Russian Federation vs Soviet Union

[Hirohito]

So, I've heard Fox Fire say that the Soviet system was much more beneficial to average Russians than the current capitalist version of Russia. I'd like to hear some examples of how this is so. We can even exclude Stalin. Don't need him for this to prove how crazy that notion is

[Franz Von Dietrich]

Both are terrible states, and to be honest only the SU was Russia's true prime of era.

Edited February 13, 2015 by Francisco Franco

[fistofdoom]

Its all crazy.

[Franz Von Dietrich]

Its all crazy.

Indeed, it is!

[Bilal the Great]

People in Russian Federation actually have food instead of just propaganda pictures of food. I say modern Russia wins.

[vonnorman]

You havent seen the russian federation yet, its merely the beginning of a new rise to power. The russians have resources and people to exploit them. There is a ball rolling and the federation will be a new soviet union after a power play that leaves the world stunned

[Franz Von Dietrich]

You havent seen the russian federation yet, its merely the beginning of a new rise to power. The russians have resources and people to exploit them. There is a ball rolling and the federation will be a new soviet union after a power play that leaves the world stunned

The Russian ruble is pratically dying, just like the economy. And yet; you say it's on the rise? No, it's really not. It's causing too many international tensions, and getting loads of sancations, so yeah, it's not rising.

[Hereno]

actually i think in the past couple years the longevity got back up to soviet numbers, it wouldn't surprise me to see the russian federation finally beating out the 1980's USSR

[Aisha Greyjoy]

The Soviet Union had the conventional military forces to push NATO into the sea.  Nuclear war was America's only defense against a Soviet Attack.  And that is why the Eisenhower doctrine called for overwhelming nuclear first strike in response to Russian aggression.

 

The Soviets maintained that conventional domination until the 80's when their sluggish economic growth had trouble competing with America's explosive military spending.  I feel confident NATO conventional forces today could trounce Russia.  So, I give points to SU.

Edited February 13, 2015 by Aisha Greyjoy

[Fox Fire]

GDP of the USSR in 1983 was worth 993 billion US dollars, ranked 3rd in the world. Share of GDP of USSR in the world was 7.8%. GDP per capita in USSR was more, than GDP per capita in the World.

Over all, their GDP was higher than China, India, Japan, Turkey, Finland, Germany, Romania, Poland, etc.

 

Russias GDP since 1983, and especially since the fall of the Union has steadily decreased and is just barely starting to recover. The massive concentration of wealth is another blow to the modern Russian economy. I would have rather lived in the USSR in the 70's than modern Russia.

[Hirohito]

The Russian ruble is pratically dying, just like the economy. And yet; you say it's on the rise? No, it's really not. It's causing too many international tensions, and getting loads of sancations, so yeah, it's not rising.

 

Much of that is fallacy. The Ruble is dying recently due to sanctions, but as a whole, Russia faired no worse than say the US in 2008 when the market collapsed. It's hardly indicative of a poor economy by Russia.

 

The Soviet Union had the conventional military forces to push NATO into the sea.  Nuclear war was America's only defense against a Soviet Attack.  And that is why the Eisenhower doctrine called for overwhelming nuclear first strike in response to Russian aggression.

 

The Soviets maintained that conventional domination until the 80's when their sluggish economic growth had trouble competing with America's explosive military spending.  I feel confident NATO conventional forces today could trounce Russia.  So, I give points to SU.

 

The Russian military vanguard that rolled into Ukraine has been seen to have advanced command and control, logistics, weapons and armor. Much of the body armor the troops were wearing has been estimated to stop any conventional small arms round NATO has, and do so more effectively than NATO armor counterparts. Also, the S300 and S400(I think?) is capable of downing most low RCS and low infrared "stealth" aircraft. The F22 is the only piece of hardware NATO has that can "trounce" any of Russia's aircraft, and only for a bit longer with the advent of Russia's PAK 5th Gen Fighter Platform. The M1 is aging, and the T90 (not the export model) is comparative, and the myth of the Abrams' invincibility was shattered by a $20 RPG in the hands of an insurgent in Iraq.

