[litwin]

Russia's GDP is less than Italy. What are they doing wrong?
Is communism or socialism to blame? Or, are they just retards?
Enlighten me.

Italy? you must be joking )) CAN you check Moscow GDP per capita ?

[late]

The only thing keeping Russia from being a failed state is their energy income. When that declines...

[ThirdTerm]

81% of Russians identify themselves as ethnic Russians, but there are also other large ethnic groups. Millions of people in Russia call themselves Russian nationals but without regarding themselves as ethnically Russian. According to the 2010 census, there are as many as 193 ethnic groups living in Russia. 3.9% of Russians are Tartars, 1.4% Ukrainians, 1.2% Bashkirs, 1.1% Chuvashs and 1.0% Chechens. Many of these ethnic groups enjoy a certain autonomy, because the Soviet Union set up republics and regions along ethnic lines. Tatarstan isn’t a financial region, nor a tourist destination. But it managed to evade the low standards of living and poverty of the Volga Federal District. Kazan, the capital of Tatarstan, has become an industrial hub in the past four years. 47 ethnic groups are officially recognized as indigenous small ethnic peoples of Russia, including the Kets, Aleuts, Itelmens, Nenets and others. They are the only ethnic groups protected by law through meeting the following criteria: the surviving populations are fewer than 50,000, they live on their historic lands, they have preserved their traditional way of life and regard themselves as a separate ethnicity. A good video from a rural area of Chuvashia, where the poverty rate was at 18.1 % in 2015.

While Chuvash mtDNA (maternal) haplogroups are 90% European, Y-DNA (paternal) haplogroup N makes up a majority in the Chuvash Y-DNA gene pool. Based on how they look in the video, it is hard to tell whether haplogroup N significant among Finno-Ugric populations is Caucasoid or Mongoloid, and Uralid is the best fit. Haplogroup N was observed in Finland at a frequency of ∼55% but very rare in Japan (1.5%). Y-DNA haplogroup frequencies for the Chuvash and other Turkic groups are as follows:

Chuvash: R1a1 (29.5~31.6%); N (27~28%); J (15.9%); I (11.4%); C (0~1.3%)

Volga Tatars: R1a1 (20.8~34.1%); N (23.1~28.3%); I (4~13.2%); J (15.1%); C (1.6~5.7%)

Yenisei Kyrgyz: N (50%); R1a1 (35.2%); Q (4%); C (1.1%)

Bashkirs: N (3~65%); R1a1 (9~48%); R1b (0~84%); C (0~17%); J (0~8%); I (0~2%)

Uzbeks: R1a1 (17.6~32%); J (5.9~21.4%); C2 (7~18%, 41.2%); O3 (0~12%); N (0~5.9%)

https://www.jstor.org/stable/26572263

But I am curious, if you were explaining that to an American that didn't know much about Russia, what does it mean?

The poverty rate of Native Americans is 25% and unemployment rates are usually high. Basically 20% of the Russian population is living like Native Americans by preserving their traditional cultures. Ethnic Russians living in Moscow tend to have a higher standard of living, where the average annual income is $48,961 USD.

[late]

81% of Russians identify themselves as ethnic Russians, but there are also other large ethnic groups.

Good post.

But I am curious, if you were explaining that to an American that didn't know much about Russia, what does it mean?

[Beren]

Russia's GDP is less than Italy. What are they doing wrong?
Is communism or socialism to blame? Or, are they just retards?
Enlighten me.

They're Eastern European, it's their Eastern Europeanness. The difference between East and West isn't only institutional, it's rather cultural and can be found in the value-systems. So it's not only corruption, lack of rule of law, or military spending, it's an inherent cultural difference affecting all facets of society. So their whole society is culturally different, has a different value-system, and it's less efficient economically. Their society or social life as a whole is inherently different from societies or social life in the West. It's the same kind of problem as why Mexico is so poor, for example. Some elements of the elites understand that and always mean to westernise society, but it's never so easy, of course.

