Why Are We in Ukraine?

413,827 Views | 6271 Replies | Last: 26 min ago by Redbrickbear
The_barBEARian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear said:





whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

4% GDP growth obviously isn't "near zero."

I think you're just churning out as much propaganda as you can now in hopes that something or anything will distract from Kiev's ongoing retreat.
when your deficits exceed your growth rate, growth actually is "near zero." (or worse).
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Redbrickbear said:

boognish_bear said:






Waltz is a solid choice. He understands that handing Ukraine on a platter to Russia is a spectacularly bad outcome for the USA.

Having proper disdain for "forever wars" does not obligate one to self-defeating isolationism.

If you check out Waltz bio, you'll see he's been around a while. Google up his wife, while you're at it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Waltz
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

Sam Lowry said:

4% GDP growth obviously isn't "near zero."

I think you're just churning out as much propaganda as you can now in hopes that something or anything will distract from Kiev's ongoing retreat.
when your deficits exceed your growth rate, growth actually is "near zero." (or worse).
Their full-year deficit is less than half that (1.7%).
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
trey3216
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

whiterock said:

Sam Lowry said:

4% GDP growth obviously isn't "near zero."

I think you're just churning out as much propaganda as you can now in hopes that something or anything will distract from Kiev's ongoing retreat.
when your deficits exceed your growth rate, growth actually is "near zero." (or worse).
Their full-year deficit is less than half that (1.7%).
They are spending 40% of GDP on wartime this coming fiscal year, and are about to layoff 400k govt employees (many of which will likely get to don a new govt uniform). Inflation is in the 20+% range and rising quickly. They are not in a good spot right now.
Mr. Treehorn treats objects like women, man.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
trey3216 said:

Sam Lowry said:

whiterock said:

Sam Lowry said:

4% GDP growth obviously isn't "near zero."

I think you're just churning out as much propaganda as you can now in hopes that something or anything will distract from Kiev's ongoing retreat.
when your deficits exceed your growth rate, growth actually is "near zero." (or worse).
Their full-year deficit is less than half that (1.7%).
They are spending 40% of GDP on wartime this coming fiscal year, and are about to layoff 400k govt employees (many of which will likely get to don a new govt uniform). Inflation is in the 20+% range and rising quickly. They are not in a good spot right now.
Inflation is currently 8.5% per annum and falling.
ATL Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Putin's Russia is getting closer to the Soviet economic dilemmas that crashed it. Defense spending outpacing social spending, rising deficits with increased borrowing costs, inflationary pressures, and a problematic labor force. An unintended weapon Trump will likely initiate is further energy deregulation resulting in lower oil and gas prices (that Russia is already discounting to avoid sanctions) which will put more and more pressure on Russian tax revenues, which are now becoming the primary funding source vs energy.

Meanwhile China is running a debt trap operation on them since the West is sanctioned from buying Russian debt.
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

whiterock said:

Sam Lowry said:

4% GDP growth obviously isn't "near zero."

I think you're just churning out as much propaganda as you can now in hopes that something or anything will distract from Kiev's ongoing retreat.
when your deficits exceed your growth rate, growth actually is "near zero." (or worse).
Their full-year deficit is less than half that (1.7%).
with borrowing.....
if the data is remotely accurate.....

no nation can mobilize for war forever. It's a losing proposition....dumping so much labor, resources, and capital into a fundamentally destructive activity. Sure, you get a flush of economic growth on the front end, but if you can't find victory, you inexorably start dealing with escalating problems with maintaining labor, resources, and capital. And the end of the war is not the end of the pain. The demobilization is as big of a challenge as the mobilization itself....massive, immediate redirection of resources. Economic hardships almost always follow, even for the victor. WWII is a great example.....

The only real question here is where Russia is on the downslope. Analysts at link seem to think Putin has another 12-18 months to go early-mid 2026. Most are mid-late 2025. The difference is not irrelevant, but both are bad when you do no have the ability to force victory on your own terms. It's just a matter of how long it takes you to fail.

Trump knows all that. He will not want to take the long term glide path to let attrition do its work. He will want to make peace. He will do it by enacting policies that he has promised will lower oil/gas prices (which also infringes on Russia's primary source of capital), tighten sanctions (resources), and removing many of Biden's restrictions on Ukrainian use of western weapons (which will hasten attrition of labor & resources).

Zero chance Trump caves and lets Putin have his way with Ukraine. His appointments thus far bear that out.

https://carnegieendowment.org/podcasts/carnegie-politika-podcast/russia-war-economy?lang=en


Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

Sam Lowry said:

whiterock said:

Sam Lowry said:

4% GDP growth obviously isn't "near zero."

I think you're just churning out as much propaganda as you can now in hopes that something or anything will distract from Kiev's ongoing retreat.
when your deficits exceed your growth rate, growth actually is "near zero." (or worse).
Their full-year deficit is less than half that (1.7%).
with borrowing.....
if the data is remotely accurate.....

no nation can mobilize for war forever. It's a losing proposition....dumping so much labor, resources, and capital into a fundamentally destructive activity. Sure, you get a flush of economic growth on the front end, but if you can't find victory, you inexorably start dealing with escalating problems with maintaining labor, resources, and capital. And the end of the war is not the end of the pain. The demobilization is as big of a challenge as the mobilization itself....massive, immediate redirection of resources. Economic hardships almost always follow, even for the victor. WWII is a great example.....

Of course that much is true. What you don't realize is that the Russians have won the war of attrition. They can force victory on their own terms in relatively short order.
Bear8084
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

whiterock said:

Sam Lowry said:

whiterock said:

Sam Lowry said:

4% GDP growth obviously isn't "near zero."

I think you're just churning out as much propaganda as you can now in hopes that something or anything will distract from Kiev's ongoing retreat.
when your deficits exceed your growth rate, growth actually is "near zero." (or worse).
Their full-year deficit is less than half that (1.7%).
with borrowing.....
if the data is remotely accurate.....

no nation can mobilize for war forever. It's a losing proposition....dumping so much labor, resources, and capital into a fundamentally destructive activity. Sure, you get a flush of economic growth on the front end, but if you can't find victory, you inexorably start dealing with escalating problems with maintaining labor, resources, and capital. And the end of the war is not the end of the pain. The demobilization is as big of a challenge as the mobilization itself....massive, immediate redirection of resources. Economic hardships almost always follow, even for the victor. WWII is a great example.....

What you don't realize is that the Russians have won the war of attrition. They can force victory on their own terms in relatively short order.


LMAO!!!!
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boognish_bear said:





ATL Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

whiterock said:

Sam Lowry said:

whiterock said:

Sam Lowry said:

4% GDP growth obviously isn't "near zero."