 

GDP of the USSR in 1983 was worth 993 billion US dollars, ranked 3rd in the world. Share of GDP of USSR in the world was 7.8%. GDP per capita in USSR was more, than GDP per capita in the World.

Over all, their GDP was higher than China, India, Japan, Turkey, Finland, Germany, Romania, Poland, etc.

 

Russias GDP since 1983, and especially since the fall of the Union has steadily decreased and is just barely starting to recover. The massive concentration of wealth is another blow to the modern Russian economy. I would have rather lived in the USSR in the 70's than modern Russia.

 

It's nice to see GDP numbers. Let's talk about food, overall consumer goods and anything not tied to heavy industry. I suggest that the picture there tells a more stark indication of the real lives of Russian citizens. There's also the famine in Ukraine, the general pollution levels of Russia, and the poor standards of living for most soviets in the mid to late 40's, after the Germans had left the country. You are also leaving out the fact that much of the country was under a brutal repression for most of the life of the Soviet Union. Arguably there have only been three real periods of freedom and democracy in Russia since 1917. First, under the provisional government lead by Kerensky. Second, under Lenin with the New Economic Policy, which increased the foodstuff production and health of the economy to pre-war levels. And under Gorby, with Glasnost and Perestroika.

Edited February 14, 2015 by Sindorin

[Nicholas II]

This is not targeted at Francisco Franco, but in address to near all points made thus far. In support that Russia has been better off now, than in the Soviet era.

 

 

The Russian ruble is pratically dying, just like the economy. And yet; you say it's on the rise? No, it's really not. It's causing too many international tensions, and getting loads of sancations, so yeah, it's not rising.

 

Two major things to note by the above graph: (1) It starts as the Soviet Union collapsed, thus as it starts in 1992, the economy would not have been a sudden drop as the slow drop at the start is the transition period,, thus is the true effect of the collapse of the Soviet Union. Where the graph starts (~1,200B), is where the Soviet Union would have been the previous years. (2) The Soviet Union was in both stagnation and decline from the end of Kruschev's reign. This ended around 1970 (I think 1968?), since the USSR had its truer start around 1922 and ended in 1991, let us do some maths: It existed for ~69 years and was in stagnation (starting from Kruschev's end) for the remaining 31 years. 31 / 69 = 0.44 ... so the USSR was in both stagnation and decline for 44% of its existence. Near half.

 

Transition periods are always troublesome. As you can see, with no international financial crisis, the economy went down. But through relief funds for the 1998 financial crisis and a change in government regime benefited Russia to a point of regaining its international standard as a world superpower. In the '90s, Russia was not much of anything, as it was, to reiterate, in a period of transition to a market economy. Now, Russia is much better off. It is quite blatant, I find.

 

Here is another graph:

 

This is GDP per capita, being an economic measurement based upon the average yearly income of all citizens that are the age of majority. If the counterargument, at all, contains support for Communism in general and not just the Soviet era of Russia, take note that China is on this GDP per capita graph as well. China became its most capitalist form, its current forum, beginning in the 1980s. So, the transition to free markets in both cases has greatly improved both countries.

 

Economist.com states the Russia has seen a 150% increase in its GDP per capita since the Soviet Union. Not as much as Google's graph, but it still supplies the argument that Russia has seen an economic benefit since the Soviet collapse.

 

Fox Fire did not cite anything for his/her GDP numbers. Also, he/she did not tell of which GDP measurement was used to get those numbers. There are several different GDPs. The first of my graphs, does, in fact, come from the IMF (its citation is on the bottom of the image). The second is a graph from Google, and even starts in the Soviet Era; showing that there was no sharp decline by its collapse.

