Russia and the US are absolutely the targets of the drop.
The difference is our economy isn't tacked onto the cost of oil being $100 a hour.
Also the US doesn't export oil. It's banned by congress, and the stuff you read about the US being a net petroleum exporter is including our massive natural gas boom.
The average US family buys about 1200 gallons of gas a year. So there's a pretty large stimulus effect from lower gas prices, cheaper heating oil, cheaper goodds because of lower transport cost etc. Even if it crushes the shale oil for a few years, it's still probably a net benefit to the US economy.
Russia and the US are absolutely the targets of the drop.
The difference is our economy isn't tacked onto the cost of oil being $100 a hour.
Also the US doesn't export oil. It's banned by congress, and the stuff you read about the US being a net petroleum exporter is including our massive natural gas boom.
The average US family buys about 1200 gallons of gas a year. So there's a pretty large stimulus effect from lower gas prices, cheaper heating oil, cheaper goodds because of lower transport cost etc. Even if it crushes the shale oil for a few years, it's still probably a net benefit to the US economy.
None of which is really true for Russia.
the US does not produce as much oil as it consumes, by a long shot (its a bit over a third)
the US is a net exporter because we have the bulk of the world's refinery capacity including the capacity to process very high sulfur content material (hence the point of the keystone pipeline I believe)
override367 on
+2
Options
MayabirdPecking at the keyboardRegistered Userregular
Endgame? Retiring? I don't think Putin has any intention of letting go of power. He'll only abdicate when the Grim Reaper takes him.
He said he doesn't want to be president for life. I can see him dipping out if things get bad enough and sticking Medvedev or somebody with the clean up job.
He cares about his image, and even when he's "retired" he's going to still have the power.
Putin says a lot of things. It only takes a moment to say "Things are soooooo bad that people need a strong leader to stay in charge and I guess that means me" and then fake-sigh at the thought of not being able to retire. Or of course "retiring" but keeping a puppet in charge. Either way, he has no intention of letting go of actual power.
A Russian joke I heard:
Putin and Medvedev go to a restaurant. The waiter comes and asks what Putin would like. He orders steak. The waiter asks, "And for the vegetable?"
Putin replies, "The vegetable will also have steak."
+3
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
Haha
That used to be a Thatcher joke. I enjoy that it's morphed to Putin now.
Russia and the US are absolutely the targets of the drop.
The difference is our economy isn't tacked onto the cost of oil being $100 a hour.
Also the US doesn't export oil. It's banned by congress, and the stuff you read about the US being a net petroleum exporter is including our massive natural gas boom.
The average US family buys about 1200 gallons of gas a year. So there's a pretty large stimulus effect from lower gas prices, cheaper heating oil, cheaper goodds because of lower transport cost etc. Even if it crushes the shale oil for a few years, it's still probably a net benefit to the US economy.
None of which is really true for Russia.
the US does not produce as much oil as it consumes, by a long shot (its a bit over a third)
the US is a net exporter because we have the bulk of the world's refinery capacity including the capacity to process very high sulfur content material (hence the point of the keystone pipeline I believe)
Plus the US economy would benefit far more from a lower cost of transporting goods thanks to cheaper fuel then it would be harmed by lost oil revenue.
I suspect that most of our green tech industry has hit a point, where it's not going to be negatively impacted long term by oil prices going down. Hell, who knows, that might allow some of the non-rich and even some of the rich, but not super wealthy, to start investing in good or stock in such industries sooner than they otherwise would have. Obviously, the fossil fuel industry will try arguing that we should forgo green tech investment because oil prices are down and some will foolishly buy that shit, but there are a number of factors besides the price of oil that drive investments in alternative energy.
so how the hell is putin going to stay power? most dictators rely on the fact that they bring stability and economic prosperity putin seems to be doing the opposite.
I think something big may happen in the coming month Kerry has already said that violence in eastern Ukraine has stopped almost completely and this was today and that the U.S. is willing to remove the sanctions within a week or even days if putins makes steps toward de escalation. Correlation does not equal causation but I find it rather odd that he would be saying that stuff unless theres some heavy duty backroom politics going on.
