Topic: Economic Implications of War on Individuals - page 7. (Read 3340 times)

Mosly I agree with your post but there's one thing that does not look right to me:

Russia's aggression will end soon. Only after this will it be possible to objectively judge how people lived and are living in different regions of the once united Ukraine.


I would rephrase it as follows:

The NATOs aggression will end soon. Only after this will it be possible to objectively judge how people lived and are living in different regions of the once united Ukraine.

I googled it and I stand by my opinion. I don’t want to give any quotes and facts from what I read and saw, since the reaction to them is known in advance, that this is Ukrainian propaganda. It is worth saying, of course, that the information on this topic on the Internet is quite old and reflects different propaganda opinions. This is understandable: there is a large-scale war going on, including in the information space. But even if we think logically, the economic situation and standard of living of people in the so-called DPR and LPR cannot be better, since military actions leave a direct negative imprint on them. If most of the mines and other enterprises in the region are closed, and there are almost no public utilities in the cities, then life there is definitely no better compared to how people lived in “Bandera’s” Ukraine.

Russia's aggression will end soon. Only after this will it be possible to objectively judge how people lived and are living in different regions of the once united Ukraine.

Just google Donbass in 2014 vs now or Crimea 2014 vs now or Mariupol 2014 vs now. You will be shocked. All these locations looked like a shithole back in 2014. Even most Ukrainians and ex-Ukrainian locals admit it. Most of the towns across Ukraine, perhaps only with the exception of Kyiv haven't been renovated since Soviet times.

I see from you recent post that you are already out of arguments. Your arguments have come to an end and you are starting to collect any info despite it’s utter irrelevance.

People in those regions who were sent to the front mostly did that of their own free will. They were not kidnapped  like Ukrainian males are being searched and kidnapped by the Ukainian police all over Ukraine.

The US involvement into the conflict brought decline and destruction to the Donbass, destroying a significant part of the civilian population. But the US and Ukraine blames Russia for this. It’s so convenient to justify your atrocities.

Until 2014, the Donetsk and Lugansk regions within Ukraine prospered. The main economic sectors of these regions were coal mining and metallurgy. At the time of separation from Ukraine, the separatists stated that the Donbass region supposedly fed the whole of Ukraine and without it Ukraine would not survive.

But in September last year, Russian Energy Minister N. Shulginov announced that the number of coal mines in the “DPR” - “LPR” had been decided to be reduced from 114 to 15.
Already in 2020, there were only six operating mines left in the LPR. As a result of this “restructuring,” according to local media, over 32 thousand miners lost their jobs. In the “DPR” at the end of 2022, only the Komsomolets Donbassa mine was more or less operating, producing over 1 million tons of coal. But even in mines that are still operating, equipment wear has reached 85%. The indicator "85%" means a pre-emergency condition.
Metallurgical enterprises in the region are already completely closed. Thus, the economy of Donbass and Lugansk as part of the “separate republics” was almost completely destroyed. They admit that these regions are now almost entirely subsidized by the Russian Federation.

What really happened to the people of these regions? From them the so-called first and second army corps were formed as part of the armed forces of the Russian Federation and they were sent to the front to fight against Ukraine. They were usually used in the front row to detect the firing points of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, so now there is almost no male population in the DPR and LPR. For this reason, public utilities do not work, the collapse is almost complete.

The Russian world brought decline and destruction to the Donbass, destroying a significant part of the civilian population. But Russia blames Ukraine for this. It’s so convenient to justify your atrocities.

• At the very start of the war if you can do it and you've got the money, do your best to seek asylum as quickly as possible but this will only be a thing that you should do when you're directly affected by the war erupting, if you're not affected at all or the proximity is too far, probably stay calm and watch the news update to the developments of the conflict, maybe stock up on non-perishable foods to make sure that your family won't be starving or something like that.
• The best business that you can do is transportation or logistic services but that comes with the risk that you'll get caught in the cross fire because the higher the pay, the higher the risk that you'll have your services requested on the frontlines.
• Normal movement of the market is going to be affected the most, once your in that state, there's little thing that you can do, if you've prepared for it before the war started near you or in your country then you wouldn't worry too much about this and you'd probably need to learn how to manage what's given to you when the rationing starts.