Edited February 14, 2015 by TsarNicholasII

[Fox Fire]

Much of that is fallacy. The Ruble is dying recently due to sanctions, but as a whole, Russia faired no worse than say the US in 2008 when the market collapsed. It's hardly indicative of a poor economy by Russia.

 

 

The Russian military vanguard that rolled into Ukraine has been seen to have advanced command and control, logistics, weapons and armor. Much of the body armor the troops were wearing has been estimated to stop any conventional small arms round NATO has, and do so more effectively than NATO armor counterparts. Also, the S300 and S400(I think?) is capable of downing most low RCS and low infrared "stealth" aircraft. The F22 is the only piece of hardware NATO has that can "trounce" any of Russia's aircraft, and only for a bit longer with the advent of Russia's PAK 5th Gen Fighter Platform. The M1 is aging, and the T90 (not the export model) is comparative, and the myth of the Abrams' invincibility was shattered by a $20 RPG in the hands of an insurgent in Iraq.

 

 

It's nice to see GDP numbers. Let's talk about food, overall consumer goods and anything not tied to heavy industry. I suggest that the picture there tells a more stark indication of the real lives of Russian citizens. There's also the famine in Ukraine, the general pollution levels of Russia, and the poor standards of living for most soviets in the mid to late 40's, after the Germans had left the country. You are also leaving out the fact that much of the country was under a brutal repression for most of the life of the Soviet Union. Arguably there have only been three real periods of freedom and democracy in Russia since 1917. First, under the provisional government lead by Kerensky. Second, under Lenin with the New Economic Policy, which increased the foodstuff production and health of the economy to pre-war levels. And under Gorby, with Glasnost and Perestroika.

First off, WWII was hell for the USSR. The fact they not only survived, but drove the Germans all the way back to Berlin is a miracle. Second, we all know Stalin was a dick. I'd consider him worse than Hitler.

Also, the modern Russian economy is owned by the Mafia and there is virtually no middle class. You're either super rich, or poor in Russia.

 

 

This is not targeted at Francisco Franco, but in address to near all points made thus far. In support that Russia has been better off now, than in the Soviet era.

 

 

 

Two major things to note by the above graph: (1) It starts as the Soviet Union collapsed, thus as it starts in 1992, the economy would not have been a sudden drop as the slow drop at the start is the transition period,, thus is the true effect of the collapse of the Soviet Union. Where the graph starts (~1,200B), is where the Soviet Union would have been the previous years. (2) The Soviet Union was in both stagnation and decline from the end of Kruschev's reign. This ended around 1970 (I think 1968?), since the USSR had its truer start around 1922 and ended in 1991, let us do some maths: It existed for ~69 years and was in stagnation (starting from Kruschev's end) for the remaining 31 years. 31 / 69 = 0.44 ... so the USSR was in both stagnation and decline for 44% of its existence. Near half.

 

Transition periods are always troublesome. As you can see, with no international financial crisis, the economy went down. But through relief funds for the 1998 financial crisis and a change in government regime benefited Russia to a point of regaining its international standard as a world superpower. In the '90s, Russia was not much of anything, as it was, to reiterate, in a period of transition to a market economy. Now, Russia is much better off. It is quite blatant, I find.

 

Here is another graph:

 

This is GDP per capita, being an economic measurement based upon the average yearly income of all citizens that are the age of majority. If the counterargument, at all, contains support for Communism in general and not just the Soviet era of Russia, take note that China is on this GDP per capita graph as well. China became its most capitalist form, its current forum, beginning in the 1980s. So, the transition to free markets in both cases has greatly improved both countries.

 

Economist.com states the Russia has seen a 150% increase in its GDP per capita since the Soviet Union. Not as much as Google's graph, but it still supplies the argument that Russia has seen an economic benefit since the Soviet collapse.

 

Fox Fire did not cite anything for his/her GDP numbers. Also, he/she did not tell of which GDP measurement was used to get those numbers. There are several different GDPs. The first of my graphs, does, in fact, come from the IMF (its citation is on the bottom of the image). The second is a graph from Google, and even starts in the Soviet Era; showing that there was no sharp decline by its collapse.

