Markets shake out

[swissie]

On 7/14/2022 at 11:44 AM, Lacessit said:

The last time I looked, inflation in Russia is 17%. GDP is predicted by Russia's own apparatchiks to shrink by 10%. The Russian economy will be hit for the next ten years, and their manufacturing and mining capabilities are degrading month by month. The aircraft industry will be forced to cannibalize planes for spare parts, prediction of multiple air accidents  in Russia over the next year is a no-brainer.

 

The fatal mistakes have been made by Putin. He re-energised a moribund NATO, you think he wanted Sweden and Finland joining up? Nations who were buying Russian military equipment are seeing how those weapons are being chewed up on the battlefield. His army is in a meat grinder worse than Afghanistan. He is now at the mercy of the Chinese and Indians, who will set their own prices when they buy his oil and gas, assuming he can find anyone to ship it with no marine insurance. Pipelines will take 5-10 years to build.

 

As for the proposition a country running eleventh in GDP is better off than the world's two biggest economies - the US and EU - I've never heard anything so patently absurd.

All well and good. But there are a few things that must be considered as well, above and beyound (western) statistics:

While the West has "demilitarised" for the last 30 years, the Russians have increased their military capabilities. The Russian Military Apparatus and the basic Russian economy is autark, needs no imports. Except for some western (unnecessary) luxury goods. Western high-tech, they have stolen from us a long time ago. Or we have given it to them voluntarily a long time ago.

Russians are uncompromising patriots. When "mother Russia" is in distress, they will rally behind their leaders. The ability to suffer and endure personal hardship by Russians is legendary. Rivalled only by the North Vietnames at the time. Something like this will not be found in Western hedonistic societies.

We must face the music. The Russians can live without the "Gas-Money" from Europe for 3 months. But Europe can not live without Gas from Russia in the winter months without ending up in a massive economical recession.

Who holds the better set of cards in this game over the next 1 to 2 years?

 

[Lacessit]

48 minutes ago, swissie said:

All well and good. But there are a few things that must be considered as well, above and beyound (western) statistics:

While the West has "demilitarised" for the last 30 years, the Russians have increased their military capabilities. The Russian Military Apparatus and the basic Russian economy is autark, needs no imports. Except for some western (unnecessary) luxury goods. Western high-tech, they have stolen from us a long time ago. Or we have given it to them voluntarily a long time ago.

Russians are uncompromising patriots. When "mother Russia" is in distress, they will rally behind their leaders. The ability to suffer and endure personal hardship by Russians is legendary. Rivalled only by the North Vietnames at the time. Something like this will not be found in Western hedonistic societies.

We must face the music. The Russians can live without the "Gas-Money" from Europe for 3 months. But Europe can not live without Gas from Russia in the winter months without ending up in a massive economical recession.

Who holds the better set of cards in this game over the next 1 to 2 years?

 

I suggest you check out the comparative numbers of US and Russian aircraft, and the relative hours of training pilots of each country gets. That's another of Putin's failures, Russia does not have air dominance over Ukraine. In contrast, Schwarzkopf would not commit ground troops in Iraq until complete air superiority was achieved.

 

European nations are switching to coal, LPG shipments and renewables as I write. Russia won't get those markets back for a least a decade, who trusts a supplier who switches off to pursue political ends?

 

The Russian military apparatus is producing inferior weapons which are getting annihilated on the battlefield. The only strong point they have is artillery, but they don't have a motivated infantry to consolidate after reducing cities to rubble. The only tactic they have is terrorism of the civilian population, which is only making the Ukrainians more determined to make every Russian pay a steep price. They obviously learned nothing from Afghanistan.

 

The most recent figures are showing Russia has inflation of 17%, double that of the EU. It also has one of the steepest falls in wages, -7.2% against an EU average of +2.7%.

 

Yes, Russians have a unique capacity for suffering. However, their patience is not inexhaustible. Perhaps you have forgotten the February Revolution, and Novocherkassk forty-five years later.