The real madness would have begun if Putin had not been stopped in Ukraine. Putin only understands power and will go as far as he is allowed. Therefore, the Baltic countries would definitely be next in his aggression. Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia understand this very clearly and help Ukraine in any way they can so as not to see destroyed houses and killed people on their territory. In fact, now Ukraine is fighting not only for its independence, but also the independence of all of Europe. Putin's Russia was not punished for the 2008 attack on Georgia, the 2014 attack on Ukraine and the seizure of the Crimean peninsula and parts of the Donetsk and Lugansk regions of Ukraine. That’s why he decided to take over all of Ukraine.

And this is total BS again, my friend.
One has to be crazy to think that Russia wants to occupy Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia. This is Western propaganda. There is not a word of truth in this. The West wants to destroy Russia and they invent a lot of stories in order to justify the destruction of Russia that neocons in the US so much desire.

Have you seen what happened in just a month of occupation of the Kiev region by Russians? Dead civilians were lying right on the street: an elderly man on a cyclist, a woman with scattered groceries from her bag. They were killed simply for fun, because they felt permissiveness. And how many corpses were then removed from mass graves hastily dug in forest plantations and from basements with their hands tied behind their backs and bullets in the back of their heads. Would you like to see this in your country?


Have you seen what happened to people living in 2 breakaway provinces of Ukraine, namely Donetsk and Luganks after their territories were regularly and systematically fired upon by Kiev nazi? This bombshelling started in 2014 and MSM of the West have been ignoring these massive killings that took place on a regular scale.
Putin was forced to invade Ukraine partially because of these killings that Kiev regime was deliberately executing starting from 2014. 

Well, let's figure out when the Ukrainians and the state of Ukraine appeared, and when Russia appeared. The name "Ukraine" first appeared in the Kyiv Chronicle in 1187. Then it either disappears or is used again, but it has been in constant use since Cossack times, that is, since the 16th-17th centuries.
“Ukraine” is one of the official names of the Cossack state, which arose after the uprising of Bohdan Khmelnitsky against Polish power in the middle of the 17th century (along with other names - Zaporozhye Army, Hetmanate, Little Russia). It is very important that in the Cossack chronicles of that time the word “Ukraine” means not just territory, but the fatherland, which requires the highest loyalty and which is a sacred duty to defend.
In the 18th century, as the Cossack state dissolved into the Russian Empire, the word “Ukraine” again disappeared from active political use. However, this name is preserved in folk culture (there are approximately 1,200 folk songs sung about Ukraine). It returns to politics and high culture in the 19th century, during the period of national revival. And in the 20th century it became generally accepted - the name of almost not a single state and even occupation entity on the territory of Ukraine in 1917–1991 could be done without it: Ukrainian People's Republic, Western Ukrainian People's Republic, Ukrainian State and even the Nazi Reichskommissariat “Ukraine”.

I do not agree with you completely here.

The meaning of the word Ukraine means okraina in Russian which can be translated as "at the border" that is at the border of Russia.
Ukraine has bever been a separate country. From times immemorial Kiev Rus and Moscovia has been one and the same country. It is all inhabited by one people.
These are not different peoples because they have been using the Russian language as their main mother tongue.
I have been living in USSR and then in Russia, I know lots of Ukrainian people and my father was a Ukrainian.
What you are trying to do is prove that Ukraine is a separate country and a separate people.
This is total BS. How can it be a separate people when they are using Russian as their mother tongue?
Ukrainian language was invented by communists in the times of USSR.
Ukrainians should be thankful to Lenin for this.