Harbringer197 on
0
Options
FencingsaxIt is difficult to get a man to understand, when his salary depends upon his not understandingGNU Terry PratchettRegistered Userregular
Putin is the elected president of a flawed democracy and Russia hasn't had a proper coup for a couple of decades. I'd assume Putin finishes his term and either stands again or hands over to someone he deems to be a safe pair of hands who won't ruin his legacy or prosecute him.
so how the hell is putin going to stay power? most dictators rely on the fact that they bring stability and economic prosperity putin seems to be doing the opposite.
Interesting point--the Russian Debt Default, not to mention a catastrophic war, ultimately didn't impede the dictatorship of Boris Yeltsin, and he wasn't half as popular among the Russian electorate (though he probably was before losing the 1994 War). Personally, I don't think Russia's current commander-in-chief is going to resort to blasting parliament out with tanks, but I make no promises.
A lot of people, though particularly western audiences where the common sense international politics narrative includes a strong fondness for Yeltsin, may have a basic (and correct) understanding of current Russian economic weaknesses, but it's very rare to have a full understanding of the sort of economic collapse the Russian Fed. faced back through the 1990s. They know times were bad, but simultaneously, it seems easy to think that in the time of the American economic prosperity of the 1990s, the country (or anywhere else) couldn't possibly have done better for itself in the 2000s, when the American economy was gradually beginning to slow down (as I understand it) following the Dot-com bubble busting. By comparison (what other reference is there), many of those years were particularly good for the Russian population in terms of real wages and economic stability, even if GDP growth was bad in 2009--though that's easy when your benchmark "debt default" low.
This is actually true for a few other countries: the 'Global Recession' almost completely bypassed Taiwan, and its economic slowdown is largely becoming evident in the last year, about 6 years behind that (to whom I'm very envious of my relations). 2008-2009 was actually a above-average year for the Taiwanese economy, I would say, especially in terms of job security and wages, though GDP growth that year was bad (maybe a reminder of how useless that can be sometimes--I remember much harder years economically that I'm surprised to see had positive GDP growth).
Another Russian debt default could be well into the future, but if the United States is hoping these brings down Putin, United Russia, or even Moscow as a whole, they should hedge their bets. An overall weakening of Russia's position globally is an entirely different story--that can happen with or without a decline in Putin's domestic popularity. After all, right now we're seeing an unprecededent level of economic cooperation between Moscow and Beijing, and Russia has signed the largest industry and military deals with India since it became an independent state.
There's that great scene from an episode of The Simpsons from ~5 years ago, about a Russian emigre who is Marge is teaching how to drive, and declares "I want to go backwards, like [Russian] economy under Putin!"
What exactly is his point of reference? Leon Brezhnev? Because otherwise this scene was written by someone who knows about as much about the Russian economy as I know about the Southeast Football Conference.
Synthesis on
0
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
Putin is the elected president of a flawed democracy and Russia hasn't had a proper coup for a couple of decades. I'd assume Putin finishes his term and either stands again or hands over to someone he deems to be a safe pair of hands who won't ruin his legacy or prosecute him.
It's a foregone conclusion he runs in 2018, but I think in 2024 when he's, what, 90 almost? I could see him stepping aside then.
Putin is the elected president of a flawed democracy and Russia hasn't had a proper coup for a couple of decades. I'd assume Putin finishes his term and either stands again or hands over to someone he deems to be a safe pair of hands who won't ruin his legacy or prosecute him.
It's a foregone conclusion he runs in 2018, but I think in 2024 when he's, what, 90 almost? I could see him stepping aside then.
Putin's a baby boomber, born in 1952. And my crappy math says he'd be 72--18 years less than 90, but only four years younger than Boris Yeltsin when he died (and had already been out of office for 7 years--then again, I'm pretty certain Putin is in much better health than Yeltsin was at the same age).
I think this forum thinks Vladimir Putin is older than he is. Then again, I only have a vague notion of how old Hillary Clinton (which is "about the same age as Vladimir Putin"--she's actually 5 years older, apparently).
