the pre-WW1 and inter-war period, where the US was profitting the most and securing the best trade agreements, playing king-maker to whilst directly staying out of the affairs of the competing and waring European powers.
If China keeps this up it could very well comfortably displace both America and Russia by the 2030s or so. But a lot of things can happen between now and then. It's also true that those who don't risk, don't stand to gain - and right now it's only Russia risking, and making efforts (semi-successful) to counter the Western encirclement of its borders as well as expand its influence in the Middle East and elsewhre; China meanwhile is laying low amongst a much more unfavourable strategic position - it's basically surrounded on all sides by US allies or potential allies - it's playing the long-game and hoping the problem will solve itself in the meantime; which may or may not work.

Russia is certainly in top 3. However, I think China is already more influencial in many ways, and certainly economically. And yes, China is taking the long-term approach. However, I don't think its strategic position is not necessarily that bad. China's economic influence is already massive, it's already the biggest trading partner with basically all its neigbours and luckily it's not an island, so it has an access to Eurasia. And this the Eurasian century. On the other hand Russia is feeling the full pressure of the US and due to that Moscow is trying to be as active as possible, although "its economy is smaller than Italy's, how pathetic, bla bla bla".    

One thing I'm more certain of is that India, despite its potential, is beset by great challenges and will remain as a regional power for the first half of this century.

You're correct, India is not there yet. I think by 2040s, or so, India could be where China is now. And that's already huge!

flamming_python wrote:

Kimppis wrote:Russian population potential is just limited, and that's why I don't see it becoming a real peer competitor to China, US and India on a global scale, atleast not until the latter part of the century and worsening global warming (it's going to greatly benefit Russia, if I'm not mistaken). But does it really need to become one? Absolutely not. Russia can be the strongest country in Europe, number 4 globally and it should, IMO, be closely aligned with China and India, in particular.

That's what the Eurasian Union is for. With the population and markets of at least half of the rest of the ex-Soviet states; Russia will be able to take advantage of a large domestic market for its goods and plenty of population potential to expand upon, as Central Asians, etc... increase their education levels.

But really you are giving too much weight to population. China and India have been the world's most populous regions/countries for several centuries now - and where has it got them? Russia 100 years ago (granted, in its Imperial borders), had virtually the same population as the whole of British India at the time - and what? How did it fare in the 20th century? On paper I'm sure that some people back then were predicting the same things as you are now. But then the real world interfered; War, Revolution, Civil War, Famine, War, etc...

Why in the 21st century is a large population, and even overpopulation as the case may be - suddenly going to become an advantage?
It certainly holds the promise of great potential but it's as much of a curse as it is a blessing.

Russia right now is probably the world's 2nd most influential and powerful country - it's going to hold that place for a while; for one thing China doesn't really seem to be all that interested in displacing it - it's wisely occupying the position that America did in the pre-WW1 and inter-war period, where the US was profitting the most and securing the best trade agreements, playing king-maker to whilst directly staying out of the affairs of the competing and waring European powers.
If China keeps this up it could very well comfortably displace both America and Russia by the 2030s or so. But a lot of things can happen between now and then. It's also true that those who don't risk, don't stand to gain - and right now it's only Russia risking, and making efforts (semi-successful) to counter the Western encirclement of its borders as well as expand its influence in the Middle East and elsewhre; China meanwhile is laying low amongst a much more unfavourable strategic position - it's basically surrounded on all sides by US allies or potential allies - it's playing the long-game and hoping the problem will solve itself in the meantime; which may or may not work.

One thing I'm more certain of is that India, despite its potential, is beset by great challenges and will remain as a regional power for the first half of this century.
It is certainly rapidly rising in power though - it's gained supremacy over Pakistan and will soon dominate the whole of Souh Asia, possibly expanding its influence more into Afghanistan and Iran. It manages to enjoy good relations with both Russia and the US, and the Europeans - to some extent they are all competing for its favour. It's relations with China are gradually improving and it will have a lot of key influence among any Russia-China-India triangle or the rising BRICS organizations; if India joins the SCO then it will come to play a crucial role in that organization too.
But nontheless - it's missing a lot of things for superpower status. A self-sufficient defense industry, a mostly urbanized/educated population, modern civil/social infastructure, influence and diplomatic levers in countries around the world, economic levers of influence, etc... it's not going to join the club for a while

But does it really need to become one? Absolutely not.

You're right, it doesn't, and I personally hope that Russia will be able to isolate itself somewhat from world affairs and concentrate on its own development more.
This position is a most enviable one - as America proved in the last century and China is starting to prove this century. But it's not always possible.

yes China like where it is ,  keep the Russia the world's 2nd most influential and powerful country.

there is no sign US will collapse soon, it's not good time to face off US immediately,

Russia can not isolate itself , coz the way Russia develop itself, Russia sell petroleum,get money and use the money to increase output.
Russia control many oil field world wide. one day Russia could get huge percentage output in world (now is NO.1 )
same in netural gas and yellow cake(raw material of nuclear fuel)
if one day russia decide not to accept US dollar, it will be the doomsday of  the petrodollar ,core interest and base of US empire.
So US want to sanction Russia before Russia get dominate world market share.and let Saudi increase output, lower the price.  The money Russia already put in to develop gas field will useless（coz cost is higher than market price）
It doesn't matter if putin is president.  US hegemony all base on  petrodollar. they can't allow this happen
China is not an immediate threat to US , but in the long run it will be US's headache.

higurashihougi wrote:@type055: The fact is that Russia, China and India together form a military stronghold, which sets a solid foundation for economic development.

