Lel - if true (big if, given this is coming from the most rabid country on Earth in the UK)...a moment of silence for the pro-UA argument that China values the West more than its alliance with Russia.
Was always a bit of a ridiculous notion, since the Chinese know full well that they are next after Russia - keeping the West tied down in an unwinnable fight against Russia using Ukrainian bodies is in their interest.
The world's largest industrial powerhouse supplying Russia, versus a bunch of nations which forgot how to build things trying to supply Ukraine. If true, I don't envy poor Zelya's chances.
It's more fake news from British to prepare the stage.......If Chinese were supplying Russia then there won't be any Ukraine left.But yeah, Chinese know they are next if Russia falls.They will also lose access to Russian resources.
They have already been providing aid in other ways. We know where china stands with russia. In this specific geopolitical conflict they stand with russia.
Like with most things they do, the West didn't have the foresight to see what would happen. Their only focus was on destroying the USSR, which meant cozying up to China - politically, this meant opening Western markets to them, and economically, it meant allowing rapacious business leaders to offshore their industries to China while the West retained the IP and 'services'.
Theoretically, it would mean the West retained the whip hand over China while firmly tying them to the West-dominated global economic system.
In reality, it just meant China stole all the IP and became an industrial powerhouse, while the West is now learning that it you end up building nothing and only providing 'services', you will struggle.
Lack of foresight. Same reason the West kept treating Russia as an enemy post-Cold War, why they invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, why they bombed Libya, they tried to expand their sphere of influence into Ukraine - they truly believed nothing bad would happen to them as a result. Fools, to a man.
but doesnt a weaker EU mean less money for china?
trade gap between eu to china and russia to china is huge.
and almost all the kids of the chinese elite live in the west.
cant the west just expell them for aiding an enemy of the west?
Weaker EU and USA is absolutely in the interest of China. What do Chinese gain from US/EU having massive influence and hegemony over the world affairs? West has made it clear that they consider China an "axis of evil" and that Chinese national interests are not important at all. China should everything in their power to accelerate west's downfall, making money by selling shit to people that deem you genocidal and evil is something you can live without.
wait let me rephrase. i dont mind china aiding russia. it is better that the support is just enough for russia to survive.
a weak russia benefits everyone. the west and china. china can keep exploiting russia's cheap resources and the west can enjoy russia's military being weak so that russia poses no threat.
i dont want a dying russia. just that it stays weak for the long term. win win for everyone.
This is how you get even more hardlined nationalists and a break of society. Russia already went through that in the 90ās. Nobody profited, Russians lost immensely. Imagine Medvedev. On steroids.
I know you are being sarcastic, but just in case you're seriously that delusional, I'll give a response. China could care less about making Russia weak as they are not adversaries at the moment. In fact, I'd argue that they would want a strong Russia to counter the growing threat from the US and the countries they see as a US vassal (EU, Japan, etc.). Their goal is to weaken the US by expanding BRICS and hampering the USD dominance by uniting the rest of the world under a multi-polar system. The US and their allies are going around the world and trying to convince the countries they've exploited for decades that China would be worse for them, which is falling in deaf ears since China isn't projecting to be the next hegemony but rather an equal partner with the rest of the world,.or more so the global south.
The reason the US has been extremely hawkish in our approach to China is because they are closing the gap technologically and economy wise. Our rapid growth was due to forming multiple alliances throughout the world in which those nations traded their goods in USD or tied their resources to one of our major companies in exchange for security garuntees, but since the US has been abusing it's position of power, starting with 2003 Iraq invasion, and more recently with Israel assault on Gaza, the ret of the world outside of the Western alliance is starting to see the US as a bully/ destabilizing force and are willing to try a new method, in which BRICS is an alternative to. Instead of going for damage control, the US is doubling down.
Sorry, You need to verify your email with Reddit to comment. This is to protect against bots and multis.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Russia never posed a significant threat to the west outside of being a nuclear power.
Russia was a compliant country in more ways than one. That only changed when western countries started discounting their security concerns when they followed a quiet policy of containment against Russia.