EDIT: as a demonstration of my crappy math, in 2024, he will be about 72, not 74. Duh.
Mostly on Crimea itself. Which is now part of the Russian federation. These sanctions mostly seem designed to make doing business in Crimea more costly for Russia. Crimea was already a big bill, these seem designed to add to the bill.
Russia and the US are absolutely the targets of the drop.
The difference is our economy isn't tacked onto the cost of oil being $100 a hour.
Also the US doesn't export oil. It's banned by congress, and the stuff you read about the US being a net petroleum exporter is including our massive natural gas boom.
The average US family buys about 1200 gallons of gas a year. So there's a pretty large stimulus effect from lower gas prices, cheaper heating oil, cheaper goodds because of lower transport cost etc. Even if it crushes the shale oil for a few years, it's still probably a net benefit to the US economy.
None of which is really true for Russia.
the US does not produce as much oil as it consumes, by a long shot (its a bit over a third)
the US is a net exporter because we have the bulk of the world's refinery capacity including the capacity to process very high sulfur content material (hence the point of the keystone pipeline I believe)
Plus the US economy would benefit far more from a lower cost of transporting goods thanks to cheaper fuel then it would be harmed by lost oil revenue.
Diesel hasn't dropped as far as gasoline. It's down $0.40 since march, which should drop shipper fuel costs by ¢5-¢7 per mile. In my truck, it would have been about $900-$1,000 per month.
Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion.
Russia and the US are absolutely the targets of the drop.
The difference is our economy isn't tacked onto the cost of oil being $100 a hour.
Also the US doesn't export oil. It's banned by congress, and the stuff you read about the US being a net petroleum exporter is including our massive natural gas boom.
The average US family buys about 1200 gallons of gas a year. So there's a pretty large stimulus effect from lower gas prices, cheaper heating oil, cheaper goodds because of lower transport cost etc. Even if it crushes the shale oil for a few years, it's still probably a net benefit to the US economy.
None of which is really true for Russia.
the US does not produce as much oil as it consumes, by a long shot (its a bit over a third)
the US is a net exporter because we have the bulk of the world's refinery capacity including the capacity to process very high sulfur content material (hence the point of the keystone pipeline I believe)
Plus the US economy would benefit far more from a lower cost of transporting goods thanks to cheaper fuel then it would be harmed by lost oil revenue.
Diesel hasn't dropped as far as gasoline. It's down $0.40 since march, which should drop shipper fuel costs by ¢5-¢7 per mile. In my truck, it would have been about $900-$1,000 per month.
Why hasn't diesel dipped as much? Completely different processing? Different source?
Russia and the US are absolutely the targets of the drop.
The difference is our economy isn't tacked onto the cost of oil being $100 a hour.
Also the US doesn't export oil. It's banned by congress, and the stuff you read about the US being a net petroleum exporter is including our massive natural gas boom.
The average US family buys about 1200 gallons of gas a year. So there's a pretty large stimulus effect from lower gas prices, cheaper heating oil, cheaper goodds because of lower transport cost etc. Even if it crushes the shale oil for a few years, it's still probably a net benefit to the US economy.
None of which is really true for Russia.
the US does not produce as much oil as it consumes, by a long shot (its a bit over a third)
the US is a net exporter because we have the bulk of the world's refinery capacity including the capacity to process very high sulfur content material (hence the point of the keystone pipeline I believe)
Plus the US economy would benefit far more from a lower cost of transporting goods thanks to cheaper fuel then it would be harmed by lost oil revenue.
Diesel hasn't dropped as far as gasoline. It's down $0.40 since march, which should drop shipper fuel costs by ¢5-¢7 per mile. In my truck, it would have been about $900-$1,000 per month.
Why hasn't diesel dipped as much? Completely different processing? Different source?
It's a different part of the petroleum that comes up. I do not know the relative ratios between the two in the source material but I do think it varies by source. I do know that there is much less refining capacity for diesel and that it is in direct competition with fuel oil for feedstock. In winter the price of diesel rises because of that last bit.
Russia and the US are absolutely the targets of the drop.