I think you're just churning out as much propaganda as you can now in hopes that something or anything will distract from Kiev's ongoing retreat.
when your deficits exceed your growth rate, growth actually is "near zero." (or worse).
Their full-year deficit is less than half that (1.7%).
with borrowing.....
if the data is remotely accurate.....

no nation can mobilize for war forever. It's a losing proposition....dumping so much labor, resources, and capital into a fundamentally destructive activity. Sure, you get a flush of economic growth on the front end, but if you can't find victory, you inexorably start dealing with escalating problems with maintaining labor, resources, and capital. And the end of the war is not the end of the pain. The demobilization is as big of a challenge as the mobilization itself....massive, immediate redirection of resources. Economic hardships almost always follow, even for the victor. WWII is a great example.....

Of course that much is true. What you don't realize is that the Russians have won the war of attrition. They can force victory on their own terms in relatively short order.
Russia will be lucky to exit with a Pyrrhic victory.
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

whiterock said:

Sam Lowry said:

whiterock said:

Sam Lowry said:

4% GDP growth obviously isn't "near zero."

I think you're just churning out as much propaganda as you can now in hopes that something or anything will distract from Kiev's ongoing retreat.
when your deficits exceed your growth rate, growth actually is "near zero." (or worse).
Their full-year deficit is less than half that (1.7%).
with borrowing.....
if the data is remotely accurate.....

no nation can mobilize for war forever. It's a losing proposition....dumping so much labor, resources, and capital into a fundamentally destructive activity. Sure, you get a flush of economic growth on the front end, but if you can't find victory, you inexorably start dealing with escalating problems with maintaining labor, resources, and capital. And the end of the war is not the end of the pain. The demobilization is as big of a challenge as the mobilization itself....massive, immediate redirection of resources. Economic hardships almost always follow, even for the victor. WWII is a great example.....

Of course that much is true. What you don't realize is that the Russians have won the war of attrition. They can force victory on their own terms in relatively short order.
lol.....only if NATO throws in the towel. And that's not gonna happen.
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ATL Bear said:

Putin's Russia is getting closer to the Soviet economic dilemmas that crashed it. Defense spending outpacing social spending, rising deficits with increased borrowing costs, inflationary pressures, and a problematic labor force. An unintended weapon Trump will likely initiate is further energy deregulation resulting in lower oil and gas prices (that Russia is already discounting to avoid sanctions) which will put more and more pressure on Russian tax revenues, which are now becoming the primary funding source vs energy.

Meanwhile China is running a debt trap operation on them since the West is sanctioned from buying Russian debt.

I don't think the USSR had that particular problem:

"The crude birth rate in the Soviet Union in 1989 was 17.6 per 1,000 people. The average population of the USSR in 1989 was 286,731,000"

"The USSR had a Fertility rate of 2.3 in 1978-79"

They were doing ok-ish on the population stuff....there was a workforce to replace the elderly aging out.

But the modern Russian Federation certainly does have that problem:

[Russia's fertility rate in 2024 is estimated to be 1.46 children per woman, which is well below the 2.1 children per woman needed to maintain population levels.

In the first six months of 2024, Russia's birth rate was the lowest it's been in 25 years. In June, the number of births fell below 100,000 for the first time

Russia's population is aging rapidly due to a number of factors, including low fertility and a high mortality rate

The natural population declined by 997,000 between October 2020 and September 2021 (the difference between the number of births and the number of deaths over a period). The natural death rate in January 2020, 2021, and 2022 have each been nearly double the natural birth rate.]

ATL Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Putin's Russia is getting closer to the Soviet economic dilemmas that crashed it. Defense spending outpacing social spending, rising deficits with increased borrowing costs, inflationary pressures, and a problematic labor force. An unintended weapon Trump will likely initiate is further energy deregulation resulting in lower oil and gas prices (that Russia is already discounting to avoid sanctions) which will put more and more pressure on Russian tax revenues, which are now becoming the primary funding source vs energy.

Meanwhile China is running a debt trap operation on them since the West is sanctioned from buying Russian debt.

I don't think the USSR had that particular problem:

"The crude birth rate in the Soviet Union in 1989 was 17.6 per 1,000 people. The average population of the USSR in 1989 was 286,731,000"

"The USSR had a Fertility rate of 2.3 in 1978-79"

They were doing ok-ish on the population stuff....there was a workforce to replace the elderly aging out.

But the modern Russian Federation certainly does have that problem:

[Russia's fertility rate in 2024 is estimated to be 1.46 children per woman, which is well below the 2.1 children per woman needed to maintain population levels.

In the first six months of 2024, Russia's birth rate was the lowest it's been in 25 years. In June, the number of births fell below 100,000 for the first time

Russia's population is aging rapidly due to a number of factors, including low fertility and a high mortality rate

The natural population declined by 997,000 between October 2020 and September 2021 (the difference between the number of births and the number of deaths over a period). The natural death rate in January 2020, 2021, and 2022 have each been nearly double the natural birth rate.]


The USSR's labor issues were cultural and skill based not the shortage issue they have today. My comment was simply a problematic workforce.
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?







The_barBEARian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Putin's Russia is getting closer to the Soviet economic dilemmas that crashed it. Defense spending outpacing social spending, rising deficits with increased borrowing costs, inflationary pressures, and a problematic labor force. An unintended weapon Trump will likely initiate is further energy deregulation resulting in lower oil and gas prices (that Russia is already discounting to avoid sanctions) which will put more and more pressure on Russian tax revenues, which are now becoming the primary funding source vs energy.

Meanwhile China is running a debt trap operation on them since the West is sanctioned from buying Russian debt.

I don't think the USSR had that particular problem:

"The crude birth rate in the Soviet Union in 1989 was 17.6 per 1,000 people. The average population of the USSR in 1989 was 286,731,000"

"The USSR had a Fertility rate of 2.3 in 1978-79"

They were doing ok-ish on the population stuff....there was a workforce to replace the elderly aging out.

But the modern Russian Federation certainly does have that problem:

[Russia's fertility rate in 2024 is estimated to be 1.46 children per woman, which is well below the 2.1 children per woman needed to maintain population levels.

In the first six months of 2024, Russia's birth rate was the lowest it's been in 25 years. In June, the number of births fell below 100,000 for the first time

Russia's population is aging rapidly due to a number of factors, including low fertility and a high mortality rate

The natural population declined by 997,000 between October 2020 and September 2021 (the difference between the number of births and the number of deaths over a period). The natural death rate in January 2020, 2021, and 2022 have each been nearly double the natural birth rate.]


The USSR's labor issues were cultural and skill based not the shortage issue they have today. My comment was simply a problematic workforce.
Sound a lot like 2024 America.