 

[Sparktrader]

1 hour ago, swissie said:

All well and good. But there are a few things that must be considered as well, above and beyound (western) statistics:

While the West has "demilitarised" for the last 30 years, the Russians have increased their military capabilities. The Russian Military Apparatus and the basic Russian economy is autark, needs no imports. Except for some western (unnecessary) luxury goods. Western high-tech, they have stolen from us a long time ago. Or we have given it to them voluntarily a long time ago.

Russians are uncompromising patriots. When "mother Russia" is in distress, they will rally behind their leaders. The ability to suffer and endure personal hardship by Russians is legendary. Rivalled only by the North Vietnames at the time. Something like this will not be found in Western hedonistic societies.

We must face the music. The Russians can live without the "Gas-Money" from Europe for 3 months. But Europe can not live without Gas from Russia in the winter months without ending up in a massive economical recession.

Who holds the better set of cards in this game over the next 1 to 2 years?

 

Which is why energy security is important.

 

Woeful leaders dont think.

[swissie]

1 hour ago, Lacessit said:

I suggest you check out the comparative numbers of US and Russian aircraft, and the relative hours of training pilots of each country gets. That's another of Putin's failures, Russia does not have air dominance over Ukraine. In contrast, Schwarzkopf would not commit ground troops in Iraq until complete air superiority was achieved.

 

European nations are switching to coal, LPG shipments and renewables as I write. Russia won't get those markets back for a least a decade, who trusts a supplier who switches off to pursue political ends?

 

The Russian military apparatus is producing inferior weapons which are getting annihilated on the battlefield. The only strong point they have is artillery, but they don't have a motivated infantry to consolidate after reducing cities to rubble. The only tactic they have is terrorism of the civilian population, which is only making the Ukrainians more determined to make every Russian pay a steep price. They obviously learned nothing from Afghanistan.

 

The most recent figures are showing Russia has inflation of 17%, double that of the EU. It also has one of the steepest falls in wages, -7.2% against an EU average of +2.7%.

 

Yes, Russians have a unique capacity for suffering. However, their patience is not inexhaustible. Perhaps you have forgotten the February Revolution, and Novocherkassk forty-five years later.

 

Not wanting to go into details. You must have gathered your "facts" from Facebook or british tabloid papers.
There is a fly in the ointment: The "inferior" Russian Army is winning the war. To call the second most powerful army of the world "inferior", resembles "military blasphemy". Or simply western based wishful thingking.
Instead of falling prey to the 2 sided war propaganda, we should pay attention to what Putin said: "We haven't even started yet".
 I have not forgotten where Hitler was defeated. Stalingrad, Leningrad, Charkow, Smolensk, Sevastapol, Moscow. All on Russian soil. All done by an "inferior" Russian army. Long before the first allied soldier set foot on the beaches of Normandie.

 

Lets just hope that the "inferior" Russian army stops at the Hungarian border. Otherwise our hedonistic i-phone soldiers (with not enough military hardware and with not enough ammo) will never have to face the "inferior" Russian army.

 

[Sparktrader]

11 minutes ago, swissie said:

Not wanting to go into details. You must have gathered your "facts" from Facebook or british tabloid papers.
There is a fly in the ointment: The "inferior" Russian Army is winning the war. To call the second most powerful army of the world "inferior", resembles "military blasphemy". Or simply western based wishful thingking.
Instead of falling prey to the 2 sided war propaganda, we should pay attention to what Putin said: "We haven't even started yet".
 I have not forgotten where Hitler was defeated. Stalingrad, Leningrad, Charkow, Smolensk, Sevastapol, Moscow. All on Russian soil. All done by an "inferior" Russian army. Long before the first allied soldier set foot on the beaches of Normandie.

 

Lets just hope that the "inferior" Russian army stops at the Hungarian border. Otherwise our hedonistic i-phone soldiers (with not enough military hardware and with not enough ammo) will never have to face the "inferior" Russian army.