The difference is our economy isn't tacked onto the cost of oil being $100 a hour.
Also the US doesn't export oil. It's banned by congress, and the stuff you read about the US being a net petroleum exporter is including our massive natural gas boom.
The average US family buys about 1200 gallons of gas a year. So there's a pretty large stimulus effect from lower gas prices, cheaper heating oil, cheaper goodds because of lower transport cost etc. Even if it crushes the shale oil for a few years, it's still probably a net benefit to the US economy.
None of which is really true for Russia.
the US does not produce as much oil as it consumes, by a long shot (its a bit over a third)
the US is a net exporter because we have the bulk of the world's refinery capacity including the capacity to process very high sulfur content material (hence the point of the keystone pipeline I believe)
Plus the US economy would benefit far more from a lower cost of transporting goods thanks to cheaper fuel then it would be harmed by lost oil revenue.
Diesel hasn't dropped as far as gasoline. It's down $0.40 since march, which should drop shipper fuel costs by ¢5-¢7 per mile. In my truck, it would have been about $900-$1,000 per month.
Why hasn't diesel dipped as much? Completely different processing? Different source?
It's a different part of the petroleum that comes up. I do not know the relative ratios between the two in the source material but I do think it varies by source. I do know that there is much less refining capacity for diesel and that it is in direct competition with fuel oil for feedstock. In winter the price of diesel rises because of that last bit.
Diesel is also tied more to industry and government, since its what powers most heavy vehicles. That alone makes the demand less immediately elastic than gasoline.
+1
Options
TraceGNU Terry Pratchett; GNU Gus; GNU Carrie Fisher; GNU Adam WeRegistered Userregular
Russia and the US are absolutely the targets of the drop.
The difference is our economy isn't tacked onto the cost of oil being $100 a hour.
Also the US doesn't export oil. It's banned by congress, and the stuff you read about the US being a net petroleum exporter is including our massive natural gas boom.
The average US family buys about 1200 gallons of gas a year. So there's a pretty large stimulus effect from lower gas prices, cheaper heating oil, cheaper goodds because of lower transport cost etc. Even if it crushes the shale oil for a few years, it's still probably a net benefit to the US economy.
None of which is really true for Russia.
the US does not produce as much oil as it consumes, by a long shot (its a bit over a third)
the US is a net exporter because we have the bulk of the world's refinery capacity including the capacity to process very high sulfur content material (hence the point of the keystone pipeline I believe)
Plus the US economy would benefit far more from a lower cost of transporting goods thanks to cheaper fuel then it would be harmed by lost oil revenue.
Diesel hasn't dropped as far as gasoline. It's down $0.40 since march, which should drop shipper fuel costs by ¢5-¢7 per mile. In my truck, it would have been about $900-$1,000 per month.
Why hasn't diesel dipped as much? Completely different processing? Different source?
The fact that diesel has dipped at all shows just how big this drop in oil is.
Just for kicks, I decided to figure how much this would affect product costs. It adds up over all; if Walmart drivers run the same sort of miles and mpg that I did, it amounts to more than $100,000 per day ($3,500,000 per month). At the same time, the savings on my old Coca-Cola run from the Bay Area to Portland come out to $38 per trailer ($0.02 per case or $0.0008 per can of Fanta).
Let not any one pacify his conscience by the delusion that he can do no harm if he takes no part, and forms no opinion.
I listened to a podcast on foreign investment in Ukraine and so had a dream last night about burger restaurants in Russia with hand written price tags crossing out list prices.
The talk of a possible default puzzles me. I read that the Russian government had enough money stockpiled to keep itself and the banks ticking for a few years. I mean, it was still going to suck for everyone else, of course. Was that information incorrect?
The talk of a possible default puzzles me. I read that the Russian government had enough money stockpiled to keep itself and the banks ticking for a few years. I mean, it was still going to suck for everyone else, of course. Was that information incorrect?
The articles I've read say that Russia had a reserve of 400 billion dollars and have already spent 80 billion of that stabilizing the ruble. If one bad week can wipe out nearly a quarter of those reserves, then I can't imagine that they can weather too many more shocks.