TSMC officials claimed the plant they built in Arizona was having problems because the American workforce was too stupid and lazy to develop the technical expertise required to manufacture their semi-conductors.
ATL Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The_barBEARian said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Putin's Russia is getting closer to the Soviet economic dilemmas that crashed it. Defense spending outpacing social spending, rising deficits with increased borrowing costs, inflationary pressures, and a problematic labor force. An unintended weapon Trump will likely initiate is further energy deregulation resulting in lower oil and gas prices (that Russia is already discounting to avoid sanctions) which will put more and more pressure on Russian tax revenues, which are now becoming the primary funding source vs energy.

Meanwhile China is running a debt trap operation on them since the West is sanctioned from buying Russian debt.

I don't think the USSR had that particular problem:

"The crude birth rate in the Soviet Union in 1989 was 17.6 per 1,000 people. The average population of the USSR in 1989 was 286,731,000"

"The USSR had a Fertility rate of 2.3 in 1978-79"

They were doing ok-ish on the population stuff....there was a workforce to replace the elderly aging out.

But the modern Russian Federation certainly does have that problem:

[Russia's fertility rate in 2024 is estimated to be 1.46 children per woman, which is well below the 2.1 children per woman needed to maintain population levels.

In the first six months of 2024, Russia's birth rate was the lowest it's been in 25 years. In June, the number of births fell below 100,000 for the first time

Russia's population is aging rapidly due to a number of factors, including low fertility and a high mortality rate

The natural population declined by 997,000 between October 2020 and September 2021 (the difference between the number of births and the number of deaths over a period). The natural death rate in January 2020, 2021, and 2022 have each been nearly double the natural birth rate.]


The USSR's labor issues were cultural and skill based not the shortage issue they have today. My comment was simply a problematic workforce.
Sound a lot like 2024 America.

TSMC officials claimed the plant they built in Arizona was having problems because the American workforce was too stupid and lazy to develop the technical expertise required to manufacture their semi-conductors.
You don't have to tell me. I've been saying it for some time that we can't do here what is done elsewhere from a manufacturing perspective. It's why outsourcing has occurred. To put it in perspective, China and India graduate well over 1 million engineers every year. The U.S. graduates around 100,000. And people wonder why we need to import skilled labor. There's a fundamental shift that has to occur in the American workforce for us to compete from America vs through America.
The_barBEARian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ATL Bear said:

The_barBEARian said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Putin's Russia is getting closer to the Soviet economic dilemmas that crashed it. Defense spending outpacing social spending, rising deficits with increased borrowing costs, inflationary pressures, and a problematic labor force. An unintended weapon Trump will likely initiate is further energy deregulation resulting in lower oil and gas prices (that Russia is already discounting to avoid sanctions) which will put more and more pressure on Russian tax revenues, which are now becoming the primary funding source vs energy.

Meanwhile China is running a debt trap operation on them since the West is sanctioned from buying Russian debt.

I don't think the USSR had that particular problem:

"The crude birth rate in the Soviet Union in 1989 was 17.6 per 1,000 people. The average population of the USSR in 1989 was 286,731,000"

"The USSR had a Fertility rate of 2.3 in 1978-79"

They were doing ok-ish on the population stuff....there was a workforce to replace the elderly aging out.

But the modern Russian Federation certainly does have that problem:

[Russia's fertility rate in 2024 is estimated to be 1.46 children per woman, which is well below the 2.1 children per woman needed to maintain population levels.

In the first six months of 2024, Russia's birth rate was the lowest it's been in 25 years. In June, the number of births fell below 100,000 for the first time

Russia's population is aging rapidly due to a number of factors, including low fertility and a high mortality rate

The natural population declined by 997,000 between October 2020 and September 2021 (the difference between the number of births and the number of deaths over a period). The natural death rate in January 2020, 2021, and 2022 have each been nearly double the natural birth rate.]


The USSR's labor issues were cultural and skill based not the shortage issue they have today. My comment was simply a problematic workforce.
Sound a lot like 2024 America.

TSMC officials claimed the plant they built in Arizona was having problems because the American workforce was too stupid and lazy to develop the technical expertise required to manufacture their semi-conductors.
You don't have to tell me. I've been saying it for some time that we can't do here what is done elsewhere from a manufacturing perspective. It's why outsourcing has occurred. To put it in perspective, China and India graduate well over 1 million engineers every year. The U.S. graduates around 100,000. And people wonder why we need to import skilled labor. There's a fundamental shift that has to occur in the American workforce for us to compete from America vs through America.

For once we agree.

Instead of wasting billions of dollars on failed proxy wars, use that money to increase the salaries of our top doctors, scientists, and engineers and incentivize young people into pursuing those careers.
trey3216
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The_barBEARian said:

ATL Bear said:

The_barBEARian said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Putin's Russia is getting closer to the Soviet economic dilemmas that crashed it. Defense spending outpacing social spending, rising deficits with increased borrowing costs, inflationary pressures, and a problematic labor force. An unintended weapon Trump will likely initiate is further energy deregulation resulting in lower oil and gas prices (that Russia is already discounting to avoid sanctions) which will put more and more pressure on Russian tax revenues, which are now becoming the primary funding source vs energy.

Meanwhile China is running a debt trap operation on them since the West is sanctioned from buying Russian debt.

I don't think the USSR had that particular problem:

"The crude birth rate in the Soviet Union in 1989 was 17.6 per 1,000 people. The average population of the USSR in 1989 was 286,731,000"

"The USSR had a Fertility rate of 2.3 in 1978-79"

They were doing ok-ish on the population stuff....there was a workforce to replace the elderly aging out.

But the modern Russian Federation certainly does have that problem:

[Russia's fertility rate in 2024 is estimated to be 1.46 children per woman, which is well below the 2.1 children per woman needed to maintain population levels.

In the first six months of 2024, Russia's birth rate was the lowest it's been in 25 years. In June, the number of births fell below 100,000 for the first time

Russia's population is aging rapidly due to a number of factors, including low fertility and a high mortality rate

The natural population declined by 997,000 between October 2020 and September 2021 (the difference between the number of births and the number of deaths over a period). The natural death rate in January 2020, 2021, and 2022 have each been nearly double the natural birth rate.]


The USSR's labor issues were cultural and skill based not the shortage issue they have today. My comment was simply a problematic workforce.
Sound a lot like 2024 America.

TSMC officials claimed the plant they built in Arizona was having problems because the American workforce was too stupid and lazy to develop the technical expertise required to manufacture their semi-conductors.
You don't have to tell me. I've been saying it for some time that we can't do here what is done elsewhere from a manufacturing perspective. It's why outsourcing has occurred. To put it in perspective, China and India graduate well over 1 million engineers every year. The U.S. graduates around 100,000. And people wonder why we need to import skilled labor. There's a fundamental shift that has to occur in the American workforce for us to compete from America vs through America.

For once we agree.