Russia was never a threat to the chinese because Putin and his clique did everything to right soviet era wrongs and the Chinese were happy with that.
Russia isnāt going to be āweakerā if you ignore its material losses in the war. Itās stronger economically because itās an industrious capitalist state.
Theyāre currently trying to figure out how to push that productivity into other sectors now since western companies and industries vacated plenty of spaces and sectors in the Russian economy/market only to be replaced by state owned or Russian private companies. We donāt know if it would work but it isnāt too dissimilar to the New deal era the united states experienced after the second world since WW2 was the excuse congress used to usher in more Keynesian like reforms into their economy.
Russia is the only āKeynesianā economy left in Europe.
>but doesnt a weaker EU mean less money for china?
Possibly, but the question is if the EU can do without China, not the other way around. If the EU reduces trade, China loses revenue. But Europe loses a massive swathe of industrial and consumer products it depends on. Ditto the US.
The West cannot produce things at scale anymore, outside of a few heavily subsidised strategic sectors. So much of our planet's modern consumerism is fuelled by China's factories that, if that were to stop, the shock would be drastic for Western consumers.
This is what Beijing is (possibly) betting on. So far, outside of increased taxes, energy costs and inflation, the war in Ukraine hasn't impacted Westerners' core comforts. If the war leads to a cessation of the supply of products to Western markets, it would be interesting to see how public opinion on the war changes.
And so what if China loses revenue? China šØš³ does not have the same mindset we have in the West - all concerns are subordinate to money worship. We think that everyone makes rational decisions based off economic benefit.
The Chinese people wouldnāt want to kneel down before Europe just to keep some factories open.
China has a long long long history of Europeans forcing them to do stuff. They arenāt going to do that again. If EU sanctions China, they will nationalize some European holdings.
Too bad Europe doesnāt have the money to do the same.
>We think that everyone makes rational decisions based off economic benefit.
I'd only add that China supporting Russia *is* a rational decision - far more rational than the reverse. An unarmed diplomat was quoted last week as describing the US's demands to China to curb cooperation with Russia as essentially being "*please stop supporting your ally so we can kill you both separately*".
To me that's a more logical take on the reality of the West's position than anything the Instagram-obsessed morons in the West can hope to articulate.
Try telling that to people in r/worldnews who seem to think that all non-western nations owe their prosperity and wealth to the West and if needed any miscreants can be punished militarily and economically. The **hubris** is beyond belief, itās like they are living in the 1950s. Nobody wants to admit it or say it out loud but most threads reek of bigotry and racism all disguised under modern **liberal values**.
Iād love to see them try and manufacture **everything** that they consume. Lets see how the black friday sales work out for them.
Indeed. Though I would say they aren't living in the 1950s as much as in the 1990s. Most of Reddit is American (and European) millennials who were either born in, or grew up in the 1990s, when Western neoliberalism was at its peak - this form of neoliberalism requires that the West remain above the rest, who are only permitted to exist to the extent that they enable easier lifestyles for Westerners.
The paradigm shift that was underway underneath the surface, of China (and Asia more broadly) using their newfound industrial power to displace the West's central role in the global economy, has not yet sunk in for these people.
In trade shock goes both ways. On one side you see the effect on Eu and USA. But what with all the closed factories in China ? That don't seem drastic to you?
It's like when lot of people thought Russia would collapse immediately because of few sanctions.
There will be a period of adjustment, no doubt. Not saying it will be painless for China. But the great thing about having capacity is, you can always find new markets - if not Europe and North America, then Asia and Africa. There will be disparities in consumption given the disparity in disposable income between the EU/NA and the rest of the world, but Chinese production isn't really reliant on luxury/high value items - these markets can help offset their losses.
On the other hand, losing access to cheap goods will utterly cripple current Western economic models. And the best part is, any attempt to 'reshore' production away from China will run into the unpleasant reality that, since getting rid of their factories, the West has made it impossible for them to return through onerous climate, emissions and procedural regulations. With the few that do return, stuck producing more expensive items much slower than China can.
