russia vs georgia

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by pgardn

Not now.

I am obviously not an economist but it seems having a
diverse economy would be desired long term. Especially with a country
like Russia, its not exactly a large desert.

Most of Russia is uninhabitated. they have natural resources, lots and lots of them. The problems they have are getting them from point A to point b. They are never going to have a robust economy simply because the govt is never going to give up the tight hold they have. It is the russian way. Not to mention the country is too vast and too large to ever be like a modern western economy. They want the southern breakaways back because they have resources and are a lot closer to delivery than Siberia.

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

Most of Russia is uninhabitated. they have natural resources, lots and lots of them. The problems they have are getting them from point A to point b. They are never going to have a robust economy simply because the govt is never going to give up the tight hold they have. It is the russian way. Not to mention the country is too vast and too large to ever be like a modern western economy. They want the southern breakaways back because they have resources and are a lot closer to delivery than Siberia.

Their history does seem to be one that desires the strong man.

I have trouble accepting that a country this big cannot feed itself.
Railroads are not exactly new inventions.

The above must be why their dissidents that have seen large
Westernized societies like ours get so pissed yet they hate our
selfishness. Lots of their intellectuals that get tossed write about
these ambivalent feelings.

Originally Posted by pgardn

The above must be why their dissidents that have seen large
Westernized societies like ours get so pissed yet they hate our
selfishness. Lots of their intellectuals that get tossed write about
these ambivalent feelings.

The following is a little blurb I was trying to express with the statement above:

Though Solzhenitsyn served the regime's purposes in the 1960s, his usefulness had waned by the 1970s. By then, Solzhenitsyn was properly perceived by the Soviet regime as a threat. In the West, he was seen as a hero by all parties. Conservatives saw him as an enemy of communism. Liberals saw him as a champion of human rights. Each invented Solzhenitsyn in their own image. He was given the Noble Prize for Literature, which immunized him against arrest and certified him as a great writer. Instead of arresting him, the Soviets expelled him, sending him into exile in the United States.

When he reached Vermont, the reality of who Solzhenitsyn was slowly sank in. Conservatives realized that while he certainly was an enemy of communism and despised Western liberals who made apologies for the Soviets, he also despised Western capitalism just as much. Liberals realized that Solzhenitsyn hated Soviet oppression, but that he also despised their obsession with individual rights, such as the right to unlimited free expression. Solzhenitsyn was nothing like anyone had thought, and he went from being the heroic intellectual to a tiresome crank in no time. Solzhenitsyn attacked the idea that the alternative to communism had to be secular, individualist humanism. He had a much different alternative in mind.

[Cannon Shell]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123488153527399773.html

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123488153527399773.html

Good article.

Conflicing info on the following. I read China surpassed us.

China, the world's second-biggest oil consumer after the U.S