Moscow, Russia, 2008

[xul]

You might want to pose that question to "anti-immigrant" Argus. .

No, this is not my purpose. I just meant if a capitalist hires a manager to run his business and earn 1million dollars for the business, these money are still his money not the manager's, aren't they?

I'm not sure I have correctly understood your purpose. It seems you think nationalism is the cause of Russian recent economy boom, but it is not the truth. I don't think Putin is a nationalist. As a Russian politician, what he did is what he is supposed to do----benefits his country's behalf even if that means harming Western interests. Did western politicians do same things to Russia, didn't they? Westerners should not suppose every Russian leader will be a drunkard who likely sale Alaska to America for a bottle of whisky.

And according your post, I think it seems that Russian are more open-minded today than they ever were. In Brezhnev's time I occasionally found a Russian book about history of modern science and technology in my school's library. In the book the author, a Russian professor, tried to tell his reader that every mordern science and technology progress of human being are due to Russian scientists' ingenuity and creativity. This is real nationalism and such kind of arrogancy not the real threat of them to other countries made Russia a lot of enemies during the Cold War, I think.

Edited July 6, 2008 by xul

[jdobbin]

Real estate is now the latest get-rich-scheme. In Moscow, average residential prices are $2000/sq. ft. (in Montreal, it's about $200/sq. ft.). You can do the calculation for wherever you live. Depending on location, apartment prices in Moscow have risen about 4X in the past eight years.

Disposable income. Federal income tax is a flat 13%. VAT is around 15%. Most people have no mortgage/rent (apartments were privatized). Property tax/utilities/condo fees (equivalent) combined are less than $100 monthly (I'm not joking.) People basically don't have credit card debt. IOW, the average single "Sex in the City" 30 year old woman has about $1500 of disposable/free income every month.

Latest information from Forbes magazine.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories

Of the 180 countries looked at in its most recent rankings, 132 had index scores below 5, including Greece, India, Mexico, Brazil, Saudi Arabia and Thailand. Some 56 countries were rated below 3, a level that indicates rampant corruption, including Argentina, Pakistan and Russia.

And with the corruption, I'm sure the number of billionaires can be explained.

http://www.forbes.com/2008/04/30/billionai...lliecities.html

The Russian capital is home to 74 billionaires, with an average net worth of $5.9 billion. That's quite a jump from just five billionaire residents in 2002. Among Moscow's wealthy denizens: Russia's richest person, aluminum magnate Oleg Deripaska, who just announced plans to take a stake in oil group Russneft, and Roman Abramovich, who owns an expensive dwelling in London but insists that Moscow is his home.

Edited July 6, 2008 by jdobbin

[August1991]

Fatuous nonsense. There are all manner of prohibited positions one can take in Russia which will get you into far worse problems than a Canadian human rights commission hearing. Free? Free to be rude, I suppose, but only if you're being rude to the powerless. How is that a great freedom compared to our freedom to speak ill of politicians - not something you can do in today's Russia.

...

Yes, journalists are so free to express themselves in Russia. Why, hardly any of them are murdered for opposing important interests. And there is such a broad spectrum of free media, too. Why it's a wonderland there!

I find myself in the truly curious position of "defending" Russia when that was not my intent at all. Well, this thread was supposed to be an experiment.

Argus, I never argued that Russia was a bastion of press freedom. I merely compared Canada's State imposed political correctness (and as a Canadian civil servant, I'm sure you are aware of this) with Russia's socially imposed conventional wisdom. I "prefer" the dictatorship of conventional wisdom. (With conventional wisdom, if I disagree with some idiot, I can ignore him. With State-sanctioned political correctness, I can lose my job.)

Uh, yes, and the massive corruption and crime there has people seeing their homes and apartments stolen right out from under them with the aid of crooked judges and bureaucrats.

...

Does that mean seniors aren't still living on $30 a month pensions and aren't out in the streets begging?

In many ways, Putin can be credited with helping to define property rights. But I don't disagree with your basic point. Property rights are still not (huge understatement ahead) well defined in Russia.

As to pensioners, the basic, minimum pension is now around $300/month. Such a pensioner typically owns their own apartment and has no mortgage/rent to pay. Basic utilities (gas/phone/hydro/property taxes/condo fees) for such a pensioner amount to $100/month. They travel on public transit for free. Health care is supposedly free.

Can one live on $200/month? Most older pensioners rely on a sobre daughter or niece for help.

And with the corruption, I'm sure the number of billionaires can be explained.

The hundred or so billionaires is rather irrelevant to most people and their daily lives.

My point Dobbin was to say that there are many, many women (and men) in shopping malls in Moscow buying stuff with cash. They tend to buy stuff that young people in Canada buy who have no rent to pay. We all know of the young woman or man in Canada who gets their first job, lives with parents rent-free and has yet to discover credit cards. They have high disposable income. Do they save for their retirement? Generally, no.