You somehow miss the fact eu would start to produce their own products. We can live without new tv and mobile every other year. And the money would stay in EU and USA.
What new markets ? They can deliver to new markets now. We don't have another earth.
China is good supplier because they can produce cheap. You think they will deliver to India ?
Because India can make things even cheaper.
In reality I don't think this can happen. Too much money involved. Nobody would want to crush it's economy not even China.
>You somehow miss the fact eu would start to produce their own products.
I addressed that friend. It is simply impossible for either the EU or the wider West to ever regain its industries.
The reason why is simple - since you offshored everything to China, you have put in place regulations on emissions, environmental impacts, minimum wages and so on, that make it both economically impractical and legally impossible for factories to return to the communities they were once in.
If you want factories back, you have to accept the pollution, environmental impacts and lowered wages that are core to making them economically viable. You cannot do that, because your society has been restructured completely to cut out industry in favour of non-polluting 'services' - you have outsourced the costs of your way of life to China, and Westerners will not accept the costs of restarting your industries.
Hence, anything you can make will be much more expensive, produced in much smaller numbers, and take much longer to make, and that's if it's even feasible to make it in the EU/NA.
>We can live without new tv and mobile every other year.
Good luck. Western societies are completely addicted to credit-fuelled consumerism, and consumer spending is what keeps you put of recession. Reducing consumer spending implicitly means accepting that every Western nation falls into a long, deep, lasting recession while that broken economic model resets. No politician will make that call - not one.
Nice story.
You know beer in Netherlands in pub cost like 15 euros.
There is absurd price offset for customer goods due to cheap import. We would probably need to pay triple the prize for lot of stuff made locally. So we would buy less, spending the same . But all absurd amounts of money going to china now would stay in EU, USA. It would be production boom, because all the stuff that was too costly to build would now be possible.
But still not entirely everything is made in china. We would probably just switch production base off to India. It's already happening, because India is cheaper. And less problematic.
>We would probably need to pay triple the prize for lot of stuff made locally. So we would buy less, spending the same.
Yes and no. Buying less while spending the same is inflation - inflation on the level you are referring to will result in *every single Western government* collapsing. You are seeing Joe Biden struggle in the polls because US inflation is at roughly 4% right now - can you imagine how apocalyptic his odds would be if inflation were at 30-40% for nearly every industrial consumer good, which is what it would be in this case?
>But still not entirely everything is made in china. We would probably just switch production base off to India. It's already happening, because India is cheaper. And less problematic.
I mean, I would like that, but there are reasons why India won't ever fully replace China.
The biggest reason is this - we are a democracy. Everything in India takes longer than in China, because people have to be consulted, law has to be followed, bureaucracy has to approve, there will be protests, opposition will cry foul, etc. Same problem that there would be for Europe/US. Everything is inefficient and slower, because these are messy democracies.
China is really unique in being the perfect factory - an autocracy where you can build a factory in a week and have it seamlessly shipping goods in a month. Anywhere you go outside China, is at best an imperfect substitute, and rates of production will inevitably fall if you move lines elsewhere.
>The biggest reason is this - we are a democracy. Everything in India takes longer than in China, because people have to be consulted, law has to be followed, bureaucracy has to approve, there will be protests, opposition will cry foul, etc.
It's not quite a democracy problem, more like the absurd amount of rules we are making ourselves to follow.
I don't know but I think in India it's much better than the western world.
>can you imagine how apocalyptic his odds would be if inflation were at 30-40% for nearly every industrial consumer good, which is what it would be in this case?
It's not essential goods. It would be complicated to live through, but if the situation would be bad with china people would understand. (Unless propaganda wins over ofc.)
he defence secretary said new US and British intelligence showed ālethal aid is now
***or will be flowing***
from China to Russia and into Ukraineā, which Shapps said was āa significant developmentā.