Russia together with Germany, is the scientific-technology stronghold of the world. China-made goods and products dominate a huge part of the global market. Indian economic power is significant, too, and is rapidly increasing.

The hegemony of the West is ending soon.

Yes they will back up each other ，but there is no solid military tready, like NATO. I doubt US empire will collapse soon , considering its superiority in military and economy. it is weakening.

higurashihougi wrote:

type055 wrote:

higurashihougi wrote:@type055: The fact is that Russia, China and India together form a military stronghold, which sets a solid foundation for economic development.

Russia together with Germany, is the scientific-technology stronghold of the world. China-made goods and products dominate a huge part of the global market. Indian economic power is significant, too, and is rapidly increasing.

The hegemony of the West is ending soon.

Yes they will back up each other ，but there is no  solid military tready, like NATO. I doubt US empire will collapse soon , considering its  superiority in military and economy.  it is weakening.  

No, US military superiority is a myth. The truth is, after the Civil War the US has never seriously faced a strong opponent in a war. Even in WW1 and WW2, the US did not carry the bulk of the war. In WW1 the US stepped in at the very late phase. In WW2 it is the USSR who defeated the Axis.

Pentagon's military achievement is bullying small, isolated, poor countries which did not have strong defense power.

You cannot call "US military superiority" since its standard battle rifle is M16, the most stupid and most ineffective assault rifle of the world.

I think when people talk about "US military superiority" they are talking about "US power projection superiority". Which is true. The US is capable of lifting massive amounts of troops and equipment to basically everywhere around the world. Probably more than the rest of the world combined, easily I might add. However, they won't necessarily be succesful in the war itself, as long as the opponent is reasonably capable and large. Although even then the USN is very capable at blockading any other nation on the planet, so if you are an island or just otherwise really dependant on maritime foreign trade and resources and you are fighting against the US, you're fucked. That's my analysis.

http://cluborlov.blogspot.ca/2015/05/americas-achilles-heel.html

I bit too dramatic, but the decay processes are there.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-05-01/lockheed-exec-blasts-germanys-retrograde-step-refusing-f-35-jet

America is sad. Look at the loser whinging by the Lockheed clowns. Give one of those "4th gen" fighters
a RAM coating and you will get 90% of the "stealth" value of an F-35. What a joke!

Well ironically LM is actually right, because Germany has its best chance of meeting its 2% of GDP commitment for weapons for HATO with buying that expensive to buy and expensive to operate piece of crap... they wont need to buy many at all and they will be spending enormous amounts of their GDP on the F-35 to get it flying and to keep it flying...

Of course with the loss of this expected batch of aircraft the calculated price of all the new ones sold will have to go up to compensate for the reduction in production... or they might just make spares and support more expensive to hide the extra costs... maybe $45,000 per flight hour...

max steel wrote: I don't think US is going to collapse anytime soon. That's conspiracy BS. You should not bet on that, at all. I find it very hard to believe that the US economy is fake it's going to suddenly collapse overnight, despite some major issues that were not there before


I told that here in this post .

America has a lot of problems in the agriculture sector in western America due to record lows in ground water levels it's causing the aquifers to compact resulting in subsidence that has caused parts of California ground levels to have lowered by 40 to 50 feet in the past 100 years, American farming has another 3 to 5 years of good crops before it runs out of ground water and the mid west and eastern America the ground water is being polluted by fracking ... so it's not looking to good for US farming

But haven't you watched the movie The day after tomorrow... the Mexicans will help because they owe so much to the US of A... just like everyone else on the planet... countries around the world will be queueing up to take American citizens to repay their generous treatment and goodwill from all these years of peace and prosperity created by a benevolent America...

GarryB wrote:But haven't you watched the movie The day after tomorrow... the Mexicans will help because they owe so much to the US of A... just like everyone else on the planet... countries around the world will be queueing up to take American citizens to repay their generous treatment and goodwill from all these years of peace and prosperity created by a benevolent America...  

lol: ignorance is bliss

this will be their reality next step will be to steal other countries ground water

The sad thing is that they are actually like a cigarette company that has done its research and really knows what people want, but the people in charge decide what the product is and it is bad for everyone.

If you fired all the people in charge... and that means everyone from senators to congresspeople and all the politicians and I was going to say make the people in charge of press releases in charge, but they are trained to lie, what you actually need is for someone from the general public following the press releases word for word and implementing policy and law the way it was intended to sound rather than the way it is actually written and actually intended to be used then you might have a winning combination.

The fact is that what they promise actually seems rather good, the problem is that the shit they deliver has nothing to do with what they talk about.

It is a bit like a wall street financial company with a good marketing department that knows most people want to spend less time working and more time enjoying time with their family and kids on holidays... which sounds nice, but those bastards then come up with the idea... short term loans on paycheques to boost your income so you can pay for unexpected things like weddings or holidays (that you would not normally be able to afford). Still almost sounds nice until you read the fine print and realise that if you don't pay this loan on time the penalties and interest means you are paying thousands of percent interest and if you are not careful this could bankrupt you and they will take your house and everything you own...

If the US really did care about democracy the first places they would invade would be Saudi Arabia and Israel.