 

China be no 2

[Lacessit]

9 hours ago, swissie said:

Not wanting to go into details. You must have gathered your "facts" from Facebook or british tabloid papers.
There is a fly in the ointment: The "inferior" Russian Army is winning the war. To call the second most powerful army of the world "inferior", resembles "military blasphemy". Or simply western based wishful thingking.
Instead of falling prey to the 2 sided war propaganda, we should pay attention to what Putin said: "We haven't even started yet".
 I have not forgotten where Hitler was defeated. Stalingrad, Leningrad, Charkow, Smolensk, Sevastapol, Moscow. All on Russian soil. All done by an "inferior" Russian army. Long before the first allied soldier set foot on the beaches of Normandie.

 

Lets just hope that the "inferior" Russian army stops at the Hungarian border. Otherwise our hedonistic i-phone soldiers (with not enough military hardware and with not enough ammo) will never have to face the "inferior" Russian army.

 

I have not forgotten Hitler was defeated because he made the mistake of fighting a war on two fronts. I haven't forgotten the mujahideen defeated the Soviet Army in Afghanistan because the US was arming it with Stinger missiles either. History repeats itself.

 

If the Russian army is winning, why are so many of its senior officers getting killed? Why has it lost so many of its tanks and other armored vehicles? You think an Abrams tank squadron would have sustained equivalent losses?

 

Putin has ordered all Russian industry to assist military supply. IMO that's not an army that is winning, it's one critically short of materials.

 

I get my facts from various sources. Some of them come from Russia itself, on the financial side. I have not seen too many facts from you, only opinions.

 

The Russian army in Ukraine is mainly conscripts who don't want to be there, with a leavening of private contractors. It does not have the same NCO structure  most western armies have. It has taken territory, the trick will be to hold it with an exhausted army as superior weaponry is supplied to the Ukrainians by the West.

 

It's impossible to get accurate figures on the Russian casualties. The Ukrainian figures are probably optimistic. To me, the fact the Russians are saying nothing speaks volumes. Putin does not want to admit to the world and his own people this war is worse than Afghanistan. 15 years in jail for calling it a war, give me a break.

 

As for Putin invading NATO countries - I think he has enough on his hands with Ukraine.

 

 

 

 

 

[billd766]

On 7/12/2022 at 5:40 AM, RichardColeman said:

Sat waiting for how the markets will react to sleepy Joe losing control of the US house and senate in November and being a lame duck and getting impeached with his prostitute loving, drug sniffing , gun totting, chinese  money taking son

And your proof is what exactly?

 

Because Trump and the republicans said so?

[swissie]

14 hours ago, Lacessit said:

I have not forgotten Hitler was defeated because he made the mistake of fighting a war on two fronts. I haven't forgotten the mujahideen defeated the Soviet Army in Afghanistan because the US was arming it with Stinger missiles either. History repeats itself.

 

If the Russian army is winning, why are so many of its senior officers getting killed? Why has it lost so many of its tanks and other armored vehicles? You think an Abrams tank squadron would have sustained equivalent losses?

 

Putin has ordered all Russian industry to assist military supply. IMO that's not an army that is winning, it's one critically short of materials.

 

I get my facts from various sources. Some of them come from Russia itself, on the financial side. I have not seen too many facts from you, only opinions.

 

The Russian army in Ukraine is mainly conscripts who don't want to be there, with a leavening of private contractors. It does not have the same NCO structure  most western armies have. It has taken territory, the trick will be to hold it with an exhausted army as superior weaponry is supplied to the Ukrainians by the West.

 

It's impossible to get accurate figures on the Russian casualties. The Ukrainian figures are probably optimistic. To me, the fact the Russians are saying nothing speaks volumes. Putin does not want to admit to the world and his own people this war is worse than Afghanistan. 15 years in jail for calling it a war, give me a break.

 

As for Putin invading NATO countries - I think he has enough on his hands with Ukraine.

 

 

 

 

 

Always love a good discussion. Appearantly we assess the situation differently.

But I am sure we can agree on 1 point:

- Without Russian Gas, Europe will find itself in economical dire straits soon. Sooner than the sanctions will put Russia in dire straits.

So, who has the better set of cards in this game?

With 30% of the European economy in a forced shutdown, I would not be surprised if the western Polit Pilgrims will re-direct the destination of their pilgrimage from Kiev to Moscow.
Under the motto: "Dear comrade Vladimir, would you please open the gas valve again".