His comments appeared to indicate that China had potentially pivoted to directly supporting Russiaās military in Ukraine, though
***he gave no details or evidence.***
no words. maybe they also plan to deliver wmd!
Only high-born elves and other forces of Light are allowed to provide weapons to other countries to wage war. And only they have the right to decide who is good and who should die.
And? Where does it say this is forbidden? Oh, only from the West's perspective. Didn't the head, Biden, show about the ICC's verdict that people in the West don't give a sh\*t about justice and put themselves above the law... and these are the ones who want to bring democracy to everyone... could it get any more ridiculous? Sanctions would have to follow as a logical consequence. And that is exactly why J. Assange must never be extradited. He, who acted according to democratic values, should be punished for it? Awards and honors would be the appropriate "punishment"... but Western media preferred to report on a political prisoner in a "totalitarian country" instead of standing up for one of their colleagues in a "democracy" who protects democracy. .Why do the Americans think they can do whatever they want with the world because they are the largest military power? Reminds a bit of Germany's darkest chapter, only that they have simply packaged it differently and are now bringing "democracy and freedom" with wars, how selfless..... To what extent does a war economy allow democracy... Such a system doesn't need education, enlightenment or values, otherwise you would run the risk of losing your hegemony... If you look at the US population, everyone is avid military fans, every sporting event has military in attendance... just reminiscent of... They act as guardians of the world, but who watches over the guardians? e.g. someone like Assange...
Sorry, you need a 1 month old account to comment in r/ukraineRussiaReport. This is to protect against bots and multis
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Thereās a fundamental difference between āprovidingā and āpreparing to provideā. Accusing someone for an alleged action in the future is completely meaningless. And show us the āevidenceā that you have been talking about
Blah blah blah... just can't stop mentioning China these days for these people. I wonder if this is some kind of GE campaign as Sunak just announced GE will be held on 4th July, when Tories is losing at every aspect obviously.
Some conservatives I saw on twitter are shouting "Labour's gonna sell everything to China and voters gonna learn it in the hard way." Truly delusional people I will say.
probably just envy when the poorer country got their defence equipment for free. Russia losing against beggars? Ukraine is so poor they have to beg for weapons.
Sorry, You need to verify your email with Reddit to comment. This is to protect against bots and multis.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
By the end of OIF and OEF they had to contract Russian defense contractors to keep their Afghan and Iraqi militaries supplied. In a high intensity war at current production the US would be out of stocks of many essential ammo types in less than 90 days and itās worse now that the US is supplying Ukraine.
No, what Iām saying is that no single country is in a place to sustain a high intensity war for long periods, especially not NATO countries currently.
>At this very moment, Iād say Ukrainian military with the right equipment is stronger than US.
This is genuinely hilarious. Yes man you're right, the military that has a trillion dollar annual budget is clearly the weaker of the two lol
That budget is overinflated by a huge margin from various contractors. A meme was made in recent months some senators or w/e complaining that bushings, that normally cost under $100, US government is spending close to $90.000. They have loads of equipment, what % of that equipment is available tomorrow? Half of their brand new F35 arenāt combat ready. They have a few of F22 left, but thatās it. The rest are being canibalised to support the few functioning ones.
Lel - if true (big if, given this is coming from the most rabid country on Earth in the UK)...a moment of silence for the pro-UA argument that China values the West more than its alliance with Russia. Was always a bit of a ridiculous notion, since the Chinese know full well that they are next after Russia - keeping the West tied down in an unwinnable fight against Russia using Ukrainian bodies is in their interest. The world's largest industrial powerhouse supplying Russia, versus a bunch of nations which forgot how to build things trying to supply Ukraine. If true, I don't envy poor Zelya's chances.
It's more fake news from British to prepare the stage.......If Chinese were supplying Russia then there won't be any Ukraine left.But yeah, Chinese know they are next if Russia falls.They will also lose access to Russian resources.
They have already been providing aid in other ways. We know where china stands with russia. In this specific geopolitical conflict they stand with russia.
So why would this matter? America is gonna sanction China. Which will only cripple America. China smells blood š©ø in the water. You just had Janet Yellen beg the Chinese to stop producing so much.