Well I would expect the GDP to be rising today. Especially in nation the size of Russia. I don't doubt the Soviet government ruined it's own economy, but perhaps you should look at earlier GDP levels. Not just from the tale end of USSR when it was collapsing. The economy of USSR was growing faster than the US, but productivity wasn't keeping up with their growth and they were throwing their whole economy into the military, which lead to them being forced to borrow money from western nations and giving them leverage against USSR.

However, let's take a look at the modern Russian economy:

The entire backbone is based on extracting and selling resources. However, there is virtually no manufacturing. The Russian state is wholly reliant on export of basic goods such as minerals, crops & hydrocarbons for its income. As a result of their resource wealth they spend little on developing domestic manufacturing, hence import most technology they require to extract those very resources they need for export. Hence they are incredibly vulnerable to a sanction against export of technical goods aimed at the hydrocarbon/mineral extraction sector. Also because of the massively unequal wealth distribution domestic consumption is not nearly what it could be should wealth be more evenly distributed, having a result of the Russian state being wholly geared toward exports for revenue (they have a flat tax rate of 13% on all income), hence a fall in oil prices cannot be compensated for unless a MASSIVE rise in domestic taxes occurs.

Where is Russias middle class? There isn't one. There's a few super rich people, the mafia, and everyone else is poor:

And the whole thing is hanging on by a thread and very vulnerable to economic shock. The corrupt oligarchs in Russia don't seem to have much faith in their own economy with all the capital that's been flowing out recently:

 

 

 

This combined with the laundering of embezzled state funds via the London markets & British tax havens are the main reasons for this large domestic capital outflow in recent years.

Then finally there is the population growth of the Russian state. Almost every region of Russia has a decreasing population. Suicide rates are high (probably because nobody can make a good living there).

 

The whole Ukraine situation is an act of desperation on Putins part, and a dangerous one for Russia at that. He's trying to stir up nationalism against a foreign agitator in a piss poor attempt to unite his people. Screaming "fascists" at the Ukrainians and highlighting their support of Nazism so maybe his own fascist laws won't look quite as bad.

 

Russias economy is weak, dependent and it's new rightist government is garbage.

[Hirohito]

Fox Fire, I think you're operating in the 90's still. The growth of a middle class has increased since Yeltsin and Putin's purge of most of the oligarchs in Russian business.

[Pwnius Scrubius]

The Russian ruble is pratically dying, just like the economy. And yet; you say it's on the rise? No, it's really not. It's causing too many international tensions, and getting loads of sancations, so yeah, it's not rising.

It's not permanet.

 

Also, it's inflating. Not dying you idiot.

Edited February 15, 2015 by Pwnius Scrubius

[Pwnius Scrubius]

First off, WWII was hell for the USSR. The fact they not only survived, but drove the Germans all the way back to Berlin is a miracle. Second, we all know Stalin was a !@#$. I'd consider him worse than Hitler.

Also, the modern Russian economy is owned by the Mafia and there is virtually no middle class. You're either super rich, or poor in Russia.

 

 

Well I would expect the GDP to be rising today. Especially in nation the size of Russia. I don't doubt the Soviet government ruined it's own economy, but perhaps you should look at earlier GDP levels. Not just from the tale end of USSR when it was collapsing. The economy of USSR was growing faster than the US, but productivity wasn't keeping up with their growth and they were throwing their whole economy into the military, which lead to them being forced to borrow money from western nations and giving them leverage against USSR.