With 30% of the economy in a forced shutdown, and the hedonistic westernes freezing their ass off, the solidarity with the Ukraine will fade quickly.
---------------------------------------------------
PS: The Ukraine was strongly linked to Russia since the 9th century. (politically, linguistically, culturally). What makes them want to be part of "the west"? It's the EU's financial "fodder through". Nothing else. Poland and Hungary are perfect examples. They share little "western values". The EU's financial "fodder trough" is of interest, nothing else.

Do we want and need more semi-failed states at the financial EU fodder trough?

[ozimoron]

11 minutes ago, swissie said:

Always love a good discussion. Appearantly we assess the situation differently.

But I am sure we can agree on 1 point:

- Without Russian Gas, Europe will find itself in economical dire straits soon. Sooner than the sanctions will put Russia in dire straits.

So, who has the better set of cards in this game?

With 30% of the European economy in a forced shutdown, I would not be surprised if the western Polit Pilgrims will re-direct the destination of their pilgrimage from Kiev to Moscow.
Under the motto: "Dear comrade Vladimir, would you please open the gas valve again".

With 30% of the economy in a forced shutdown, and the hedonistic westernes freezing their ass off, the solidarity with the Ukraine will fade quickly.
---------------------------------------------------
PS: The Ukraine was strongly linked to Russia since the 9th century. (politically, linguistically, culturally). What makes them want to be part of "the west"? It's the EU's financial "fodder through". Nothing else. Poland and Hungary are perfect examples. They share little "western values". The EU's financial "fodder trough" is of interest, nothing else.

Do we want and need more semi-failed states at the financial EU fodder trough?

The very reason Russia invaded Ukraine is because it's a failed state. Russia needs Ukraine to diversify it's economy away from just fossil fuels and gold. With fossil fuels in decline the future for Russia looks bleak. Ukraine's agricultural, mining and manufacturing sectors are crucial for Russia to reverse the slide.

[Sparktrader]

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

The very reason Russia invaded Ukraine is because it's a failed state. Russia needs Ukraine to diversify it's economy away from just fossil fuels and gold. With fossil fuels in decline the future for Russia looks bleak. Ukraine's agricultural, mining and manufacturing sectors are crucial for Russia to reverse the slide.

Fossil fuels arent in decline though.

[Sparktrader]

18 mth bull mkt in coal

 

The western media lies all the time about fossil fuels

[ozimoron]

3 minutes ago, Sparktrader said:

Fossil fuels arent in decline though.

True in the short term but the long view is for fossil fuels to decline. They have to if the world is to combat climate change which it will be increasingly forced to do.

 

https://www.gisreportsonline.com/r/peak-oil-demand/

[Sparktrader]

1 minute ago, ozimoron said:

True in the short term but the long view is for fossil fuels to decline. They have to if the world is to combat climate change which it will be increasingly forced to do.

 

https://www.gisreportsonline.com/r/peak-oil-demand/

People said that 30 years ago.

 

 

[Sparktrader]

Error

Edited July 17, 2022 by Sparktrader

[Sparktrader]

Error

Edited July 17, 2022 by Sparktrader

[ozimoron]

3 minutes ago, Sparktrader said:

People said that 30 years ago.

 

 

They did, the fossil fuel industry was listening too. They spent trillions in lobbying to prevent any meaningful action to curtail fossil fuel use.

[Sparktrader]

    https://www.statista.com/statistics/265235/oil-consumption-in-china-in-thousand-barrels-per-day/ oil

[Sparktrader]

3 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

They did, the fossil fuel industry was listening too. They spent trillions in lobbying to prevent any meaningful action to curtail fossil fuel use.

China doesnt care what people in the west say. Look up the stats in link.

 

 

[ozimoron]

6 minutes ago, Sparktrader said:

China doesnt care what people in the west say. Look up the stats in link.

 

 

I did and I acknowledged that fossil fuel usage was increasing in the short term. The tide will start to turn soon when the reality of climate change becomes an imperative and governments who fail to act will be voted out or face sanctions from countries who are making sacrifices. A world trade tariff against recalcitrants is also on the cards.