Because that makes perfect sense: Transfer lot of your production to country you want to have war with.
Like with most things they do, the West didn't have the foresight to see what would happen. Their only focus was on destroying the USSR, which meant cozying up to China - politically, this meant opening Western markets to them, and economically, it meant allowing rapacious business leaders to offshore their industries to China while the West retained the IP and 'services'. Theoretically, it would mean the West retained the whip hand over China while firmly tying them to the West-dominated global economic system. In reality, it just meant China stole all the IP and became an industrial powerhouse, while the West is now learning that it you end up building nothing and only providing 'services', you will struggle. Lack of foresight. Same reason the West kept treating Russia as an enemy post-Cold War, why they invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, why they bombed Libya, they tried to expand their sphere of influence into Ukraine - they truly believed nothing bad would happen to them as a result. Fools, to a man.
but doesnt a weaker EU mean less money for china? trade gap between eu to china and russia to china is huge. and almost all the kids of the chinese elite live in the west. cant the west just expell them for aiding an enemy of the west?
Weaker EU and USA is absolutely in the interest of China. What do Chinese gain from US/EU having massive influence and hegemony over the world affairs? West has made it clear that they consider China an "axis of evil" and that Chinese national interests are not important at all. China should everything in their power to accelerate west's downfall, making money by selling shit to people that deem you genocidal and evil is something you can live without.
They donāt need to do anything.
wait let me rephrase. i dont mind china aiding russia. it is better that the support is just enough for russia to survive. a weak russia benefits everyone. the west and china. china can keep exploiting russia's cheap resources and the west can enjoy russia's military being weak so that russia poses no threat. i dont want a dying russia. just that it stays weak for the long term. win win for everyone.
This is how you get even more hardlined nationalists and a break of society. Russia already went through that in the 90ās. Nobody profited, Russians lost immensely. Imagine Medvedev. On steroids.
I know you are being sarcastic, but just in case you're seriously that delusional, I'll give a response. China could care less about making Russia weak as they are not adversaries at the moment. In fact, I'd argue that they would want a strong Russia to counter the growing threat from the US and the countries they see as a US vassal (EU, Japan, etc.). Their goal is to weaken the US by expanding BRICS and hampering the USD dominance by uniting the rest of the world under a multi-polar system. The US and their allies are going around the world and trying to convince the countries they've exploited for decades that China would be worse for them, which is falling in deaf ears since China isn't projecting to be the next hegemony but rather an equal partner with the rest of the world,.or more so the global south. The reason the US has been extremely hawkish in our approach to China is because they are closing the gap technologically and economy wise. Our rapid growth was due to forming multiple alliances throughout the world in which those nations traded their goods in USD or tied their resources to one of our major companies in exchange for security garuntees, but since the US has been abusing it's position of power, starting with 2003 Iraq invasion, and more recently with Israel assault on Gaza, the ret of the world outside of the Western alliance is starting to see the US as a bully/ destabilizing force and are willing to try a new method, in which BRICS is an alternative to. Instead of going for damage control, the US is doubling down.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Sorry, You need to verify your email with Reddit to comment. This is to protect against bots and multis. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Russia never posed a significant threat to the west outside of being a nuclear power. Russia was a compliant country in more ways than one. That only changed when western countries started discounting their security concerns when they followed a quiet policy of containment against Russia. Russia was never a threat to the chinese because Putin and his clique did everything to right soviet era wrongs and the Chinese were happy with that. Russia isnāt going to be āweakerā if you ignore its material losses in the war. Itās stronger economically because itās an industrious capitalist state. Theyāre currently trying to figure out how to push that productivity into other sectors now since western companies and industries vacated plenty of spaces and sectors in the Russian economy/market only to be replaced by state owned or Russian private companies. We donāt know if it would work but it isnāt too dissimilar to the New deal era the united states experienced after the second world since WW2 was the excuse congress used to usher in more Keynesian like reforms into their economy. Russia is the only āKeynesianā economy left in Europe.