[Potemkin]

They're Eastern European, it's their Eastern Europeanness. The difference between East and West isn't only institutional, it's rather cultural and can be found in the value-systems. So it's not only corruption, lack of rule of law, or military spending, it's an inherent cultural difference affecting all facets of society. So their whole society is culturally different, has a different value-system, and it's less efficient economically. Their society or social life as a whole is inherently different from societies or social life in the West. It's the same kind of problem as why Mexico is so poor, for example. Some elements of the elites understand that and always mean to westernise society, but it's never so easy, of course.

The Rise of Feudalism in Eastern Europe: A Critical Appraisal of the Wallerstein "World-System" Thesis

[JohnRawls]

They're Eastern European, it's their Eastern Europeanness. The difference between East and West isn't only institutional, it's rather cultural and can be found in the value-systems. So it's not only corruption, lack of rule of law, or military spending, it's an inherent cultural difference affecting all facets of society. So their whole society is culturally different, has a different value-system, and it's less efficient economically. Their society or social life as a whole is inherently different from societies or social life in the West. It's the same kind of problem as why Mexico is so poor, for example. Some elements of the elites understand that and always mean to westernise society, but it's never so easy, of course.

There is no such thing as cultural differences honestly that affects economy in any serious manner, it is a looser argument that people claim for their superiority or why they can't change things. Inherently it is a very stupid argument like blaming the climate for your shit economy or your good economy.

[Rancid]

The Rise of Feudalism in Eastern Europe: A Critical Appraisal of the Wallerstein "World-System" Thesis

What you posted there, if I read it correctly, basically disagrees with what Beren said.

[Rancid]

There is no such thing as cultural differences honestly that affects economy in any serious manner, it is a looser argument that people claim for their superiority or why they can't change things. Inherently it is a very stupid argument like blaming the climate for your shit economy or your good economy.

I am inclined to agree with this.

The key thing that is not talked about when this argument is made, is exactly WHICH cultural differences lead to this supposed fate of always being poor.

[JohnRawls]

I am inclined to agree with this.

The key thing that is not talked about when this argument is made, is exactly WHICH cultural differences lead to this supposed fate of always being poor.

If culture or climate was a problem then why the hell Poland is richer and grows folds faster than Belarussia or Russia? Or Estonia?

Why can Koreans or Japanese or Singaporeans or Taiwanese can be rich compared China or India?

Why is America rich along with Canada while Mexico is poor?

Why are Russian immigrants earning significantly much more compared to locals in almost 99% of places in the West.

Edit: The greatest tragedy of Russia is that there is more middle and high income class Russian living outside of Russia instead of inside. Rough numbers is that 20 million middle and high class exist within Russia while there is around 30-40 million outside of Russia.

[Beren]

The Rise of Feudalism in Eastern Europe: A Critical Appraisal of the Wallerstein "World-System" Thesis

In my opinion it's actually older and deeper than that and it's basically a matter of whether how much Romanised, or civilised in the actual meaning of the word, we are. Which are basically the same because some parts of Europe, Western Europe especially, were civilised by the Romans through Romanisation, and that's what's been going on since then. I mean we're getting more civilised as time passes, which is a continuation of our Romanisation without the Romans actually. When Hungarians came here, for example, they met East Francia, which was more Romanised and developed, which has never changed because we just never will be able to be as Romanised/civilised as they are. It may also have something to do with Germanic culture or cultural roots, but Romanisation is the key, I guess.

[Potemkin]

In my opinion it's actually older and deeper than that and it's basically a matter of whether how much Romanised, or civilised in the actual meaning of the word, we are. Which are basically the same because some parts of Europe, Western Europe especially, were civilised by the Romans through Romanisation, and that's what's been going on since then. I mean we're getting more civilised as time passes, which is a continuation of our Romanisation without the Romans actually. When Hungarians came here, for example, they met East Francia, which was more Romanised and developed, which has never changed because we just never will be able to be as Romanised/civilised as they are. It may also have something to do with Germanic culture or cultural roots, but Romanisation is the key, I guess.