In Russia, they pay high prices in part because of the corruption. Various bribes paid to put items in the shopping malls makes prices higher than they would otherwise be. Bribes are a form of tax.

As to the billionaires, this is generally irrelevant to most people in their daily life just as Conrad Black is probably irrelevant to your life.

I'm not sure I have correctly understood your purpose. It seems you think nationalism is the cause of Russian recent economy boom, but it is not the truth. I don't think Putin is a nationalist. As a Russian politician, what he did is what he is supposed to do----benefits his country's behalf even if that means harming Western interests. Did western politicians do same things to Russia, didn't they? Westerners should not suppose every Russian leader will be a drunkard who likely sale Alaska to America for a bottle of whisky.

I tend to think that Russia's current economic success is based on oil at $140/barrel. When Russia suffered an economic crisis in August 1998, oil was at $10/barrel.

IOW, Putin was lucky. He was president when the world price of oil rose. The world wants what Russia has. As to Russian nationalism, I find it a strange three dimensional beast. In general, I don't like nationalists or nationalism.

And according your post, I think it seems that Russian are more open-minded today than they ever were. In Brezhnev's time I occasionally found a Russian book about history of modern science and technology in my school's library. In the book the author, a Russian professor, tried to tell his reader that every mordern science and technology progress of human being are due to Russian scientists' ingenuity and creativity. This is real nationalism and such kind of arrogancy not the real threat of them to other countries made Russia a lot of enemies during the Cold War, I think.

As I noted above to Argus, a person can say the most outrageous things in Russia without problem. If Argus were in Russia, he could say out loud what he posts here under a pseudonym.

In this sense, Russia is a breath of fresh air. And that comment has more to say about Canada than it does about Russia.

----

I'm sorry to avoid these serious questions of freedom, freedom of the press, Russia and the standard of living of ordinary Russians. I have thought about them over the past few weeks and I have no obvious answers.

I don't think Putin was merely lucky. He also imposed the power of the State. In 2000, in Russia, that was not an easy thing to do and regardless of the world price of oil, Putin has managed to make the Russian State viable.

It seems to me that a State must offer as a minimum competent methods to enforce criminal law and to collect taxes. In the US, at the central government, the IRS dates from Lincoln and the FBI from Theodore Roosevelt.

Canadians might understand this in terms of Trudeau in October 1970.

Edited July 6, 2008 by August1991

[jdobbin]

The hundred or so billionaires is rather irrelevant to most people and their daily lives.

Is it? Or does it mean that corruption and crime have transferred formally public assets into private hands?

My point Dobbin was to say that there are many, many women (and men) in shopping malls in Moscow buying stuff with cash. They tend to buy stuff that young people in Canada buy who have no rent to pay. We all know of the young woman or man in Canada who gets their first job, lives with parents rent-free and has yet to discover credit cards. They have high disposable income. Do they save for their retirement? Generally, no.

I'm not surprised that there is more money flowing in Russia. Commodity prices have risen dramatically and with it comes jobs and cash.

At the moment, cost of living remains lower in Russia than high cost centres like many other parts of Europe. Forbes pointed out that this is likely to change in part, because the groaning infrastructure to support this new wealth has yet to be upgraded or built.

In Russia, they pay high prices in part because of the corruption. Various bribes paid to put items in the shopping malls makes prices higher than they would otherwise be. Bribes are a form of tax.

I don't disagree. Bribes also cause fear and fear can limit economic growth.

As to the billionaires, this is generally irrelevant to most people in their daily life just as Conrad Black is probably irrelevant to your life.

I disagree. Billionaires like Black often leave a field of carnage in their wakes because they think rules don't apply to them and that rewards should fall to them over their investors.

I tend to think that Russia's current economic success is based on oil at $140/barrel. When Russia suffered an economic crisis in August 1998, oil was at $10/barrel.

Exactly. Would Putin have been if a position to continue if oil was stagnant? Doubtful. Russia would likely be in chaos.

Still, with all of the money that does flow, Russia faces the challenge of inflation and income disparities that can and will cause future problems.

In this sense, Russia is a breath of fresh air. And that comment has more to say about Canada than it does about Russia.

Really? People can say what they want without fear of being killed?

I'm sorry to avoid these serious questions of freedom, freedom of the press, Russia and the standard of living of ordinary Russians. I have thought about them over the past few weeks and I have no obvious answers.

I don't think Putin was merely lucky. He also imposed the power of the State. In 2000, in Russia, that was not an easy thing to do and regardless of the world price of oil, Putin has managed to make the Russian State viable.

Since Forbes magazine estimates that Putin has become a billionaire as a result of being President, he is indeed more than just lucky.

Did Trudeau make that kind of money in 1970 from being PM?