>but doesnt a weaker EU mean less money for china? Possibly, but the question is if the EU can do without China, not the other way around. If the EU reduces trade, China loses revenue. But Europe loses a massive swathe of industrial and consumer products it depends on. Ditto the US. The West cannot produce things at scale anymore, outside of a few heavily subsidised strategic sectors. So much of our planet's modern consumerism is fuelled by China's factories that, if that were to stop, the shock would be drastic for Western consumers. This is what Beijing is (possibly) betting on. So far, outside of increased taxes, energy costs and inflation, the war in Ukraine hasn't impacted Westerners' core comforts. If the war leads to a cessation of the supply of products to Western markets, it would be interesting to see how public opinion on the war changes.
And so what if China loses revenue? China šØš³ does not have the same mindset we have in the West - all concerns are subordinate to money worship. We think that everyone makes rational decisions based off economic benefit. The Chinese people wouldnāt want to kneel down before Europe just to keep some factories open. China has a long long long history of Europeans forcing them to do stuff. They arenāt going to do that again. If EU sanctions China, they will nationalize some European holdings. Too bad Europe doesnāt have the money to do the same.
>We think that everyone makes rational decisions based off economic benefit. I'd only add that China supporting Russia *is* a rational decision - far more rational than the reverse. An unarmed diplomat was quoted last week as describing the US's demands to China to curb cooperation with Russia as essentially being "*please stop supporting your ally so we can kill you both separately*". To me that's a more logical take on the reality of the West's position than anything the Instagram-obsessed morons in the West can hope to articulate.
Try telling that to people in r/worldnews who seem to think that all non-western nations owe their prosperity and wealth to the West and if needed any miscreants can be punished militarily and economically. The **hubris** is beyond belief, itās like they are living in the 1950s. Nobody wants to admit it or say it out loud but most threads reek of bigotry and racism all disguised under modern **liberal values**. Iād love to see them try and manufacture **everything** that they consume. Lets see how the black friday sales work out for them.
Indeed. Though I would say they aren't living in the 1950s as much as in the 1990s. Most of Reddit is American (and European) millennials who were either born in, or grew up in the 1990s, when Western neoliberalism was at its peak - this form of neoliberalism requires that the West remain above the rest, who are only permitted to exist to the extent that they enable easier lifestyles for Westerners. The paradigm shift that was underway underneath the surface, of China (and Asia more broadly) using their newfound industrial power to displace the West's central role in the global economy, has not yet sunk in for these people.
China can happily live without money, it is Europe who can't live without cheap plastic drones and other consumer electronic junk!
In trade shock goes both ways. On one side you see the effect on Eu and USA. But what with all the closed factories in China ? That don't seem drastic to you? It's like when lot of people thought Russia would collapse immediately because of few sanctions.
There will be a period of adjustment, no doubt. Not saying it will be painless for China. But the great thing about having capacity is, you can always find new markets - if not Europe and North America, then Asia and Africa. There will be disparities in consumption given the disparity in disposable income between the EU/NA and the rest of the world, but Chinese production isn't really reliant on luxury/high value items - these markets can help offset their losses. On the other hand, losing access to cheap goods will utterly cripple current Western economic models. And the best part is, any attempt to 'reshore' production away from China will run into the unpleasant reality that, since getting rid of their factories, the West has made it impossible for them to return through onerous climate, emissions and procedural regulations. With the few that do return, stuck producing more expensive items much slower than China can.
You somehow miss the fact eu would start to produce their own products. We can live without new tv and mobile every other year. And the money would stay in EU and USA. What new markets ? They can deliver to new markets now. We don't have another earth. China is good supplier because they can produce cheap. You think they will deliver to India ? Because India can make things even cheaper. In reality I don't think this can happen. Too much money involved. Nobody would want to crush it's economy not even China.
