Russia could run out of money next year, says oligarch Oleg Deripaska

[Scott]

 

The oligarch Oleg Deripaska has said Russia could run out of money by next year unless the country secures investment from “friendly” countries as western sanctions bite.

Deripaska, an energy and metals tycoon who was once Russia’s richest person, told an investment conference in Siberia on Thursday: “There will be no money already next year. We will need foreign investors.”

Deripaska, who is subject to UK, US and EU sanctions over Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, said funds are running low and “that’s why they’ve [the Russian government] already begun to shake us down”, according to a Bloomberg report.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/02/russia-run-out-of-money-oleg-deripaska

[ArturGorbachev]

“[the Russian government] already begun to shake us down”

“There will be no money already next year. We (I) will need foreign investors.”

 

 

????

[ozimoron]

Next year is a long time away. Putin will be dead and the war will be over.

[ArturGorbachev]

14 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Next year is a long time away. Putin will be dead and the war will be over.

Life is like a zebra; white stripe, black stripe, and the ass at the end. Who knows who will be after Putin, maybe Putin was actually the white one.

[nauseus]

Sounds like a crock to me, especially of this guy is an energy and metals "tycoon". Russia has been hoarding gold and energy resources are still plentiful. Both will outlast Putin, hopefully.  

[Bkk Brian]

Oleg Deripaska needs to stay well clear of balconies or open windows

[malibukid]

there is always the Bank of China

[bangon04]

Russia is already out of money. The Oligarchs and Putin fan club, on the other hand, are not at any risk..

[spidermike007]

Oh, let us hope this happens. If any nation on earth deserves bankruptcy, it is Russia. They are already morally bankrupt, and are being led into the abyss by a serial killing madman dictator, who seems to think nothing of inflicting massive pain and death upon women and children. 

[George Aylesham]

Hopefully - but this may just be Mr Deripaska's wishful thinking.

[Purdey]

I suspect the Chinese may lend money in exchange for seaports and airports. 

[Fruit Trader]

49 minutes ago, spidermike007 said:

Oh, let us hope this happens. If any nation on earth deserves bankruptcy, it is Russia.

I very much doubt it will happen with so much desirable stock in the store.

[Foghorn]

That’s what the west would like , the only country that stands up to the NWO , if NATO stood by the agreement not to expand to the Russian borders to incite a war there wouldn’t be a problem

[bradiston]

17 minutes ago, Foghorn said:

That’s what the west would like , the only country that stands up to the NWO , if NATO stood by the agreement not to expand to the Russian borders to incite a war there wouldn’t be a problem

NATO members Latvia and Estonia are on the Russian border, and I never heard mention they were about to invade. That's the only reason Russia didn't invade them as well. The poppycock excuse Putin blurts out at every opportunity, that NATO was about to invade Russia... Well about as much truth in that as all the rest of the crumbling Kremlin crxp. 

[placeholder]

23 minutes ago, Foghorn said:

That’s what the west would like , the only country that stands up to the NWO , if NATO stood by the agreement not to expand to the Russian borders to incite a war there wouldn’t be a problem

There was no agreement not to expand to the Russian borders:

 

Did NATO Promise Not to Enlarge? Gorbachev Says “No”

Western leaders never pledged not to enlarge NATO, a point that several analysts have demonstrated. Mark Kramer explored the question in detail in a 2009 article in The Washington Quarterly. He drew on declassified American, German and Soviet records to make his case and noted that, in discussions on German reunification in the two-plus-four format (the two Germanys plus the United States, Soviet Union, Britain and France), the Soviets never raised the question of NATO enlargement other than how it might apply in the former German Democratic Republic (GDR).

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2014/11/06/did-nato-promise-not-to-enlarge-gorbachev-says-no/

 

[Eric Loh]

36 minutes ago, Foghorn said:

That’s what the west would like , the only country that stands up to the NWO , if NATO stood by the agreement not to expand to the Russian borders to incite a war there wouldn’t be a problem

Which countries that border Russia did NATO expanded? Norway and Poland are old members. After the Russia invasion of Ukraine, Finland and Ukraine formally applied. Putin dream of Russia grandeur to emulate the former Soveit Union expansionism is creating fear among the border countries and pushing them towards Nato alliance to safeguard their security. .  

[placeholder]

4 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Which countries that border Russia did NATO expanded? Norway and Poland are old members. After the Russia invasion of Ukraine, Finland and Ukraine formally applied. Putin dream of Russia grandeur to emulate the former Soveit Union expansionism is creating fear among the border countries and pushing them towards Nato alliance to safeguard their security. .  

Anyway, as pointed out above, it's not true. There was no promise made.

[Harveyboy]

On 3/3/2023 at 3:40 AM, ozimoron said:

Next year is a long time away. Putin will be dead and the war will be over.

Would be nice 

[Operator2002]

On 3/3/2023 at 12:20 PM, Foghorn said:

... if NATO stood by the agreement not to expand to the Russian borders to incite a war there wouldn’t be a problem

No need to repeat Putin regime's propoganda. No need to justify worthless war started because of somebody's imperialistic ambitions.

1. Actually there was no such agreement with Russia (it was with Soviet Union in regard Baltic republics when they were part of SSSR so out of context now).

2. NATO is defensive organization - and why it cannot be expanded? It has open membership policy to accept anyone. 

3. In Budapest memorandum Russia provided security assurances to Ukraine in exchange of nuclear weapons but violated it by invading Ukraine in 2014.

[vandeventer]

On 3/3/2023 at 6:20 AM, nauseus said:

Sounds like a crock to me, especially of this guy is an energy and metals "tycoon". Russia has been hoarding gold and energy resources are still plentiful. Both will outlast Putin, hopefully.  