The real madness would have begun if Putin had not been stopped in Ukraine. Putin only understands power and will go as far as he is allowed. Therefore, the Baltic countries would definitely be next in his aggression. Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia understand this very clearly and help Ukraine in any way they can so as not to see destroyed houses and killed people on their territory. In fact, now Ukraine is fighting not only for its independence, but also the independence of all of Europe. Putin's Russia was not punished for the 2008 attack on Georgia, the 2014 attack on Ukraine and the seizure of the Crimean peninsula and parts of the Donetsk and Lugansk regions of Ukraine. That’s why he decided to take over all of Ukraine.

Have you seen what happened in just a month of occupation of the Kiev region by Russians? Dead civilians were lying right on the street: an elderly man on a cyclist, a woman with scattered groceries from her bag. They were killed simply for fun, because they felt permissiveness. And how many corpses were then removed from mass graves hastily dug in forest plantations and from basements with their hands tied behind their backs and bullets in the back of their heads. Would you like to see this in your country?

Of course, even Poland is afraid of such a repetition at home and therefore wants to place nuclear weapons on its territory to deter the horde of Russians. Escalation of hostilities and a reason for Putin to invade? The best reason for him to invade is weak neighbors. On the other hand, is Putin’s deployment of his nuclear weapons on the territory of Belarus not an escalation of the war with NATO?

Have you ever wondered why Finland and Sweden asked to join NATO after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine? Because the Finns have not yet forgotten how these neighbors attacked them in 1939-1940 and also do not want such a repetition. Russia's neighbors know what this horde is like. Your country is probably located far from Russia, so you feel relatively safe. To prevent this from happening again, Putin and his army of orcs must now be kicked in the teeth, so that many generations of these orcs will pay reparations to the Ukrainians for the evil they have done and remember the fatal mistake of their older generations.

what is crazy is that they voted billions to support Ukraine while it keeps losing. they are planning to send nukes to Poland.
they have been dragging Poland into this war already of course they have been telling Putin is going to invade all, but they are also giving him reason to do it like putting nukes in that country.
 


they shouldn't start a war in the first place. but because it's just that sometimes there is the need to do it because of the country's security. if one country is just going to mind its own business and not tangled with border issues. settle these issues before they get worse then, there won't be any wars. but because they ask superpowers to back them.

The economic value of commodities will go up and the individuals will feel the heat more than the economy of the country and the most important  will be the life of individuals, and during war you hardly have access to commodities or even physical cash and things that are important during war is the safety of the people.

Even if war is dispute why cant they just settle it before taking people lives at risk, is not worth declaring anything on anyone, because if you see what people go through during war, mentally then the life's lost is not something anyone will want to experience, the sight of see dead bodies everywhere, you wont even think of the economy, the recure team during wars are trying during wars, yeah during war it is always difficult to navigate so the only people that its easy for are does that actually have money, but the government will also try their best to relocate people to a safe place.

Zelensky is of course an actor, but very poor acting by him. You need to realize one thing: there is no Ukraine and no allies. There's US fighting Russia with the hands of Ukrainians. So this theatrical show (can also be called a good cop vs bad cop scenario) is there just to show that US government cares about oil supply and prices. Do they care in fact? Definitely not! Actually, they're happy the prices are going up so they can get more money for their own oil. Zelensky is just a sockpuppet reading out loud stuff received from the US sources.    

Even now, after years of war, the number of civilians killed in this war (not only by the Russians btw) is lower than in any other recent war. It's at least five times lower than Israel's violent assault on Gaza. And I'm talking only about initial 2-3 weeks of Israeli occupation of Palestine. And don't forget the infamous UN report exposing war crimes of AFU, including placing artillery and MLRS units in residential areas.    

Don't worry, Ukraine is not going to receive $60 billion worth of military support. As to the ATACMS missiles, Ukraine already used them (slightly shorter range though) and they don't require too much effort from the Russians to intercept and destroy.