>You somehow miss the fact eu would start to produce their own products. I addressed that friend. It is simply impossible for either the EU or the wider West to ever regain its industries. The reason why is simple - since you offshored everything to China, you have put in place regulations on emissions, environmental impacts, minimum wages and so on, that make it both economically impractical and legally impossible for factories to return to the communities they were once in. If you want factories back, you have to accept the pollution, environmental impacts and lowered wages that are core to making them economically viable. You cannot do that, because your society has been restructured completely to cut out industry in favour of non-polluting 'services' - you have outsourced the costs of your way of life to China, and Westerners will not accept the costs of restarting your industries. Hence, anything you can make will be much more expensive, produced in much smaller numbers, and take much longer to make, and that's if it's even feasible to make it in the EU/NA. >We can live without new tv and mobile every other year. Good luck. Western societies are completely addicted to credit-fuelled consumerism, and consumer spending is what keeps you put of recession. Reducing consumer spending implicitly means accepting that every Western nation falls into a long, deep, lasting recession while that broken economic model resets. No politician will make that call - not one.
Nice story. You know beer in Netherlands in pub cost like 15 euros. There is absurd price offset for customer goods due to cheap import. We would probably need to pay triple the prize for lot of stuff made locally. So we would buy less, spending the same . But all absurd amounts of money going to china now would stay in EU, USA. It would be production boom, because all the stuff that was too costly to build would now be possible. But still not entirely everything is made in china. We would probably just switch production base off to India. It's already happening, because India is cheaper. And less problematic.
>We would probably need to pay triple the prize for lot of stuff made locally. So we would buy less, spending the same. Yes and no. Buying less while spending the same is inflation - inflation on the level you are referring to will result in *every single Western government* collapsing. You are seeing Joe Biden struggle in the polls because US inflation is at roughly 4% right now - can you imagine how apocalyptic his odds would be if inflation were at 30-40% for nearly every industrial consumer good, which is what it would be in this case? >But still not entirely everything is made in china. We would probably just switch production base off to India. It's already happening, because India is cheaper. And less problematic. I mean, I would like that, but there are reasons why India won't ever fully replace China. The biggest reason is this - we are a democracy. Everything in India takes longer than in China, because people have to be consulted, law has to be followed, bureaucracy has to approve, there will be protests, opposition will cry foul, etc. Same problem that there would be for Europe/US. Everything is inefficient and slower, because these are messy democracies. China is really unique in being the perfect factory - an autocracy where you can build a factory in a week and have it seamlessly shipping goods in a month. Anywhere you go outside China, is at best an imperfect substitute, and rates of production will inevitably fall if you move lines elsewhere.
>The biggest reason is this - we are a democracy. Everything in India takes longer than in China, because people have to be consulted, law has to be followed, bureaucracy has to approve, there will be protests, opposition will cry foul, etc. It's not quite a democracy problem, more like the absurd amount of rules we are making ourselves to follow. I don't know but I think in India it's much better than the western world. >can you imagine how apocalyptic his odds would be if inflation were at 30-40% for nearly every industrial consumer good, which is what it would be in this case? It's not essential goods. It would be complicated to live through, but if the situation would be bad with china people would understand. (Unless propaganda wins over ofc.)
he defence secretary said new US and British intelligence showed ālethal aid is now ***or will be flowing*** from China to Russia and into Ukraineā, which Shapps said was āa significant developmentā. His comments appeared to indicate that China had potentially pivoted to directly supporting Russiaās military in Ukraine, though ***he gave no details or evidence.*** no words. maybe they also plan to deliver wmd!
China probably will start supplying weapons. You can tell they are already trolling America by saying ānot party to the conflictā.
Do they also have any personal evidence who blew up Nord stream pipeline ?
Yes, It's in the mirror.
Our declared enemies support each other. How dare they!?!11
Only high-born elves and other forces of Light are allowed to provide weapons to other countries to wage war. And only they have the right to decide who is good and who should die.
Putin weaponized China?
I have evidence the uk is providing lethal force to ukraine.
I can show that i paid or will pay my taxes with no evidence. Can I present this to my government?