Instead of wasting billions of dollars on failed proxy wars, use that money to increase the salaries of our top doctors, scientists, and engineers and incentivize young people into pursuing those careers.
Because the government pays for those jobs??? Our top doctors make PLENTTTTTYYYYYY of $$.....engineers and scientists, too.
Mr. Treehorn treats objects like women, man.
The_barBEARian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
trey3216 said:

The_barBEARian said:

ATL Bear said:

The_barBEARian said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Putin's Russia is getting closer to the Soviet economic dilemmas that crashed it. Defense spending outpacing social spending, rising deficits with increased borrowing costs, inflationary pressures, and a problematic labor force. An unintended weapon Trump will likely initiate is further energy deregulation resulting in lower oil and gas prices (that Russia is already discounting to avoid sanctions) which will put more and more pressure on Russian tax revenues, which are now becoming the primary funding source vs energy.

Meanwhile China is running a debt trap operation on them since the West is sanctioned from buying Russian debt.

I don't think the USSR had that particular problem:

"The crude birth rate in the Soviet Union in 1989 was 17.6 per 1,000 people. The average population of the USSR in 1989 was 286,731,000"

"The USSR had a Fertility rate of 2.3 in 1978-79"

They were doing ok-ish on the population stuff....there was a workforce to replace the elderly aging out.

But the modern Russian Federation certainly does have that problem:

[Russia's fertility rate in 2024 is estimated to be 1.46 children per woman, which is well below the 2.1 children per woman needed to maintain population levels.

In the first six months of 2024, Russia's birth rate was the lowest it's been in 25 years. In June, the number of births fell below 100,000 for the first time

Russia's population is aging rapidly due to a number of factors, including low fertility and a high mortality rate

The natural population declined by 997,000 between October 2020 and September 2021 (the difference between the number of births and the number of deaths over a period). The natural death rate in January 2020, 2021, and 2022 have each been nearly double the natural birth rate.]


The USSR's labor issues were cultural and skill based not the shortage issue they have today. My comment was simply a problematic workforce.
Sound a lot like 2024 America.

TSMC officials claimed the plant they built in Arizona was having problems because the American workforce was too stupid and lazy to develop the technical expertise required to manufacture their semi-conductors.
You don't have to tell me. I've been saying it for some time that we can't do here what is done elsewhere from a manufacturing perspective. It's why outsourcing has occurred. To put it in perspective, China and India graduate well over 1 million engineers every year. The U.S. graduates around 100,000. And people wonder why we need to import skilled labor. There's a fundamental shift that has to occur in the American workforce for us to compete from America vs through America.

For once we agree.

Instead of wasting billions of dollars on failed proxy wars, use that money to increase the salaries of our top doctors, scientists, and engineers and incentivize young people into pursuing those careers.
Because the government pays for those jobs??? Our top doctors make PLENTTTTTYYYYYY of $$.....engineers and scientists, too.

Yes government pays for those jobs.

For Doctors and Pharma - Medicare and Medicaid.

For Engineers and Scientists - All large engineering firms or scientific think tanks are funded by government contracts or grants.

Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ATL Bear said:

The_barBEARian said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Putin's Russia is getting closer to the Soviet economic dilemmas that crashed it. Defense spending outpacing social spending, rising deficits with increased borrowing costs, inflationary pressures, and a problematic labor force. An unintended weapon Trump will likely initiate is further energy deregulation resulting in lower oil and gas prices (that Russia is already discounting to avoid sanctions) which will put more and more pressure on Russian tax revenues, which are now becoming the primary funding source vs energy.

Meanwhile China is running a debt trap operation on them since the West is sanctioned from buying Russian debt.

I don't think the USSR had that particular problem:

"The crude birth rate in the Soviet Union in 1989 was 17.6 per 1,000 people. The average population of the USSR in 1989 was 286,731,000"

"The USSR had a Fertility rate of 2.3 in 1978-79"

They were doing ok-ish on the population stuff....there was a workforce to replace the elderly aging out.

But the modern Russian Federation certainly does have that problem:

[Russia's fertility rate in 2024 is estimated to be 1.46 children per woman, which is well below the 2.1 children per woman needed to maintain population levels.

In the first six months of 2024, Russia's birth rate was the lowest it's been in 25 years. In June, the number of births fell below 100,000 for the first time

Russia's population is aging rapidly due to a number of factors, including low fertility and a high mortality rate

The natural population declined by 997,000 between October 2020 and September 2021 (the difference between the number of births and the number of deaths over a period). The natural death rate in January 2020, 2021, and 2022 have each been nearly double the natural birth rate.]


The USSR's labor issues were cultural and skill based not the shortage issue they have today. My comment was simply a problematic workforce.
Sound a lot like 2024 America.

TSMC officials claimed the plant they built in Arizona was having problems because the American workforce was too stupid and lazy to develop the technical expertise required to manufacture their semi-conductors.
You don't have to tell me. I've been saying it for some time that we can't do here what is done elsewhere from a manufacturing perspective. It's why outsourcing has occurred. To put it in perspective, China and India graduate well over 1 million engineers every year. The U.S. graduates around 100,000. And people wonder why we need to import skilled labor. There's a fundamental shift that has to occur in the American workforce for us to compete from America vs through America.

How much fraud do you think comes with that number?

There are quite a lot of articles out there about Chinese diploma mills and the cheating that goes on

(india as well)
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The_barBEARian said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Putin's Russia is getting closer to the Soviet economic dilemmas that crashed it. Defense spending outpacing social spending, rising deficits with increased borrowing costs, inflationary pressures, and a problematic labor force. An unintended weapon Trump will likely initiate is further energy deregulation resulting in lower oil and gas prices (that Russia is already discounting to avoid sanctions) which will put more and more pressure on Russian tax revenues, which are now becoming the primary funding source vs energy.

Meanwhile China is running a debt trap operation on them since the West is sanctioned from buying Russian debt.

I don't think the USSR had that particular problem:

"The crude birth rate in the Soviet Union in 1989 was 17.6 per 1,000 people. The average population of the USSR in 1989 was 286,731,000"

"The USSR had a Fertility rate of 2.3 in 1978-79"

They were doing ok-ish on the population stuff....there was a workforce to replace the elderly aging out.

But the modern Russian Federation certainly does have that problem:

[Russia's fertility rate in 2024 is estimated to be 1.46 children per woman, which is well below the 2.1 children per woman needed to maintain population levels.

In the first six months of 2024, Russia's birth rate was the lowest it's been in 25 years. In June, the number of births fell below 100,000 for the first time

Russia's population is aging rapidly due to a number of factors, including low fertility and a high mortality rate

The natural population declined by 997,000 between October 2020 and September 2021 (the difference between the number of births and the number of deaths over a period). The natural death rate in January 2020, 2021, and 2022 have each been nearly double the natural birth rate.]