I heard on the news today that Russia has over 100,000 in losses. Also it may be America running out of money finding out that the USA is paying pensions to the Ukraine people. You would think the EU would be helping more.

[ozimoron]

28 minutes ago, vandeventer said:

I heard on the news today that Russia has over 100,000 in losses. Also it may be America running out of money finding out that the USA is paying pensions to the Ukraine people. You would think the EU would be helping more.

They aren't?

[nauseus]

34 minutes ago, vandeventer said:

I heard on the news today that Russia has over 100,000 in losses. Also it may be America running out of money finding out that the USA is paying pensions to the Ukraine people. You would think the EU would be helping more.

That would be the right thing to do. So it probably won't happen.

[candide]

1 hour ago, vandeventer said:

I heard on the news today that Russia has over 100,000 in losses. Also it may be America running out of money finding out that the USA is paying pensions to the Ukraine people. You would think the EU would be helping more.

It's not as high as the U.S. still significant.

 

Over 2022, the US led the way with major support decisions for Ukraine, with EU countries following with some delay and overtaking the US in the meantime with their total commitments. With additional data now collected (November 21 to January 15), the US again takes the lead. With additional pledges of nearly 37 billion euros in December, the Americans have earmarked a total of just over 73.1 billion euros for Ukraine support. For the EU, the comparable figure is 54.9 billion euros. 

https://www.ifw-kiel.de/publications/media-information/2023/one-year-of-support-to-ukraine-us-leads-eu-follows/

[still kicking]

On 3/3/2023 at 4:40 AM, ozimoron said:

Next year is a long time away. Putin will be dead and the war will be over.

Unsettling claims Vladimir Putin has ‘gone mad with power’

Vladimir Putin has ‘gone mad with power, says politician Ilya Yashin | news.com.au — Australia’s leading news site

[Scott]

Off-topic, troll post removed.

 

[bradiston]

On 3/3/2023 at 4:20 PM, Foghorn said:

That’s what the west would like , the only country that stands up to the NWO , if NATO stood by the agreement not to expand to the Russian borders to incite a war there wouldn’t be a problem

The corollary is, if Ukraine HAD been a member of NATO, none of this would have happened. An ironic lesson for the future. Putin has pretty much guaranteed NATO and EU membership for Ukraine. How else is Europe going to defend IT'S borders?

[vandeventer]

23 hours ago, candide said:

It's not as high as the U.S. still significant.

 

Over 2022, the US led the way with major support decisions for Ukraine, with EU countries following with some delay and overtaking the US in the meantime with their total commitments. With additional data now collected (November 21 to January 15), the US again takes the lead. With additional pledges of nearly 37 billion euros in December, the Americans have earmarked a total of just over 73.1 billion euros for Ukraine support. For the EU, the comparable figure is 54.9 billion euros. 

https://www.ifw-kiel.de/publications/media-information/2023/one-year-of-support-to-ukraine-us-leads-eu-follows/

https://fb.watch/j5nHulcHRJ/

[ArturGorbachev]

4 hours ago, bradiston said:

The corollary is, if Ukraine HAD been a member of NATO, none of this would have happened. An ironic lesson for the future. Putin has pretty much guaranteed NATO and EU membership for Ukraine. How else is Europe going to defend IT'S borders?

1. There were many ways to avoid this war, being a NATO member is one of them ( ?question mark see #2)

2. Being a NATO member does not make a country magically safe or immortal, while in theory it should and so far it worked, does not mean it will continue to do so in the future.

 

There are plenty of literature in fiction genre  where a protagonist somehow get a knowledge of his future misfortune and with his actions trying to avoid it he actually makes it happen. Take a Finland for example, want join NATO to be safe while they were already safe. What will happen if they start put missiles on their land, probably nothing, but in a tiny chance the conflict between NATO and Russia will start and i cant see it happens without nukes flying , Finland will be blown to pieces in 10 minutes after the beginning, was it their goal when they were decide to join, i doubt.

 

[ozimoron]

1 minute ago, ArturGorbachev said:

1. There were many ways to avoid this war, being a NATO member is one of them ( ?question mark see #2)

2. Being a NATO member does not make a country magically safe or immortal, while in theory it should and so far it worked, does not mean it will continue to do so in the future.

 

There are plenty of literature in fiction genre  where a protagonist somehow get a knowledge of his future misfortune and with his actions trying to avoid it he actually makes it happen. Take a Finland for example, want join NATO to be safe while they were already safe. What will happen if they start put missiles on their land, probably nothing, but in a tiny chance the conflict between NATO and Russia will start and i cant see it happens without nukes flying , Finland will be blown to pieces in 10 minutes after the beginning, was it their goal when they were decide to join, i doubt.

 

Being a member of NATO has made countries since its inception. Russia is never going to attack a NATO country. Never has and never will. NATO was formed to ensure that exactly that never happened.

[ArturGorbachev]

7 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Being a member of NATO has made countries since its inception. Russia is never going to attack a NATO country. Never has and never will. NATO was formed to ensure that exactly that never happened.

I disagree. It can happen if circumstances will make it unavoidable. Example a country that controls land crossing from Belarus to Kalingrad (Latvia? i dont remember which one of them) decide to organize blockade. There is a mutual fear nobody wants provoke each other, because nobody knows what will happen. If a russian rocket hit a city in Latvia for the reason above, will you bet your life that USA and EU will hit russia in return and risk everyone die, or they will roll their eyes and say something that blockade was an idiot move and let it go?

 

I cant say that something will never happen, things change, does not mean anything if something did not happen in past 30 years, 30 years sounds like a lot for a person, but for history it is just a blink of an eye.