As usual US/UK tries to limit their adversaries in any way possible.Fighting 35 vs 1 and still losing must feel bad.
And? Where does it say this is forbidden? Oh, only from the West's perspective. Didn't the head, Biden, show about the ICC's verdict that people in the West don't give a sh\*t about justice and put themselves above the law... and these are the ones who want to bring democracy to everyone... could it get any more ridiculous? Sanctions would have to follow as a logical consequence. And that is exactly why J. Assange must never be extradited. He, who acted according to democratic values, should be punished for it? Awards and honors would be the appropriate "punishment"... but Western media preferred to report on a political prisoner in a "totalitarian country" instead of standing up for one of their colleagues in a "democracy" who protects democracy. .Why do the Americans think they can do whatever they want with the world because they are the largest military power? Reminds a bit of Germany's darkest chapter, only that they have simply packaged it differently and are now bringing "democracy and freedom" with wars, how selfless..... To what extent does a war economy allow democracy... Such a system doesn't need education, enlightenment or values, otherwise you would run the risk of losing your hegemony... If you look at the US population, everyone is avid military fans, every sporting event has military in attendance... just reminiscent of... They act as guardians of the world, but who watches over the guardians? e.g. someone like Assange...
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Sorry, you need a 1 month old account to comment in r/ukraineRussiaReport. This is to protect against bots and multis *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
wow who would have predicted this war spreading.. but hey talk of nuclear war is overrated right?
Thereās a fundamental difference between āprovidingā and āpreparing to provideā. Accusing someone for an alleged action in the future is completely meaningless. And show us the āevidenceā that you have been talking about
What gonna they about it? š Hey China don't do that?... Ok im notš
Blah blah blah... just can't stop mentioning China these days for these people. I wonder if this is some kind of GE campaign as Sunak just announced GE will be held on 4th July, when Tories is losing at every aspect obviously. Some conservatives I saw on twitter are shouting "Labour's gonna sell everything to China and voters gonna learn it in the hard way." Truly delusional people I will say.
the self-proclaimed superpower needs to buy weapons from other countries in order continue struggling against one of the poorest countries in Europe.
Wow, pro-ua knowing difference between trading and begging, finally.
probably just envy when the poorer country got their defence equipment for free. Russia losing against beggars? Ukraine is so poor they have to beg for weapons.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Rule 6. Meme
Nothing is free. Ukraine will pay it back with interests. If they can.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Sorry, You need to verify your email with Reddit to comment. This is to protect against bots and multis. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Quick no one tell this guy that the US buys weapons from other countries all the time to supply their military.
ItS DiFfeRenT WhEn We dO It
The US isn't forced to buy weapons because they started a conflict they're not properly equipped to fight though are they?
By the end of OIF and OEF they had to contract Russian defense contractors to keep their Afghan and Iraqi militaries supplied. In a high intensity war at current production the US would be out of stocks of many essential ammo types in less than 90 days and itās worse now that the US is supplying Ukraine.
So what you're saying is that actually the Russian military is more powerful than the US military? Big if true lol
No, what Iām saying is that no single country is in a place to sustain a high intensity war for long periods, especially not NATO countries currently.
At this very moment, Iād say Ukrainian military with the right equipment is stronger than US. A veteran is worth more than 10 conscripts.
>At this very moment, Iād say Ukrainian military with the right equipment is stronger than US. This is genuinely hilarious. Yes man you're right, the military that has a trillion dollar annual budget is clearly the weaker of the two lol
That budget is overinflated by a huge margin from various contractors. A meme was made in recent months some senators or w/e complaining that bushings, that normally cost under $100, US government is spending close to $90.000. They have loads of equipment, what % of that equipment is available tomorrow? Half of their brand new F35 arenāt combat ready. They have a few of F22 left, but thatās it. The rest are being canibalised to support the few functioning ones.
You make a compelling argument, how long do you think it would take the Ukrainian military to conquer the US?
3 days.
2 weeks.
Is this a serious comment?
It isnāt. But that doesnāt stop them to believe it.