The fundamental split between western and eastern Europe dates back to the Roman Empire, of course, but this was a very long time ago, and is a cultural rather than an economic distinction. No, the real reason eastern Europe was and is economically backward compared to western Europe was the “second serfdom” which eastern Europe was subjected to from the 17th century onwards, just as western Europe was casting off feudalism and rising like a phoenix into the brave new world of capitalism. Why this happened is what needs to be explained.

[Beren]

The fundamental split between western and eastern Europe dates back to the Roman Empire, of course, but this was a very long time ago, and is a cultural rather than an economic distinction. No, the real reason eastern Europe was and is economically backward compared to western Europe was the “second serfdom” which eastern Europe was subjected to from the 17th century onwards, just as western Europe was casting off feudalism and rising like a phoenix into the brave new world of capitalism. Why this happened is what needs to be explained.

Well, my point is that culture and economy go hand in hand, or rather they're flip sides to the same coin (society). And there have been many splits between Eastern and Western Europe, of course, the Cold War was one of them as well, but the basic split is still the split between the more Romanised (civilised) West and the less Romanised (civilised) East, which is the very root of all splits afterwards.

[Politics_Observer]

@JohnRawls

Why are Russian immigrants earning significantly much more compared to locals in almost 99% of places in the West.

It seems that way in my opinion. Russian immigrants that come to the United States make a lot of money and do very well for themselves here. A common complaint I hear from them about Russia is the fact Russia has low wages in comparison to what you can make here in the United States. Russian immigrants seem to have the mentality to do very well for themselves here in the United States.

They tell me that the mentality in Russia is similar in many ways to the mentality here in the United States. So, I would have to agree with your assessment. It's not culture that's holding the Russians back from building a strong economy. As a matter of fact, Russia has great potential to be an economic super-power and the breadbasket of the world.

But potential doesn't mean anything if you can't fight corruption in government and society. It's corruption and government that is holding Russia back from developing it's economy. Part of the solution to this problem, in my opinion, is truly free and fair elections in Russia rather than a corrupt autocratic authoritarian regime which it currently has under Putin. This, of course, is not something an autocrat who wishes to stay in power for life, wants.

Moreover, corruption is something that can be found anywhere, including in Western Europe, Canada, and the United States. It is part of human nature unfortunately. Autocratic regimes can also arise in any country as well, including the United States or Canada, or Australia. It can happen anywhere. Nobody is immune.

[Godstud]

Russian poverty rate is comparable to that of the USA.

USA 13.4%

Russia 12.4%

GDP isn't necessarily an indicator of how poor or rich a country is.

[wat0n]

What's the definition of poverty in each? The same person may be considered poor in the US and not poor in Russia.

[Patrickov]

GDP isn't necessarily an indicator of how poor or rich a country is.

You are right, GDP is more about productivity than individual living standards.

Russia's problem is its apparent over-reliance of natural resources on the international stage.

[Patrickov]

But I am curious, if you were explaining that to an American that didn't know much about Russia, what does it mean?

That's not a complete piece of information anyways. Ethnic distribution matters as much as its overall demographics if not more.

For example, Han Chinese make up of 92% of China's population but in Tibet it is just 8%.

Not to mention both Taiwan and Hong Kong are ethnically Chinese but they are as resistant as Tibetans if not more.

[JohnRawls]

Russian poverty rate is comparable to that of the USA.

USA 13.4%

Russia 12.4%

GDP isn't necessarily an indicator of how poor or rich a country is.

Definition of poverty in Russia and US are totally different. By US standards anybody recieving 36 dollars a day or 72 dollars for a family is poor.

Average Russian nominal salary against official numbers is 54649 rub per month(1 USD is 79 Rub right now) which is less than 36 dollars per day. Meaning by US statistics probably around 60%+ of Russia is in poverty. (If not more)

[Godstud]

No @JohnRawls. Since the poverty rate is not determined by comparisons to other countries, but based on the country's average income and other factors, it can be judged by percentage.

You are talking about being POOR, which is something completely different, and cannot be compared, since it's based on perception.

Russia might be "poor" by American standards, but it's pretty irrelevant. Are the rents comparable? What about buying power?

GDP comparisons are dumb, too. This is just a thread by a guy wanting to slag Russians.