Even if Ukraine is going to hit the Crimea bridge, it won't change anything on the battlefield: AFU are losing more villages and towns every day, more territories being captured by Russia without any chance to regain later.   

The Ukrainian Armed Forces have already carried out successful attacks on 14 Russian oil refineries, which led to a reduction in the export of petroleum products by a third. At the same time, some politicians in the United States were indeed dissatisfied with such attacks by the Armed Forces of Ukraine, since as a result, prices for gasoline and diesel fuel rose. But Ukrainian President Zelensky directly stated that he would not listen to this advice and that the terrorist country Russia can only be stopped if it strikes military facilities and other Russian facilities that support the invasion of Ukraine.

Considering that Russia continues to methodically launch missile and bomb attacks on populated areas of Ukraine, trying to destroy them to the ground, including such a multi-million Ukrainian city as Kharkov, killing civilians every day, it seems that any ban on attacks on military targets on Russian territory with the help of Western weapons has already been removed or will be removed in the near future.

Today the US Senate is scheduled to vote on the $60 billion aid bill to Ukraine, which was approved by the House of Representatives on April 20. Biden has already stated that he will sign it as quickly as possible and weapons, including long-range ATACMS shells, will soon arrive in Ukraine. Then it will be possible to clearly see at what depth in Russia military installations will explode under the blows of high-precision Western weapons.
In this regard, the Crimean Bridge, it seems, will soon tire and fall in parts to the bottom of the sea.

War indeed has a profoundly disruptive impact on economies and individual livelihoods. When conflict arises, normal economic activities often grind to a halt. Business owners face plummeting profits as customers prioritize safety and survival over shopping. Additionally, the uncertainty and danger associated with war zones discourage suppliers and disrupt supply chains, further strangling business operations.

War make business owners not to make profits from their businesses because customers will be running for their dear life or managing the ones they have bought before the war started from the country.

You can see many countries war has reduced their economy to zero just because they allow war to involve between them and their neighboring country, no business will be moving well in such area, and their suppliers will be afraid to supply goods to those that demand for the goods because no one want to lose his life for war.

It will take some years before Russia and Ukraine businesses owners can recover from the damage of their businesses for the war that is affecting them, and it will make other countries to know that war always bring damage to the economy.

The laws of economics work equally for all countries without any exception. This means that no country can afford to unlimitedly print national money and use it to pay for the production of military products, which are then destroyed in the war, as well as for the deaths and injuries of soldiers to their relatives. This will cause any economy to fall and inflation to rise sharply.

The production of a tank and a civilian passenger car cannot cost the state the same. This is complete nonsense. As for Putin, he now doesn’t give a damn about anything except his reputation and saving his life after, on his initiative, Russia was mired in a brutal, bloody war in Ukraine, which has been going on for the third year and there is no end in sight. I think that in Russia almost everyone has already felt the cost of this madness.

Well, let's figure out when the Ukrainians and the state of Ukraine appeared, and when Russia appeared. The name "Ukraine" first appeared in the Kyiv Chronicle in 1187. Then it either disappears or is used again, but it has been in constant use since Cossack times, that is, since the 16th-17th centuries.
“Ukraine” is one of the official names of the Cossack state, which arose after the uprising of Bohdan Khmelnitsky against Polish power in the middle of the 17th century (along with other names - Zaporozhye Army, Hetmanate, Little Russia). It is very important that in the Cossack chronicles of that time the word “Ukraine” means not just territory, but the fatherland, which requires the highest loyalty and which is a sacred duty to defend.
In the 18th century, as the Cossack state dissolved into the Russian Empire, the word “Ukraine” again disappeared from active political use. However, this name is preserved in folk culture (there are approximately 1,200 folk songs sung about Ukraine). It returns to politics and high culture in the 19th century, during the period of national revival. And in the 20th century it became generally accepted - the name of almost not a single state and even occupation entity on the territory of Ukraine in 1917–1991 could be done without it: Ukrainian People's Republic, Western Ukrainian People's Republic, Ukrainian State and even the Nazi Reichskommissariat “Ukraine”.