The USSR's labor issues were cultural and skill based not the shortage issue they have today. My comment was simply a problematic workforce.
Sound a lot like 2024 America.

TSMC officials claimed the plant they built in Arizona was having problems because the American workforce was too stupid and lazy to develop the technical expertise required to manufacture their semi-conductors.

Looks like it was Federal Government mandated DEI that hurt them....more than issues with the American work force per se

https://thehill.com/opinion/4517470-dei-killed-the-chips-act/

[The Biden administration recently promised it will finally loosen the purse strings on $39 billion of CHIPS Act grants to encourage semiconductor fabrication in the U.S. But less than a week later, Intel announced that it's putting the brakes on its Columbus factory. The Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) has pushed back production at its second Arizona foundry. The remaining major chipmaker, Samsung, just delayed its first Texas fab.

This is not the way companies typically respond to multi-billion-dollar subsidies. So what explains chipmakers' apparent ingratitude? In large part, frustration with DEI requirements embedded in the CHIPS Act.


Commentators have noted that CHIPS and Science Act money has been sluggish. What they haven't noticed is that it's because the CHIPS Act is so loaded with DEI pork that it can't move.

The law contains 19 sections aimed at helping minority groups, including one creating a Chief Diversity Officer at the National Science Foundation, and several prioritizing scientific cooperation with what it calls "minority-serving institutions." A section called "Opportunity and Inclusion" instructs the Department of Commerce to work with minority-owned businesses and make sure chipmakers "increase the participation of economically disadvantaged individuals in the semiconductor workforce."

The department interprets that as license to diversify. Its factsheet asserts that diversity is "critical to strengthening the U.S. semiconductor ecosystem," adding, "Critically, this must include significant investments to create opportunities for Americans from historically underserved communities."]
ATL Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

The_barBEARian said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Putin's Russia is getting closer to the Soviet economic dilemmas that crashed it. Defense spending outpacing social spending, rising deficits with increased borrowing costs, inflationary pressures, and a problematic labor force. An unintended weapon Trump will likely initiate is further energy deregulation resulting in lower oil and gas prices (that Russia is already discounting to avoid sanctions) which will put more and more pressure on Russian tax revenues, which are now becoming the primary funding source vs energy.

Meanwhile China is running a debt trap operation on them since the West is sanctioned from buying Russian debt.

I don't think the USSR had that particular problem:

"The crude birth rate in the Soviet Union in 1989 was 17.6 per 1,000 people. The average population of the USSR in 1989 was 286,731,000"

"The USSR had a Fertility rate of 2.3 in 1978-79"

They were doing ok-ish on the population stuff....there was a workforce to replace the elderly aging out.

But the modern Russian Federation certainly does have that problem:

[Russia's fertility rate in 2024 is estimated to be 1.46 children per woman, which is well below the 2.1 children per woman needed to maintain population levels.

In the first six months of 2024, Russia's birth rate was the lowest it's been in 25 years. In June, the number of births fell below 100,000 for the first time

Russia's population is aging rapidly due to a number of factors, including low fertility and a high mortality rate

The natural population declined by 997,000 between October 2020 and September 2021 (the difference between the number of births and the number of deaths over a period). The natural death rate in January 2020, 2021, and 2022 have each been nearly double the natural birth rate.]


The USSR's labor issues were cultural and skill based not the shortage issue they have today. My comment was simply a problematic workforce.
Sound a lot like 2024 America.

TSMC officials claimed the plant they built in Arizona was having problems because the American workforce was too stupid and lazy to develop the technical expertise required to manufacture their semi-conductors.
You don't have to tell me. I've been saying it for some time that we can't do here what is done elsewhere from a manufacturing perspective. It's why outsourcing has occurred. To put it in perspective, China and India graduate well over 1 million engineers every year. The U.S. graduates around 100,000. And people wonder why we need to import skilled labor. There's a fundamental shift that has to occur in the American workforce for us to compete from America vs through America.

How much fraud do you think comes with that number?

There are quite a lot of articles out there about Chinese diploma mills and the cheating that goes on

(india as well)
Even if it's 30-50% the differential is astounding and emanates from educational focus, purpose and outcomes.
ATL Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The_barBEARian said:

ATL Bear said:

The_barBEARian said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Putin's Russia is getting closer to the Soviet economic dilemmas that crashed it. Defense spending outpacing social spending, rising deficits with increased borrowing costs, inflationary pressures, and a problematic labor force. An unintended weapon Trump will likely initiate is further energy deregulation resulting in lower oil and gas prices (that Russia is already discounting to avoid sanctions) which will put more and more pressure on Russian tax revenues, which are now becoming the primary funding source vs energy.

Meanwhile China is running a debt trap operation on them since the West is sanctioned from buying Russian debt.

I don't think the USSR had that particular problem:

"The crude birth rate in the Soviet Union in 1989 was 17.6 per 1,000 people. The average population of the USSR in 1989 was 286,731,000"

"The USSR had a Fertility rate of 2.3 in 1978-79"

They were doing ok-ish on the population stuff....there was a workforce to replace the elderly aging out.

But the modern Russian Federation certainly does have that problem:

[Russia's fertility rate in 2024 is estimated to be 1.46 children per woman, which is well below the 2.1 children per woman needed to maintain population levels.

In the first six months of 2024, Russia's birth rate was the lowest it's been in 25 years. In June, the number of births fell below 100,000 for the first time

Russia's population is aging rapidly due to a number of factors, including low fertility and a high mortality rate

The natural population declined by 997,000 between October 2020 and September 2021 (the difference between the number of births and the number of deaths over a period). The natural death rate in January 2020, 2021, and 2022 have each been nearly double the natural birth rate.]


The USSR's labor issues were cultural and skill based not the shortage issue they have today. My comment was simply a problematic workforce.
Sound a lot like 2024 America.

TSMC officials claimed the plant they built in Arizona was having problems because the American workforce was too stupid and lazy to develop the technical expertise required to manufacture their semi-conductors.
You don't have to tell me. I've been saying it for some time that we can't do here what is done elsewhere from a manufacturing perspective. It's why outsourcing has occurred. To put it in perspective, China and India graduate well over 1 million engineers every year. The U.S. graduates around 100,000. And people wonder why we need to import skilled labor. There's a fundamental shift that has to occur in the American workforce for us to compete from America vs through America.

For once we agree.

Instead of wasting billions of dollars on failed proxy wars, use that money to increase the salaries of our top doctors, scientists, and engineers and incentivize young people into pursuing those careers.
It's not a compensation issue.
The_barBEARian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ATL Bear said:

The_barBEARian said:

ATL Bear said:

The_barBEARian said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Putin's Russia is getting closer to the Soviet economic dilemmas that crashed it. Defense spending outpacing social spending, rising deficits with increased borrowing costs, inflationary pressures, and a problematic labor force. An unintended weapon Trump will likely initiate is further energy deregulation resulting in lower oil and gas prices (that Russia is already discounting to avoid sanctions) which will put more and more pressure on Russian tax revenues, which are now becoming the primary funding source vs energy.

