Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

agjios t1_j1z3d4z wrote

Reply to comment by Minezenroll in New sanctions starting to bite Russia’s economy as Moscow admits deficit impact by Minezenroll

“Starting to have an impact” means that sanctions AREN’T working. Here is a counterpoint article. Don’t get me wrong, the sanctions should stay in place and we should continue to squeeze Russia for their illegal war, their rampant war crimes, etc. But we are coming up on a year of them being isolated and they aren’t feeling any immediate effects. They will eventually see the effects because future industry will be hurt, plus the brain drain of so many escaping. But Russia has trained for this and is still able to produce and fight.

https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2022/12/06/1140120485/why-the-sanctions-against-russia-arent-working-yet

−41

Stingerc t1_j1z981v wrote

My understanding is that the sanctions aren't meant to hurt the average citizen and push him to revolt, but to cripple the Russian government's ability to aquire material like microchips and components for weapons, which are working.

That the general population sufferes financially is just a side effect.

43

ZeenTex t1_j1zaat5 wrote

Nah. Sanctions are like a slow working poison. At first nothing is felt, and when you start thinking everything is OK, the bite is being felt. By the time it really starts to hurt, it's nearly too late and almost irreversible.

Sanctions take a lot of time, but are very effective some time in, especially on a country that relies on raw exports and has to import almost anything else, including expertise.

26

agjios t1_j1zc2ba wrote

You clearly didn’t read my article. It’s not that sanctions are a slow working poison. It is that Russia has prepared for this contingency and is able to withstand it in the short term.

−26

GrotesquelyObese t1_j20553e wrote

That’s almost exactly what he said to you. The short term is coming to an end.

20

agjios t1_j207j78 wrote

Again, read my article. It’s from fucking NPR, this isn’t like I’m posting a celebratory article from the Russian state media.

Sanctions WERE SUPPOSED to have an immediate affect by crippling Russia’s GDP and leading to rampant inflation. The Russian economy has resisted the immediate expected and planned effects of the sanctions. So while there will be long term effects, the sanctions were put in place because they were SUPPOSED to have immediate effects. They have failed to do so.

I know that it’s inconvenient and uncomfortable to hear this news, but refusing to face the truth isn’t going to help anything.

−19

ZeenTex t1_j209xa8 wrote

>Sanctions WERE SUPPOSED to have an immediate affect by crippling Russia’s GDP and leading to rampant inflation

According to who?

​

Sanctions work slowly, always have, always will. Long term effects are what are expected, short term effects are merely a bonus.

Russia has well filled coffers, enough to prop up the Ruble for a while. As for inflation, russia has enough raw materials and food production to keep the country going for a while. As for anything that needs to be imported, scarcity will lead to price hikes, but for the population, those are mostly luxury goods (iphones, etc), for the industry however, irreplacable and hard to obtain.

But the primary reason is to thwart Russia's advanced weapons production, long term. And it seems it's working.

Again, no one expects sanctions to have an immediate effect, especially when the receiving end deploys countermeasures, like manipulation of the Rouble, halting stock trade etc, which is what's going on, but these efforts cost money and Russia won't be able to do this forever.

12

agjios t1_j20eglz wrote

According to all of the parties that imposed the sanctions as well as their various advisors, lol. Primarily the US and the US Treasury. Seriously, not only did I link a completely unbiased article, but it even has links and sources. Again, at least PRETEND to consider the situation instead of blindly parading around and avoiding any inconvenient news.

−4

HenCarrier t1_j20rtk7 wrote

You keep circling back to that fact the link you posted was from NPR instead of attempting to understand that sanctions work slowly, not immediately.

10

agjios t1_j21h1z3 wrote

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/08/23/russian-sanctions-economy/

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/24/us/politics/russia-ukraine-biden-sanctions.html

https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/16/politics/russia-sanctions-ukraine-slow-economic-pain/index.html

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-06-01/us-wavers-over-next-russia-sanctions-as-fears-of-divide-grow?leadSource=uverify%20wall

And you keep ignoring the fact that everyone that imposed sanctions against Russia, Russian banks, and Russian officials did so strictly with the intent to cause immediate harm. And that the immediate harm did not occur anywhere to the extent that we hoped.

−1

GrotesquelyObese t1_j21s5i6 wrote

No. It was to starve Russia without causing global economic collapse. Zelensky was and is still pissed that the world wasn’t/isn’t going far enough with sanctions that would have immediate consequences.

If you notice the article currently posted from today is saying that the economy is starting to tank you are posting from the past that say they aren’t doing as much damage as people want. Now there is evidence that the Russian economy is slowing.

I don’t believe that there hasn’t been serious damage to the Russian economy since the source of russian economic data is controlled by the Russian government.

4

agjios t1_j21xk94 wrote

Your claim of what the sanction was for is counter to what the US administration, the US Department of Treasury, and the US Department of State have all explicitly stated. And what all US allies that have also gone in on sanctioning Russia have stated. I’m inclined to believe them over you.

The various US officials are all frustrated because they enacted these sanctions based on the Intel and the forecasts that the Russian GDP would shrink significantly more than it has and that the Russian currency would experience much greater inflation than it has. Russia has unfortunately defied expectations and has been measurably successful in countering what the sanctions have attempted to do.

2

Odd-Employment2517 t1_j25p5lz wrote

Thats clearly why Russia still has no t14s after the 2016 sanctions while the US just developed and is already sending to field testing our new tank. The sanctions from 2016 on are breaking Russia and u love to see it, they can't even make a tank they've been developing for 6+ years

1

agjios t1_j25s72k wrote

Again, look at ANY of the links that I posted. Specifically, the sanctions that have started to be put in place since the beginning of this year were done so in order to sink the Russian GDP and increase the ruble's inflation. When every single government and organization that has collectively led these sanctions has explicitly stated that they did so in order to decrease the Russian GDP by double what it has seen and attempt to cause double/triple the level of inflation that Russia has experienced, that's great that it's crippling Russia but if we can't be honest about the results we're experiencing through our actions, then we can't effictively fight these battles against Russia. There's no value in parading around with blinders on in celebration instead of admitting that our actions haven't had the expected results and going back to the drawing board.

1

majinspy t1_j1z6edv wrote

Sanctions have a terrible history. The idea is that we will squeeze the average citizen until they revolt.

The result: we push them closer to the dictator as nationalism fills the voids in their stomachs. They refuse to bow to the "money men" from whatever far away place demands they bend the knee.

Meanwhile, the elite are never going to starve.

−10

datumerrata t1_j1z9c4v wrote

I think there's also an intent to hobble the war machine. Reduction in industry and commerce reduces tax income. Parts and materials for weapons, equipment, and supplies may be more difficult to source.

17