The Russian Empire, and then the Soviet Union, did everything to prevent Ukrainians from rising to the level of a nation, but to remain an ethnic group. A nation is not only political self-determination, but also the opportunity to create one’s own high culture in one’s native language. Therefore, the Ukrainian language was banned twice during the period of liberal reforms of Tsar Alexander II. During the Thaw, Khrushchev convinced Ukrainians and Belarusians that the faster they switched to Russian, the faster communism would be built. True, Gorbachev argued in private conversations that the Russification of Ukrainians was occurring naturally, because they themselves did not want their children to learn Ukrainian. At that time, mostly peasants spoke Ukrainian, and anyone who wanted to make a career in Soviet Ukraine had to switch to Russian.

The idea to call the Principality of Moscow the Russian Kingdom belongs to a descendant of Mamai from the Mongolian tribe of Kyiyat, known as Ivan IV Vasilyevich, nicknamed the Terrible.
The word “Russian” can have one application - as belonging to a territory, and not a people, which was then divided into Novgorodians and Pskovians (“we are Pskovites”), Suzdalians, and then Muscovites. Ivan the Terrible simply stole the name of Rus' when in 1547 the Grand Duke of Moscow was crowned Tsar and took the full title: “Great Sovereign, by the grace of God Tsar and Grand Duke of All Rus', Vladimir, Moscow, Novgorod, Pskov, Ryazan, Tver, Yugorsk , Perm, Vyatsky, Bo(u)Lgarsky and others.” With the seizure of new lands, the names of the occupied territories were added - “Tsar of Kazan, Tsar of Astrakhan, Tsar of Siberia and ruler of all Northern countries.” Did Ivan the Terrible know about the existence of the Russian Kingdom (voivodeship) in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth? He couldn’t help but know: his western neighbors and the once prosperous Kievan Rus did not give him peace.

In 1703, another Russian dictator, Peter I, built a new capital on the swamps, conducted several successful military campaigns, and in 1721 allowed himself to be called the titles of Emperor of All Russia and Father of the Fatherland. From that time on, “Russia”, “Russian”, “Russian” had not an ethnic, but a state designation. In fact, what a “Russian” second wife of Peter the Great is, in the modern patriotic understanding, Marta Samuilovna Skavronskaya-Kruse, the mother of Empress Elizabeth. What kind of “Russian” emperor was Karl Peter Ulrich von Schleswig-Holstein-Gottorf, Peter III. Then Catherine II, née Sophie Auguste Friederike von Anhalt-Zerbst-Dornburg. Literally until the last Tsar Nicholas II, there was more German blood in the blood of the Russian imperial house than the mythical “Russian”.

Manipulation of historical facts is an old Russian hobby. Once you lie, you have to lie constantly, inventing a story that takes the Russians’ breath away. It’s just that in others she evokes laughter and pity.

https://nv.ua/opinion/nastojashchaja-rus-o-chem-bojatsja-vspominat-rossijane-69010.html

When there is a war in a country, there is a country that takes business opportunities in this case, even though there are risks that must be taken in it. so we can see together that there are countries trying to offer food aid first, that is part of the strategy so that the country at war can win the favor of the leader, after that they offer work in another form, namely their weapons, this is offering themselves war troops. After the war ended, cooperation became increasingly wide open. This is the influence of economic war that cannot be controlled

The thing about business and feeding your family in war is common because every person can do the same when he or she sees his/her family suffering from starvation. There is no tip to start any business in war because the enemy force will not allow you to do so and in case you start it so to whom you will sell because every person suffering from war and have zero capital. The govt is also unable to feed the civilians because they trying to fight the war and feed the forces first.  In this situation, not only weapon sellers took benefits but also those countries who sent you food and health-related requirements and medicines. So my advice is if you're in such a situation then please if possible fly to the nearest state or at least leave that region.