Saudi Arabia, by contrast, has more than a trillion in reserve. With their population and infrastructure, they can last this out a lot better than Russia.
The reserves also need to be used to bail out businesses, banks or the like. Many under worse pressure than would be expected in a oil price downturn, because of sanctions.
Even in a normal country this'd be an awful issue but Putin needs to prop up his supporting oligarchs, departments and the like.
The reserves also need to be used to bail out businesses, banks or the like. Many under worse pressure than would be expected in a oil price downturn, because of sanctions.
Even in a normal country this'd be an awful issue but Putin needs to prop up his supporting oligarchs, departments and the like.
not to mention the massive corruption that is probably draining away some of that reserve money
The reserves also need to be used to bail out businesses, banks or the like. Many under worse pressure than would be expected in a oil price downturn, because of sanctions.
Even in a normal country this'd be an awful issue but Putin needs to prop up his supporting oligarchs, departments and the like.
not to mention the massive corruption that is probably draining away some of that reserve money
Ah, all right. It makes sense not to trust official numbers with so much corruption.
So during the forum break there was a prisoner exchange between Ukraine and the pro-Russian separatists. So far 146 Ukrainian soldiers were exchanged for 222 militants. The final number is suppose to be 150 Ukrainian soldiers for 225 militants by Sunday. I'm curious how many, if any, of those 225 militants turn out to be Russian soldiers, soldiers that that douche-bag Putin claims are fighting on their own volition. If some of them are "volunteers," then the question becomes how many are really volunteering because they are a shithead nationalist and how many are there because they got ordered.
No doubt, people reading the above link will notice the mention of some travel serviced being cut to Crimea at the bottom. This article elaborates further on what's going on there. Ukraine's Parliament has voted to shut down all train and bus services tot he peninsula over deteriorating security. This comes in addition to the already Air and Sea travels bans put in place. Effectively, Ukraine is now blockading Crimea and this was something that most saw coming months ago. Though not a full blockade since passenger cars and lorries can still travel between Crimea and the rest of Ukraine. Also note at the end of that article that Ukraine has been force to ration electricity and already had to cutoff Crimea for failing to cut back.
Surprising no one, Putin's BS not has made NATO relevant again, but has also made some interested in exploring or at least moving closer to getting in. Ukraine voted to rescind its non-alignment status. Hard to say where things will go from here. I disagree with the authors contention that Russia's strong opposition matters at this point. If Putin wasn't being a belligerent shithead, maybe the powers in NATO would give a shit, but given Putin's rhetoric and behavior, it does matter because NATO members are being handed shit regardless of what they do.
I mean seriously, they named NATO as the top threat for Russia. I'd argue that the biggest threat to Russia is that Putin is an insecure, shitty strongman that doesn't seem to grasp that the cold war is over and that being a belligerent shithead has consequences (You know much like have Faux News doesn't grasp that big business is declaring the real war on Christmas). Likely this is some shitty posturing being made in a weak attempt to deflect attention away from Russia's imploding economy.
"The government... cannot afford such extensive holidays, at least not this year," Putin said
Russian President Vladimir Putin said Thursday that he has canceled holiday vacations for members of the government, as the Kremlin struggles to address Russia’s plummeting national currency and embattled economy.
Putin delivered the bad news during a Christmas Day speech, saying that government employees had to work through Christmas to help solve Russia’s growing economic crisis, caused by sinking oil prices and Westerns sanctions. (Christmas is celebrated in Russia on Jan. 7, the traditional date in the Eastern Orthodox Church.)
“The government and its various structures cannot afford such extensive holidays, at least not this year,” Putin told government ministers in a speech broadcast on state television, CNN reports. “You know what I am talking about.”
Posts
Ours is! Damn Conservatives
(Assuming hours is some sort of strange Imperial unit of measurement for volume.)
Also the US doesn't export oil. It's banned by congress, and the stuff you read about the US being a net petroleum exporter is including our massive natural gas boom.
