Total de-dollarization in Russia

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Tolkien

That's how free markets work. If the price of farmland in Ukraine is now lower, it's for a good reason. Ie it's a war zone. Buying it is a bit of a risk at the moment.

That's not free markets, that's how sociopaths work.
After WW2, the US/American corporations did not seek to buy out all German companies, all Japanese companies, etc, which they could have done for pennies.

People were ethical back then

a reply to: Tolkien

I dont think ethics had much to do with it.

After World War II US corporations did not buy out German and Japanese companies largely due to political and strategic considerations.

The US focused on rebuilding these nations through initiatives like the Marshall Plan to prevent the spread of communism.

originally posted by: Tolkien

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Tolkien

That's how free markets work. If the price of farmland in Ukraine is now lower, it's for a good reason. Ie it's a war zone. Buying it is a bit of a risk at the moment.

That's not free markets, that's how sociopaths work.
After WW2, the US/American corporations did not seek to buy out all German companies, all Japanese companies, etc, which they could have done for pennies.

People were ethical back then

Can you provide evidence of significant purchase of Ukrainian farm land by US corporations?

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise

originally posted by: Tolkien

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Tolkien

That's how free markets work. If the price of farmland in Ukraine is now lower, it's for a good reason. Ie it's a war zone. Buying it is a bit of a risk at the moment.

That's not free markets, that's how sociopaths work.
After WW2, the US/American corporations did not seek to buy out all German companies, all Japanese companies, etc, which they could have done for pennies.

People were ethical back then

Can you provide evidence of significant purchase of Ukrainian farm land by US corporations?

Here:

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/www.oaklandinstitute.org... nd.pdf

The largest landholders are a mix of oligarchs and a variety of foreign interests – mostly European and North American, including a US-based private equity fund and the sovereign fund of Saudi Arabia. All but one of the ten largest landholding firms are registered overseas, mainly in tax havens such as Cyprus or Luxembourg. Even when run and still largely controlled by an oligarch founder, a number of firms have gone public with Western banks and investment funds now controlling a significant amount of their shares. The report identifies many prominent investors, including Vanguard Group, Kopernik Global Investors, BNP Asset Management Holding, Goldman Sachs-owned NN Investment Partners Holdings, and Norges Bank Investment Management, which manages Norway’s sovereign wealth fund. A number of large US pension funds, foundations, and university endowments are also invested in Ukrainian land through NCH Capital – a US-based private equity fund, which is the fifth largest landholder in the country.

Completely disgusting profiteering.
And Ukrainians are fighting and dying for this.

You think this is OK ????

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Tolkien

I dont think ethics had much to do with it.

After World War II US corporations did not buy out German and Japanese companies largely due to political and strategic considerations.

The US focused on rebuilding these nations through initiatives like the Marshall Plan to prevent the spread of communism.

The US chose not to then.

Wht the US is doing now is completely unethical

a reply to: Tolkien

Why are you focusing on the US? Not all the other private equity firms from various countries and... oligarchs?

It's not the US Government?

originally posted by: Tolkien

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise

originally posted by: Tolkien

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Tolkien

That's how free markets work. If the price of farmland in Ukraine is now lower, it's for a good reason. Ie it's a war zone. Buying it is a bit of a risk at the moment.

That's not free markets, that's how sociopaths work.
After WW2, the US/American corporations did not seek to buy out all German companies, all Japanese companies, etc, which they could have done for pennies.

People were ethical back then

Can you provide evidence of significant purchase of Ukrainian farm land by US corporations?

Here:

chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/www.oaklandinstitute.org... nd.pdf

The largest landholders are a mix of oligarchs and a variety of foreign interests – mostly European and North American, including a US-based private equity fund and the sovereign fund of Saudi Arabia. All but one of the ten largest landholding firms are registered overseas, mainly in tax havens such as Cyprus or Luxembourg. Even when run and still largely controlled by an oligarch founder, a number of firms have gone public with Western banks and investment funds now controlling a significant amount of their shares. The report identifies many prominent investors, including Vanguard Group, Kopernik Global Investors, BNP Asset Management Holding, Goldman Sachs-owned NN Investment Partners Holdings, and Norges Bank Investment Management, which manages Norway’s sovereign wealth fund. A number of large US pension funds, foundations, and university endowments are also invested in Ukrainian land through NCH Capital – a US-based private equity fund, which is the fifth largest landholder in the country.

Completely disgusting profiteering.
And Ukrainians are fighting and dying for this.

You think this is OK ????

Your link doesn't work and the quoted text doesn't say anything about buying land during the war.

a reply to: Tolkien

They choose not to, so as to stop the spread of communism.

And other political and strategic considerations.

Not because of ethical considerations.

What Putin has done by way of invading Ukraine is certainly unethical.

a reply to: Tolkien

"People were ethical back then".

Yeah, like Germany and Japan were "ethical" back then.

a reply to: BedevereTheWise

www.oaklandinstitute.org...