However, let's take a look at the modern Russian economy:

The entire backbone is based on extracting and selling resources. However, there is virtually no manufacturing. The Russian state is wholly reliant on export of basic goods such as minerals, crops & hydrocarbons for its income. As a result of their resource wealth they spend little on developing domestic manufacturing, hence import most technology they require to extract those very resources they need for export. Hence they are incredibly vulnerable to a sanction against export of technical goods aimed at the hydrocarbon/mineral extraction sector. Also because of the massively unequal wealth distribution domestic consumption is not nearly what it could be should wealth be more evenly distributed, having a result of the Russian state being wholly geared toward exports for revenue (they have a flat tax rate of 13% on all income), hence a fall in oil prices cannot be compensated for unless a MASSIVE rise in domestic taxes occurs.

Where is Russias middle class? There isn't one. There's a few super rich people, the mafia, and everyone else is poor:

And the whole thing is hanging on by a thread and very vulnerable to economic shock. The corrupt oligarchs in Russia don't seem to have much faith in their own economy with all the capital that's been flowing out recently:

 

 

 

This combined with the laundering of embezzled state funds via the London markets & British tax havens are the main reasons for this large domestic capital outflow in recent years.

Then finally there is the population growth of the Russian state. Almost every region of Russia has a decreasing population. Suicide rates are high (probably because nobody can make a good living there).

 

The whole Ukraine situation is an act of desperation on Putins part, and a dangerous one for Russia at that. He's trying to stir up nationalism against a foreign agitator in a piss poor attempt to unite his people. Screaming "fascists" at the Ukrainians and highlighting their support of Nazism so maybe his own fascist laws won't look quite as bad.

 

Russias economy is weak, dependent and it's new rightist government is garbage.

 

Russia is no longer run by the mafia, their casinos got closed by Glorious Czar Putin of The Russian Communist Empire. Otherwise, pro-western news would spam that fact a lot.

I would try to prove this when I have time.

 

''Once upon a time, there was a factory, given a order to make X shovels (lets say 1,000). They ran out of metal. They still had to complete the order though. So... they made shovels out of titanium.

I know someone who has one of those.

They lost money like that.''

 

That's all I have to say. I'll expand my arguments later since I have little time

Edited February 15, 2015 by Pwnius Scrubius

[Fox Fire]

Fox Fire, I think you're operating in the 90's still. The growth of a middle class has increased since Yeltsin and Putin's purge of most of the oligarchs in Russian business.

As of October 2013:

Thirty-five percent of household wealth in the country is in the hands of 110 people. (Yes, you read that right. 110 people)

There's one Russian billionaire for every $11 billion in household wealth in the country. Worldwide, that number is one for every $170 billion in household wealth.

What's more troubling, the report says, is that when exchange rates are factored in, the average wealth of Russians has been falling since 2007, or just before the global economic crisis began.

All but one of the 26 Russian billionaires named in 2005 remained on the list in 2010 – a higher survival rate, the report said, than most other economies.

"At the time of transition there were hopes that Russia would convert to a high skilled, high income economy with strong social protection programs inherited from Soviet Union days. This is almost a parody of what happened in practice. Efforts were made at the outset to distribute state assets equitably: most of the housing stock was given away to residents and shares in Gazprom were allocated to Russian citizens. But other choice assets in resource-rich companies went to the chosen few, and subsequent developments in a nation notorious for weak institutions have reinforced the importance of political connections rather than entrepreneurial talent."

https://publications.credit-suisse.com/tasks/render/file/?fileID=BCDB1364-A105-0560-1332EC9100FF5C83

 

Also, as of October 2013: Russia has the worlds highest income inequality in the world with the exception of a few small Caribbean nations where billionaires have taken up residency.

 

The wealth as far as I can find is only concentrating more and more. The rich are getting richer, the poor are getting poorer. This is also happening in the US, but at a much slower pace.

Edited February 15, 2015 by Fox Fire

[Fox Fire]

Russia is no longer run by the mafia, their casinos got closed by Glorious Czar Putin of The Russian Communist Empire. Otherwise, pro-western news would spam that fact a lot.

I would try to prove this when I have time.

 

''Once upon a time, there was a factory, given a order to make X shovels (lets say 1,000). They ran out of metal. They still had to complete the order though. So... they made shovels out of titanium.