Meanwhile China is running a debt trap operation on them since the West is sanctioned from buying Russian debt.

I don't think the USSR had that particular problem:

"The crude birth rate in the Soviet Union in 1989 was 17.6 per 1,000 people. The average population of the USSR in 1989 was 286,731,000"

"The USSR had a Fertility rate of 2.3 in 1978-79"

They were doing ok-ish on the population stuff....there was a workforce to replace the elderly aging out.

But the modern Russian Federation certainly does have that problem:

[Russia's fertility rate in 2024 is estimated to be 1.46 children per woman, which is well below the 2.1 children per woman needed to maintain population levels.

In the first six months of 2024, Russia's birth rate was the lowest it's been in 25 years. In June, the number of births fell below 100,000 for the first time

Russia's population is aging rapidly due to a number of factors, including low fertility and a high mortality rate

The natural population declined by 997,000 between October 2020 and September 2021 (the difference between the number of births and the number of deaths over a period). The natural death rate in January 2020, 2021, and 2022 have each been nearly double the natural birth rate.]


The USSR's labor issues were cultural and skill based not the shortage issue they have today. My comment was simply a problematic workforce.
Sound a lot like 2024 America.

TSMC officials claimed the plant they built in Arizona was having problems because the American workforce was too stupid and lazy to develop the technical expertise required to manufacture their semi-conductors.
You don't have to tell me. I've been saying it for some time that we can't do here what is done elsewhere from a manufacturing perspective. It's why outsourcing has occurred. To put it in perspective, China and India graduate well over 1 million engineers every year. The U.S. graduates around 100,000. And people wonder why we need to import skilled labor. There's a fundamental shift that has to occur in the American workforce for us to compete from America vs through America.

For once we agree.

Instead of wasting billions of dollars on failed proxy wars, use that money to increase the salaries of our top doctors, scientists, and engineers and incentivize young people into pursuing those careers.
It's not a compensation issue.

And your moment of clarity has passed... doctors, scientists, and engineers are underpaid for the value they bring to society. If you have never worked in STEM you dont know what you are talking about.
Redbrickbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

The_barBEARian said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Putin's Russia is getting closer to the Soviet economic dilemmas that crashed it. Defense spending outpacing social spending, rising deficits with increased borrowing costs, inflationary pressures, and a problematic labor force. An unintended weapon Trump will likely initiate is further energy deregulation resulting in lower oil and gas prices (that Russia is already discounting to avoid sanctions) which will put more and more pressure on Russian tax revenues, which are now becoming the primary funding source vs energy.

Meanwhile China is running a debt trap operation on them since the West is sanctioned from buying Russian debt.

I don't think the USSR had that particular problem:

"The crude birth rate in the Soviet Union in 1989 was 17.6 per 1,000 people. The average population of the USSR in 1989 was 286,731,000"

"The USSR had a Fertility rate of 2.3 in 1978-79"

They were doing ok-ish on the population stuff....there was a workforce to replace the elderly aging out.

But the modern Russian Federation certainly does have that problem:

[Russia's fertility rate in 2024 is estimated to be 1.46 children per woman, which is well below the 2.1 children per woman needed to maintain population levels.

In the first six months of 2024, Russia's birth rate was the lowest it's been in 25 years. In June, the number of births fell below 100,000 for the first time

Russia's population is aging rapidly due to a number of factors, including low fertility and a high mortality rate

The natural population declined by 997,000 between October 2020 and September 2021 (the difference between the number of births and the number of deaths over a period). The natural death rate in January 2020, 2021, and 2022 have each been nearly double the natural birth rate.]


The USSR's labor issues were cultural and skill based not the shortage issue they have today. My comment was simply a problematic workforce.
Sound a lot like 2024 America.

TSMC officials claimed the plant they built in Arizona was having problems because the American workforce was too stupid and lazy to develop the technical expertise required to manufacture their semi-conductors.
You don't have to tell me. I've been saying it for some time that we can't do here what is done elsewhere from a manufacturing perspective. It's why outsourcing has occurred. To put it in perspective, China and India graduate well over 1 million engineers every year. The U.S. graduates around 100,000. And people wonder why we need to import skilled labor. There's a fundamental shift that has to occur in the American workforce for us to compete from America vs through America.

How much fraud do you think comes with that number?

There are quite a lot of articles out there about Chinese diploma mills and the cheating that goes on

(india as well)
Even if it's 30-50% the differential is astounding and emanates from educational focus, purpose and outcomes.


If 50% of their degrees are BS..And if China does have 1.3 billion people

While the USA has 330 million

Then America is not that far off on producing engineers

If anything it's China under producing with its large population
trey3216
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The_barBEARian said:

ATL Bear said:

The_barBEARian said:

ATL Bear said:

The_barBEARian said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Putin's Russia is getting closer to the Soviet economic dilemmas that crashed it. Defense spending outpacing social spending, rising deficits with increased borrowing costs, inflationary pressures, and a problematic labor force. An unintended weapon Trump will likely initiate is further energy deregulation resulting in lower oil and gas prices (that Russia is already discounting to avoid sanctions) which will put more and more pressure on Russian tax revenues, which are now becoming the primary funding source vs energy.

Meanwhile China is running a debt trap operation on them since the West is sanctioned from buying Russian debt.

I don't think the USSR had that particular problem:

"The crude birth rate in the Soviet Union in 1989 was 17.6 per 1,000 people. The average population of the USSR in 1989 was 286,731,000"

"The USSR had a Fertility rate of 2.3 in 1978-79"

They were doing ok-ish on the population stuff....there was a workforce to replace the elderly aging out.

But the modern Russian Federation certainly does have that problem:

[Russia's fertility rate in 2024 is estimated to be 1.46 children per woman, which is well below the 2.1 children per woman needed to maintain population levels.

In the first six months of 2024, Russia's birth rate was the lowest it's been in 25 years. In June, the number of births fell below 100,000 for the first time

Russia's population is aging rapidly due to a number of factors, including low fertility and a high mortality rate

The natural population declined by 997,000 between October 2020 and September 2021 (the difference between the number of births and the number of deaths over a period). The natural death rate in January 2020, 2021, and 2022 have each been nearly double the natural birth rate.]


The USSR's labor issues were cultural and skill based not the shortage issue they have today. My comment was simply a problematic workforce.
Sound a lot like 2024 America.