The average US family buys about 1200 gallons of gas a year. So there's a pretty large stimulus effect from lower gas prices, cheaper heating oil, cheaper goodds because of lower transport cost etc. Even if it crushes the shale oil for a few years, it's still probably a net benefit to the US economy.
None of which is really true for Russia.
the US does not produce as much oil as it consumes, by a long shot (its a bit over a third)
the US is a net exporter because we have the bulk of the world's refinery capacity including the capacity to process very high sulfur content material (hence the point of the keystone pipeline I believe)
Putin says a lot of things. It only takes a moment to say "Things are soooooo bad that people need a strong leader to stay in charge and I guess that means me" and then fake-sigh at the thought of not being able to retire. Or of course "retiring" but keeping a puppet in charge. Either way, he has no intention of letting go of actual power.
A Russian joke I heard:
Putin and Medvedev go to a restaurant. The waiter comes and asks what Putin would like. He orders steak. The waiter asks, "And for the vegetable?"
Putin replies, "The vegetable will also have steak."
That used to be a Thatcher joke. I enjoy that it's morphed to Putin now.
Plus the US economy would benefit far more from a lower cost of transporting goods thanks to cheaper fuel then it would be harmed by lost oil revenue.
our 9mbpd is a fraction of our economy
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-30483873
battletag: Millin#1360
Nice chart to figure out how honest a news source is.
I think something big may happen in the coming month Kerry has already said that violence in eastern Ukraine has stopped almost completely and this was today and that the U.S. is willing to remove the sanctions within a week or even days if putins makes steps toward de escalation. Correlation does not equal causation but I find it rather odd that he would be saying that stuff unless theres some heavy duty backroom politics going on.
I thought Iran was more the target, because of that reason.
Interesting point--the Russian Debt Default, not to mention a catastrophic war, ultimately didn't impede the dictatorship of Boris Yeltsin, and he wasn't half as popular among the Russian electorate (though he probably was before losing the 1994 War). Personally, I don't think Russia's current commander-in-chief is going to resort to blasting parliament out with tanks, but I make no promises.
A lot of people, though particularly western audiences where the common sense international politics narrative includes a strong fondness for Yeltsin, may have a basic (and correct) understanding of current Russian economic weaknesses, but it's very rare to have a full understanding of the sort of economic collapse the Russian Fed. faced back through the 1990s. They know times were bad, but simultaneously, it seems easy to think that in the time of the American economic prosperity of the 1990s, the country (or anywhere else) couldn't possibly have done better for itself in the 2000s, when the American economy was gradually beginning to slow down (as I understand it) following the Dot-com bubble busting. By comparison (what other reference is there), many of those years were particularly good for the Russian population in terms of real wages and economic stability, even if GDP growth was bad in 2009--though that's easy when your benchmark "debt default" low.
This is actually true for a few other countries: the 'Global Recession' almost completely bypassed Taiwan, and its economic slowdown is largely becoming evident in the last year, about 6 years behind that (to whom I'm very envious of my relations). 2008-2009 was actually a above-average year for the Taiwanese economy, I would say, especially in terms of job security and wages, though GDP growth that year was bad (maybe a reminder of how useless that can be sometimes--I remember much harder years economically that I'm surprised to see had positive GDP growth).
Another Russian debt default could be well into the future, but if the United States is hoping these brings down Putin, United Russia, or even Moscow as a whole, they should hedge their bets. An overall weakening of Russia's position globally is an entirely different story--that can happen with or without a decline in Putin's domestic popularity. After all, right now we're seeing an unprecededent level of economic cooperation between Moscow and Beijing, and Russia has signed the largest industry and military deals with India since it became an independent state.
There's that great scene from an episode of The Simpsons from ~5 years ago, about a Russian emigre who is Marge is teaching how to drive, and declares "I want to go backwards, like [Russian] economy under Putin!"
What exactly is his point of reference? Leon Brezhnev? Because otherwise this scene was written by someone who knows about as much about the Russian economy as I know about the Southeast Football Conference.
It's a foregone conclusion he runs in 2018, but I think in 2024 when he's, what, 90 almost? I could see him stepping aside then.