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Tolkien

Why are you focusing on the US? Not all the other private equity firms from various countries and... oligarchs?

It's not the US Government?

Not focusing on just the US

I cited above an article that includes European and Saudi firms
Scummy, no matter who does it.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Tolkien

"People were ethical back then".

Yeah, like Germany and Japan were "ethical" back then.

Clearly not, but the US and the West in general was, more than today anyway.

Pretty impressive that the US Marshall plan helped rebuild not only European allies but Germany as well.

originally posted by: Tolkien
a reply to: BedevereTheWise

www.oaklandinstitute.org...

Thank you for the link.

Reding the article it's putting most of the blame on land reform that predates the war. I don't disagree with a lot of the article , particularly onerous conditions put on by the IMF.

However the examples given of the impact of the war reference russian takeover of farm land and domestic purchase.

Ukraine has had strict rules on land purchase since gaining independence and it's inevitable as this is liberalised that there will be significant changes to land ownership.

There is an argument for delaying land reform during the war but Ukraine is also desperate for foreign currency so that is unlikely to happen.

a reply to: Tolkien

Clearly not, but the US and the West in general was, more than today anyway.

What about the eugenics programs and policies both our respective nations and many other of our European cousins operated and implemented right up until the 1970s?

Were those ethical?

Pretty impressive that the US Marshall plan helped rebuild not only European allies but Germany as well.

Again that had little to do with ethics and more to do with political and strategic concerns.

You may need to remove the rose-coloured glasses where the past is concerned Tolkien.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Tolkien

Clearly not, but the US and the West in general was, more than today anyway.

What about the eugenics programs and policies both our respective nations and many other of our European cousins operated and implemented right up until the 1970s?

Were those ethical?

Pretty impressive that the US Marshall plan helped rebuild not only European allies but Germany as well.

Again that had little to do with ethics and more to do with political and strategic concerns.

You may need to remove the rose-coloured glasses where the past is concerned Tolkien.

It's not "rose-colored glasses"

There was much less crime.
Cities were much better managed.
There was no cities like in the current state of Detroit, or Baltimore

You did not need a "# map" in San Francisco"



Much as this offends your progressive delusion, while certainly imperfect, previous generations WERE better and much more ethical.

a reply to: Tolkien

Much less people back then also.

I think you may need to open a real history book or two.

You see the picture painted simply does not fit with the claim you make.

And i notice you did not bother to address the i questions asked or the eugenics issues associated with such.

originally posted by: BedevereTheWise

originally posted by: Tolkien
a reply to: BedevereTheWise

www.oaklandinstitute.org...

Thank you for the link.

Reding the article it's putting most of the blame on land reform that predates the war. I don't disagree with a lot of the article , particularly onerous conditions put on by the IMF.

However the examples given of the impact of the war reference russian takeover of farm land and domestic purchase.

Ukraine has had strict rules on land purchase since gaining independence and it's inevitable as this is liberalised that there will be significant changes to land ownership.

There is an argument for delaying land reform during the war but Ukraine is also desperate for foreign currency so that is unlikely to happen.

Shelling in the Donetsk actually started in 2014, much prior to the Russian invasion of 2022.
War has a tendency to produce much lower land prices....which western banks abused, IMHO.
The controversial Ukrainian land "reforms" was in 2021.

Note that western banks did not try to pull that kind of scam in France, or the UK, farmland price "being too high"
( although banks are still trying to screw over european farmers under pretext of expropriation to "save the planet from global warming" or some such excuse, per the recent farmers protests.

Screwing over farmers, of all people, on which our food supply depends, is peak scumbag and idiocy
How-To-Create-A-Famine-101.

Russia is no longer dependent on the American currency

a reply to: RussianTroll

I think a lot of that is the combination of Russia being forced out of the dollar because of the Ukraine invasion coupled with the Biden/Harris administration not effectively cutting out options with other nations. Not so surprisingly, it is about a weak US foreign policy. Because of US's dominate market and trade status the US can dictate global trade pacts and in doing so control, to an extent, the behavior of a particular nation. Iran is a perfect example-Iran was broke and ready to make a deal with the Trump administration because under the Trump administration the US had a policy that if you, other nations, do business with Iran you don't do business with the US.

“When I came into office, Iran had $70 billion in foreign exchange reserves. … By the time I left, they had nothing. They were broke.”

Strong global policies would break Putin and Russia

Did you see this, I was once concerned about the dollar hegomony the US enjoys but no longer. Our market and trade status along with our military keep the US dollar the global currency, sorry Russia but you will play ball when we have a stronger administration. Just a fact.

The U.S. dollar remains the world's primary reserve currency, and neither the euro nor the so-called BRICS countries have been able to reduce global reliance on the dollar, a new study by the Atlantic Council's GeoEconomics Center shows.

The group's "Dollar Dominance Monitor", opens new tab said the dollar continued to dominate foreign reserve holdings, trade invoicing, and currency transactions globally and its role as the primary global reserve currency was secure in the near and medium term.

The dollar is here to stay