TSMC officials claimed the plant they built in Arizona was having problems because the American workforce was too stupid and lazy to develop the technical expertise required to manufacture their semi-conductors.
You don't have to tell me. I've been saying it for some time that we can't do here what is done elsewhere from a manufacturing perspective. It's why outsourcing has occurred. To put it in perspective, China and India graduate well over 1 million engineers every year. The U.S. graduates around 100,000. And people wonder why we need to import skilled labor. There's a fundamental shift that has to occur in the American workforce for us to compete from America vs through America.

For once we agree.

Instead of wasting billions of dollars on failed proxy wars, use that money to increase the salaries of our top doctors, scientists, and engineers and incentivize young people into pursuing those careers.
It's not a compensation issue.

And your moment of clarity has passed... doctors, scientists, and engineers are underpaid for the value they bring to society. If you have never worked in STEM you dont know what you are talking about.
Look at Bar_Bearian. Always wanting Big Govt Big Handouts....so long as they are to him.

I know quite a few surgeons, doctors, engineers and other STEM oriented folks that get paid quite handsomely, with very little coming from government (outside of contractually obligated stuff from Medicaid/Medicare...which none of them want to deal with since they make less money off that) .

So once again, you just show your ass about small government. You don't want small government. You want big government that makes you the safe space. You want government that selects you and not all "those other people."

Sorry buddy. Keep banging away at the data entry that all the medical doctors do so you can get your paychecks like everyone else does.
Mr. Treehorn treats objects like women, man.
The_barBEARian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
trey3216 said:

The_barBEARian said:

ATL Bear said:

The_barBEARian said:

ATL Bear said:

The_barBEARian said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Putin's Russia is getting closer to the Soviet economic dilemmas that crashed it. Defense spending outpacing social spending, rising deficits with increased borrowing costs, inflationary pressures, and a problematic labor force. An unintended weapon Trump will likely initiate is further energy deregulation resulting in lower oil and gas prices (that Russia is already discounting to avoid sanctions) which will put more and more pressure on Russian tax revenues, which are now becoming the primary funding source vs energy.

Meanwhile China is running a debt trap operation on them since the West is sanctioned from buying Russian debt.

I don't think the USSR had that particular problem:

"The crude birth rate in the Soviet Union in 1989 was 17.6 per 1,000 people. The average population of the USSR in 1989 was 286,731,000"

"The USSR had a Fertility rate of 2.3 in 1978-79"

They were doing ok-ish on the population stuff....there was a workforce to replace the elderly aging out.

But the modern Russian Federation certainly does have that problem:

[Russia's fertility rate in 2024 is estimated to be 1.46 children per woman, which is well below the 2.1 children per woman needed to maintain population levels.

In the first six months of 2024, Russia's birth rate was the lowest it's been in 25 years. In June, the number of births fell below 100,000 for the first time

Russia's population is aging rapidly due to a number of factors, including low fertility and a high mortality rate

The natural population declined by 997,000 between October 2020 and September 2021 (the difference between the number of births and the number of deaths over a period). The natural death rate in January 2020, 2021, and 2022 have each been nearly double the natural birth rate.]


The USSR's labor issues were cultural and skill based not the shortage issue they have today. My comment was simply a problematic workforce.
Sound a lot like 2024 America.

TSMC officials claimed the plant they built in Arizona was having problems because the American workforce was too stupid and lazy to develop the technical expertise required to manufacture their semi-conductors.
You don't have to tell me. I've been saying it for some time that we can't do here what is done elsewhere from a manufacturing perspective. It's why outsourcing has occurred. To put it in perspective, China and India graduate well over 1 million engineers every year. The U.S. graduates around 100,000. And people wonder why we need to import skilled labor. There's a fundamental shift that has to occur in the American workforce for us to compete from America vs through America.

For once we agree.

Instead of wasting billions of dollars on failed proxy wars, use that money to increase the salaries of our top doctors, scientists, and engineers and incentivize young people into pursuing those careers.
It's not a compensation issue.

And your moment of clarity has passed... doctors, scientists, and engineers are underpaid for the value they bring to society. If you have never worked in STEM you dont know what you are talking about.
Look at Bar_Bearian. Always wanting Big Govt Big Handouts....so long as they are to him.

I know quite a few surgeons, doctors, engineers and other STEM oriented folks that get paid quite handsomely, with very little coming from government (outside of contractually obligated stuff from Medicaid/Medicare...which none of them want to deal with since they make less money off that) .

So once again, you just show your ass about small government. You don't want small government. You want big government that makes you the safe space. You want government that selects you and not all "those other people."

Sorry buddy. Keep banging away at the data entry that all the medical doctors do so you can get your paychecks like everyone else does.

Of course there are, but the majority are compensated either directly or indirectly by the government.

Over 50% of a typical hospital's patient volume are on Medicare.

NIH spends $50 billion on grants for medical research every year.

The biggest civil engineering firms and defense contractors work on government contracts.

Utility and Energy companies receive government subsidies.

I want a small government but I also want a sensible government.

I would be in favor of the government subsidizing the industrial sector to bring foundaries and steel mills to the US or spending money on GMP and GLP compliant manufacturing facilities and laboratories to resecure our drug supply chain.

The CHIPS act is a sensible idea, but going back to what ATL_Bear said, there is a gap between the supply curve and the demand curve when it comes to qualified workers with the technical abilities to run these facilities and typically we address this gap in a capitalist economy with wage growth and higher salaries.

America doesnt need any more lawyers or finance guys. We have a surplus.
ATL Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The_barBEARian said:

trey3216 said:

The_barBEARian said:

ATL Bear said:

The_barBEARian said:

ATL Bear said:

The_barBEARian said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Putin's Russia is getting closer to the Soviet economic dilemmas that crashed it. Defense spending outpacing social spending, rising deficits with increased borrowing costs, inflationary pressures, and a problematic labor force. An unintended weapon Trump will likely initiate is further energy deregulation resulting in lower oil and gas prices (that Russia is already discounting to avoid sanctions) which will put more and more pressure on Russian tax revenues, which are now becoming the primary funding source vs energy.

Meanwhile China is running a debt trap operation on them since the West is sanctioned from buying Russian debt.

I don't think the USSR had that particular problem:

"The crude birth rate in the Soviet Union in 1989 was 17.6 per 1,000 people. The average population of the USSR in 1989 was 286,731,000"

"The USSR had a Fertility rate of 2.3 in 1978-79"

They were doing ok-ish on the population stuff....there was a workforce to replace the elderly aging out.

But the modern Russian Federation certainly does have that problem:

[Russia's fertility rate in 2024 is estimated to be 1.46 children per woman, which is well below the 2.1 children per woman needed to maintain population levels.

In the first six months of 2024, Russia's birth rate was the lowest it's been in 25 years. In June, the number of births fell below 100,000 for the first time

Russia's population is aging rapidly due to a number of factors, including low fertility and a high mortality rate

The natural population declined by 997,000 between October 2020 and September 2021 (the difference between the number of births and the number of deaths over a period). The natural death rate in January 2020, 2021, and 2022 have each been nearly double the natural birth rate.]