Putin's a baby boomber, born in 1952. And my crappy math says he'd be 72--18 years less than 90, but only four years younger than Boris Yeltsin when he died (and had already been out of office for 7 years--then again, I'm pretty certain Putin is in much better health than Yeltsin was at the same age).
I think this forum thinks Vladimir Putin is older than he is. Then again, I only have a vague notion of how old Hillary Clinton (which is "about the same age as Vladimir Putin"--she's actually 5 years older, apparently).
EDIT: as a demonstration of my crappy math, in 2024, he will be about 72, not 74. Duh.
What do Putin, the price of a barrel of oil, and the number of rubles to dollars have in common? They are all going to hit 63 next year.
Given the current numbers on those, the joke is actually funnier now.
That's makes more sense.
They did that same joke in the 90s when the oil prices bottomed out then.
Boooooo.
Mostly on Crimea itself. Which is now part of the Russian federation. These sanctions mostly seem designed to make doing business in Crimea more costly for Russia. Crimea was already a big bill, these seem designed to add to the bill.
We'll see what the ruble does on Monday.
Diesel hasn't dropped as far as gasoline. It's down $0.40 since march, which should drop shipper fuel costs by ¢5-¢7 per mile. In my truck, it would have been about $900-$1,000 per month.
- John Stuart Mill
Why hasn't diesel dipped as much? Completely different processing? Different source?
It's a different part of the petroleum that comes up. I do not know the relative ratios between the two in the source material but I do think it varies by source. I do know that there is much less refining capacity for diesel and that it is in direct competition with fuel oil for feedstock. In winter the price of diesel rises because of that last bit.
Diesel is also tied more to industry and government, since its what powers most heavy vehicles. That alone makes the demand less immediately elastic than gasoline.
The fact that diesel has dipped at all shows just how big this drop in oil is.
- John Stuart Mill
Stupid dull dreams!
The articles I've read say that Russia had a reserve of 400 billion dollars and have already spent 80 billion of that stabilizing the ruble. If one bad week can wipe out nearly a quarter of those reserves, then I can't imagine that they can weather too many more shocks.
Saudi Arabia, by contrast, has more than a trillion in reserve. With their population and infrastructure, they can last this out a lot better than Russia.
Even in a normal country this'd be an awful issue but Putin needs to prop up his supporting oligarchs, departments and the like.
not to mention the massive corruption that is probably draining away some of that reserve money
Ah, all right. It makes sense not to trust official numbers with so much corruption.
ultimately it's just going to hurt the people of Crimea
That's what sanctions always do.
If they didn't want to be sanctioned, they should have tried harder to not be Russian.
No doubt, people reading the above link will notice the mention of some travel serviced being cut to Crimea at the bottom. This article elaborates further on what's going on there. Ukraine's Parliament has voted to shut down all train and bus services tot he peninsula over deteriorating security. This comes in addition to the already Air and Sea travels bans put in place. Effectively, Ukraine is now blockading Crimea and this was something that most saw coming months ago. Though not a full blockade since passenger cars and lorries can still travel between Crimea and the rest of Ukraine. Also note at the end of that article that Ukraine has been force to ration electricity and already had to cutoff Crimea for failing to cut back.
Surprising no one, Putin's BS not has made NATO relevant again, but has also made some interested in exploring or at least moving closer to getting in. Ukraine voted to rescind its non-alignment status. Hard to say where things will go from here. I disagree with the authors contention that Russia's strong opposition matters at this point. If Putin wasn't being a belligerent shithead, maybe the powers in NATO would give a shit, but given Putin's rhetoric and behavior, it does matter because NATO members are being handed shit regardless of what they do.
I mean seriously, they named NATO as the top threat for Russia. I'd argue that the biggest threat to Russia is that Putin is an insecure, shitty strongman that doesn't seem to grasp that the cold war is over and that being a belligerent shithead has consequences (You know much like have Faux News doesn't grasp that big business is declaring the real war on Christmas). Likely this is some shitty posturing being made in a weak attempt to deflect attention away from Russia's imploding economy.
battletag: Millin#1360
Nice chart to figure out how honest a news source is.