 

Key findings

Power consumption to more than double by 2050 as energy demand electrifies

Green hydrogen will become cost competitive by 2030 - a game changer for the sector

Low-cost renewables will dominate the power market by 2030 as they become cheaper than existing fossil plants

Almost half of global capacity will be in solar and wind by 2035

 

https://energydigital.com/oil-and-gas/mckinsey-aggregate-fossil-fuel-demand-peak-2027

[Sparktrader]

2 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

I did and I acknowledged that fossil fuel usage was increasing in the short term. The tide will start to turn soon when the reality of climate change becomes an imperative and governments who fail to act will be voted out or face sanctions from countries who are making sacrifices. A world trade tariff against recalcitrants is also on the cards.

 

Key findings

Power consumption to more than double by 2050 as energy demand electrifies

Green hydrogen will become cost competitive by 2030 - a game changer for the sector

Low-cost renewables will dominate the power market by 2030 as they become cheaper than existing fossil plants

Almost half of global capacity will be in solar and wind by 2035

 

https://energydigital.com/oil-and-gas/mckinsey-aggregate-fossil-fuel-demand-peak-2027

Except they could be wrong. All previous forecasts on energy wrong.

 

 

[Sparktrader]

https://cleantechnica.com/2017/09/06/iea-gets-hilariously-slammed-continuously-pessimistic-renewable-energy-forecasts/

[ozimoron]

2 minutes ago, Sparktrader said:

Except they could be wrong. All previous forecasts on energy wrong.

It's possible but climate change will become more intense and I believe that will ensure the demise of fossil fuels.

[Sparktrader]

4 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

It's possible but climate change will become more intense and I believe that will ensure the demise of fossil fuels.

Or it may not. I sent you a message. You really should research things more. Dont believe the headlines.

[Sparktrader]

  

Despite the rapid growth of non-fossil energy sources, the composition of the energy basket will largely remain the same, and fossil fuels – oil, natural gas, and coal – will remain the main suppliers of energy, accounting for over 78% of the energy supply in 2030.

https://www.brookings.edu › 2014/05

Energy 2030 - Brookings

[Sparktrader]

https://www.rechargenews.com/energy-transition/green-hydrogen-is-too-expensive-these-38-government-policies-are-needed-to-make-it-viable/2-1-1095533

[ozimoron]

13 minutes ago, Sparktrader said:

Or it may not. I sent you a message. You really should research things more. Dont believe the headlines.

I do, produce a credible criticism of McKinsey.

[ozimoron]

4 minutes ago, Sparktrader said:

https://www.rechargenews.com/energy-transition/green-hydrogen-is-too-expensive-these-38-government-policies-are-needed-to-make-it-viable/2-1-1095533

https://www.rechargenews.com/energy-transition/how-to-make-expensive-green-hydrogen-commercially-viable-today-without-subsidies/2-1-1142848

[Sparktrader]

4 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

I do, produce a credible criticism of McKinsey.

Despite the rapid growth of non-fossil energy sources, the composition of the energy basket will largely remain the same, and fossil fuels – oil, natural gas, and coal – will remain the main suppliers of energy, accounting for over 78% of the energy supply in 2030.

https://www.brookings.edu › 2014/05

Energy 2030 - Brookings

[ozimoron]

In the short term, hydrogen will be applied first in those sectors that are under societal pressure to decarbonise - likely those closest to the customer. Interest from the market is coming from consumer goods companies in Europe which can obtain a premium from consumers substituting their energy needs in production and distribution. Think about a car from green steel (produced with the use of hydrogen) and hydrogen trucks to distribute consumer products.

In the medium to long term, industrial feedstock and electricity buffering are also likely to be decarbonised by hydrogen, as well as potentially some niches in other mobility applications and the built environment.

 

https://www2.deloitte.com/nl/nl/pages/sustainability/articles/creating-a-viable-hydrogen-economy.html

[Sparktrader]

7 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

https://www.rechargenews.com/energy-transition/how-to-make-expensive-green-hydrogen-commercially-viable-today-without-subsidies/2-1-1142848

Except that article doesnt show anything about low costs.