The USSR's labor issues were cultural and skill based not the shortage issue they have today. My comment was simply a problematic workforce.
Sound a lot like 2024 America.

TSMC officials claimed the plant they built in Arizona was having problems because the American workforce was too stupid and lazy to develop the technical expertise required to manufacture their semi-conductors.
You don't have to tell me. I've been saying it for some time that we can't do here what is done elsewhere from a manufacturing perspective. It's why outsourcing has occurred. To put it in perspective, China and India graduate well over 1 million engineers every year. The U.S. graduates around 100,000. And people wonder why we need to import skilled labor. There's a fundamental shift that has to occur in the American workforce for us to compete from America vs through America.

For once we agree.

Instead of wasting billions of dollars on failed proxy wars, use that money to increase the salaries of our top doctors, scientists, and engineers and incentivize young people into pursuing those careers.
It's not a compensation issue.

And your moment of clarity has passed... doctors, scientists, and engineers are underpaid for the value they bring to society. If you have never worked in STEM you dont know what you are talking about.
Look at Bar_Bearian. Always wanting Big Govt Big Handouts....so long as they are to him.

I know quite a few surgeons, doctors, engineers and other STEM oriented folks that get paid quite handsomely, with very little coming from government (outside of contractually obligated stuff from Medicaid/Medicare...which none of them want to deal with since they make less money off that) .

So once again, you just show your ass about small government. You don't want small government. You want big government that makes you the safe space. You want government that selects you and not all "those other people."

Sorry buddy. Keep banging away at the data entry that all the medical doctors do so you can get your paychecks like everyone else does.

Of course there are, but the majority are compensated either directly or indirectly by the government.

Over 50% of a typical hospital's patient volume are on Medicare.

NIH spends $50 billion on grants for medical research every year.

The biggest civil engineering firms and defense contractors work on government contracts.

Utility and Energy companies receive government subsidies.

I want a small government but I also want a sensible government.

I would be in favor of the government subsidizing the industrial sector to bring foundaries and steel mills to the US or spending money on GMP and GLP compliant manufacturing facilities and laboratories to resecure our drug supply chain.

The CHIPS act is a sensible idea, but going back to what ATL_Bear said, there is a gap between the supply curve and the demand curve when it comes to qualified workers with the technical abilities to run these facilities and typically we address this gap in a capitalist economy with wage growth and higher salaries.

America doesnt need any more lawyers or finance guys. We have a surplus.
You really have no idea what you're talking about. The simplest example is in 2 areas. First, countries with more socialized medicine (government involvement) have lower earnings for physicians, surgeons, specialists, etc. Second, healthcare payments and reimbursement rates are driven down by Medicare/Medicaid and hospitals, surgeons, physicians, etc. struggle for profitability unless they have a healthy private payer, private insurance revenue stream.

So not only is that giant healthcare subsidy/entitlement called Medicare crushing our Federal budget and imperiling our fiscal future, it's strangling the healthcare market, particularly rural hospitals and smaller facilities and practices, and driving up healthcare costs.

So tell me more about how we can F up the engineering market? Because you don't understand the issue. If you want to talk STEM, then just look at how small of a percentage of American students participate in it, and then take a second look at the demographics of those who do. Ironically it matches the global market for those same interests. That's a baseline of the fundamental issue.

And then there's heavy industry, which again is so hamstrung by regulations you can barely get the coal and scrap steel you need to even sniff those types of operations, much less discuss the mining dearth we've cast upon ourselves. And that's not even getting to the labor force that's not even interested in that type of thankless difficult work to participate at the levels other countries manage to execute. We have a supply and skill shortage at pretty much every level of the manufacturing segment, and to change that isn't to artificially inflate the costs or throw more government dollars at it. It's a reevaluation of labor and skill perspectives, as well as massive regulatory and environmental policy shifts.

But the real solution isn't what the wage complainers want, and that is technology, the biggest job killer since tools were invented.
ATL Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

The_barBEARian said:

ATL Bear said:

Redbrickbear said:

ATL Bear said:

Putin's Russia is getting closer to the Soviet economic dilemmas that crashed it. Defense spending outpacing social spending, rising deficits with increased borrowing costs, inflationary pressures, and a problematic labor force. An unintended weapon Trump will likely initiate is further energy deregulation resulting in lower oil and gas prices (that Russia is already discounting to avoid sanctions) which will put more and more pressure on Russian tax revenues, which are now becoming the primary funding source vs energy.

Meanwhile China is running a debt trap operation on them since the West is sanctioned from buying Russian debt.

I don't think the USSR had that particular problem:

"The crude birth rate in the Soviet Union in 1989 was 17.6 per 1,000 people. The average population of the USSR in 1989 was 286,731,000"

"The USSR had a Fertility rate of 2.3 in 1978-79"

They were doing ok-ish on the population stuff....there was a workforce to replace the elderly aging out.

But the modern Russian Federation certainly does have that problem:

[Russia's fertility rate in 2024 is estimated to be 1.46 children per woman, which is well below the 2.1 children per woman needed to maintain population levels.

In the first six months of 2024, Russia's birth rate was the lowest it's been in 25 years. In June, the number of births fell below 100,000 for the first time

Russia's population is aging rapidly due to a number of factors, including low fertility and a high mortality rate

The natural population declined by 997,000 between October 2020 and September 2021 (the difference between the number of births and the number of deaths over a period). The natural death rate in January 2020, 2021, and 2022 have each been nearly double the natural birth rate.]


The USSR's labor issues were cultural and skill based not the shortage issue they have today. My comment was simply a problematic workforce.
Sound a lot like 2024 America.

TSMC officials claimed the plant they built in Arizona was having problems because the American workforce was too stupid and lazy to develop the technical expertise required to manufacture their semi-conductors.
You don't have to tell me. I've been saying it for some time that we can't do here what is done elsewhere from a manufacturing perspective. It's why outsourcing has occurred. To put it in perspective, China and India graduate well over 1 million engineers every year. The U.S. graduates around 100,000. And people wonder why we need to import skilled labor. There's a fundamental shift that has to occur in the American workforce for us to compete from America vs through America.

How much fraud do you think comes with that number?

There are quite a lot of articles out there about Chinese diploma mills and the cheating that goes on

(india as well)
Even if it's 30-50% the differential is astounding and emanates from educational focus, purpose and outcomes.


If 50% of their degrees are BS..And if China does have 1.3 billion people

While the USA has 330 million

Then America is not that far off on producing engineers

If anything it's China under producing with its large population
Only if you think the U.S. doesn't suffer from a similar "fraud" and under qualified degree programs, such as the vast number of "online" engineering degrees .
First Page
Page 179 of 180
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.