I know someone who has one of those.

They lost money like that.''

 

That's all I have to say. I'll expand my arguments later since I have little time

I'm aware the Bratva has lost a lot of power since the 90's but according to our CIA it's still the largest, most sophisticated and most dangerous criminal orginization on the planet, with an estimated 300,000 members and a global reach into over 50 different countries. They are by no means dismantled or anywhere near it. Most recently, according to the infamous WikiLeaks cables, our government has branded Russia "a virtual mafia state." It's also becoming a problem in Israel where Russian-Jews have been migrating, and an increase of crime has emerged in Israel because of it, and because of the Israeli governments not paying enough attention to it because they're too focused on oppressing Palestinians.

 

To think the Bratva still doesn't hold major influence is Russia is a bad assumption. I know a couple from Russia. Neither of them particularly disagree with that assesment.

[Hirohito]

Brat a has been around since the Tsars. It's never going to go away. Corruption just isn't institutionalized as it used to be under the Bolsheviks.

[Seryozha Nikanor]

The Soviet Leaders peverted communism for their own benefit.

[Fox Fire]

Brat a has been around since the Tsars. It's never going to go away. Corruption just isn't institutionalized as it used to be under the Bolsheviks.

 

The Soviet Leaders peverted communism for their own benefit.

The Bratva became a true thing in the Gulags under Stalin. It was heavily suppressed by the Soviets and the Bratva always dispised the Soviet government with every ounce of what they were. It flurishes far more nowadays than it ever did before.

[Guest Ronald Reagen]

russia is strong but not as strong as expected, it's by far way weaker the US, but currently it could destroy china. M1 Abrahams are unchallenged, F-22's have been mass produced to a fact that Russia or China will never catch up too, America has just mass produced it's top military equipment that no body in the world could catch up too for the next 2 centuries. India has pretty good scientists though, they could get a boom in technology but too much corruption that will screw it all up, along with pakistan's government playing around with nukes.

[Fox Fire]

russia is strong but not as strong as expected, it's by far way weaker the US, but currently it could destroy china. M1 Abrahams are unchallenged, F-22's have been mass produced to a fact that Russia or China will never catch up too, America has just mass produced it's top military equipment that no body in the world could catch up too for the next 2 centuries. India has pretty good scientists though, they could get a boom in technology but too much corruption that will screw it all up, along with pakistan's government playing around with nukes.

The F-22 is pretty much obsolete already, not to mention the massive problems they keep having with pilots experiencing decreased mental status after or during flight, which remains unexplained and unsolved. I also hear there has been a lot of displeasure with the F119 engine. I'm not going to get into the F-22 vs F-35 debate though. TBQH, the new planes coming out of Russia and China seem like a pretty good bet on either of them. Like the SU-35 Flanker E (Russian) or the J-31 (Chinese) seem pretty promising.

 

America may have a much larger air force than any other, but things have gotten to the point where we can't keep our top secrets out of everone elses hands. Russia and China are only one step behind us in that feild. Russia's Ka choppers aren't too shabby either.

Edited February 25, 2015 by Fox Fire

[Hirohito]

The Bratva became a true thing in the Gulags under Stalin. It was heavily suppressed by the Soviets and the Bratva always dispised the Soviet government with every ounce of what they were. It flurishes far more nowadays than it ever did before.

 

The Bratva was originally highway thugs and bandits that existed in the Tsarist Russia time period as well. Their origin started there, and they became organized there. You're making it seem like Bratva, and Russian Organized Crime only was a problem beginning after 1991. It wasn't.

[Fox Fire]

The Bratva was originally highway thugs and bandits that existed in the Tsarist Russia time period as well. Their origin started there, and they became organized there. You're making it seem like Bratva, and Russian Organized Crime only was a problem beginning after 1991. It wasn't.

I would say the Bratva became organized under the USSR, and became powerful after it fell. Sure it was around in Tsarist and Soviet Russia but it wasn't as powerful.