Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
All Ukrainians will benefit from this. As the farms become more productive, revenue to the farmers and the state will go up. Wages will increase in rural areas as labor demand increases. Food prices will have downward pressures as supply increases. Where is the downside. Its not slavery to give rural Ukrainian farmers property rights (that they lost under Lenin). You're arguing the grass is blue and the sky is green. Its bad for Russia who competes with Ukraine for grain exports.
GDP-PPP La-laPP as usual DKM.
Oh, and while I am at that - I hope you didn't miss this post of mine in the Politics section,
but just in case you did, I'll re-post it here, since the UkraineGate is not about to disappear as far as I can see...;
"Jeez no.
Everything is much more simple and prosaic.
When Americans go to Russia ( or Ukraine in this case,) they become the inseparable part of corruption, facilitating it and making millions in personal profits, while insisting that they bring to that country "freedom and democracy."
Burisma Holdings had all the classical features of the corrupt entity, typical for that part of the world.
Trading energy/other natural resources - check mark.
Direct ties to the government officials - check mark.
Big money-check mark.
Foreign/offshore accounts - check mark.
So somewhere in January-February of 2014 the UK starts investigation into this particular company ( since I assume it had accounts somewhere in London) suspecting the illegal origin of the transferred funds and money laundering.) British investigators need cooperation of their Ukrainian counterparts to proceed with investigation, but within 2014 they receive none.
Instead, two months later, after the investigation has been opened by the Brits, in April of 2014, Hunter Biden joins Burisma.
That was the move made by the owner of the company - N. Zlochevsky, former top government official in Ukraine, and from 2014 - a businessman. This move ( hiring Biden's son) was obviously made with the purpose to give Burisma a legit appearance and to protect it from further international and domestic investigations alike. ( Apparently former Polish president Alexander Kvasnevsky, who joined the board of directors of Burisma in January 2014 was not convincing enough.)
So throughout the 2014 Ukrainian legal office does not cooperate with the UK inquiries, (there were at least three different Prosecutors General in charge of the country throughout 2014-2015.)
So I am not sure what happened on the UK end - whether they closed the case because of the lack of evidence, or some other reasons - those questions should be addressed to London.
However in February 2015 P. Poroshenko ( then president of Ukraine) pulls Victor Shokin out of retirement and appoints him as Prosecutor General.
According to the lengthy interview with V. Shokin, Joe Biden was overseeing the internal Ukrainian affairs, traveling there often and placing his hand-picked people in certain positions. Then-US ambassador to Ukraine G. Payette was equally involved in internal Ukrainian affairs, and V. Shokin ( apparently) was not thrilled with either one of them.
Joe Biden was reacting in the same manner, asking Poroshenko on numerous occasions to fire Shokin, but Poroshenko was reluctant to do it. Not sure what month of 2015 exactly Shokin started investigation of Burisma, however in December of 2015, when Biden was in Ukraine, he promised Poroshenko that "next time he would bring enough of incriminating material against Shokin" to finally convince Poroshenko to fire him. ( Biden couldn't come up with any.)
Meanwhile, on February 2nd of 2016, Shokin sent the repeated request through the court to freeze Burisma accounts.
Soon after that Joe Biden demanded Shokin to be fired for real, under a threat of withholding loans - about $1 billion from what I remember.
So that's the bottom line.
Of course there are few interesting nuances to this story, but even if we'll be talking about the corruption of high-ranking Ukrainian officials involved in it, the ties seem to be going directly to Poroshenko himself - a man approved by the US officials, as the new head of the Ukrainian government after the "revolution" that took place in Kiev in 2014."
So obviously I had to dig for the older articles on Ukrainian sites, in order to figure out the "timeline" of the events, but that's not all.
That "Zlochevsky" name - (the owner of Burisma, you know ) started ringing me a bell.
And then I remembered.
A very interesting detail, that has been mentioned in one of Sharij's videos.
This is the recorded conversation between Poroshenko and someone A. Onishenko ( yet another MP with a VERY interesting biography to say the least,) where Poroshenko is promising to "help out" Zlochevsky with his problems, because, you know, "Kolya is a good guy."
Uhhm.
Now this very Onishenko is residing somewhere in London ( if to believe Wikipedia,) and this shows yet again the depth of corruption from the very top to the bottom, that that "new and democratic Ukraine," that puppet state run by the Democrats was, after the coup d'etat in 2014.
The only person who was clearly playing along with them was Kurt Volker from MacCain's team.
And he seems to be resigning. ( Big news for Donbass I suppose.)
In Ukraine I hear A. Daniluk put the letter of resignation in a day ago; he is considered to be one of the top Soros/IMF men in Zelensky's government.
All Ukrainians will benefit from this. As the farms become more productive, revenue to the farmers and the state will go up. Wages will increase in rural areas as labor demand increases. Food prices will have downward pressures as supply increases. Where is the downside. Its not slavery to give rural Ukrainian farmers property rights (that they lost under Lenin). You're arguing the grass is blue and the sky is green. Its bad for Russia who competes with Ukraine for grain exports.
Ukrainians will benefit with land LEASED from the government if they have good government to spend the money on Ukraine. Fat chance though when you have politicians who steal 50% of the take for themselves. Corporations buying the Ukrainian land and exploiting it will give them nothing but a desert, and poverty.
Ukrainians will benefit with land LEASED from the government if they have good government to spend the money on Ukraine. Fat chance though when you have politicians who steal 50% of the take for themselves. Corporations buying the Ukrainian land and exploiting it will give them nothing but a desert, and poverty.
Yesterday I talked for two hours with the guy from Krivoy Rog - the one who knew Ze from his childhood, and literally told him that he should be ready when/if Ze will need to cry in old firend's shoulder, when things will turn too sour for him.
He said basically that he understands what I am talking about, and what position Ukraine is in.
( And yes, their life over there is no peaches - that's for sure.)
P.S. But anyways Scrat, don't forget to look at the "timeline" in my post above.
( And yes, their life over there is no peaches - that's for sure.)
I think that most Ukrainians have decent lives considering the circumstances. They're adjusting/adapting to the situation as it is today. When the foreign actors step in that's going to up end everything. It may well have the same effects as all out war.
That whole Biden thing makes my blood boil. I won't say what I think about it as I may get turned in by the local gestapo and feel the wrath of some "officials" ban stick, especially on this forum. It really makes me feel sick and disgusted about my country. I'm serious.
Grega, I don't know much about Ukraine of the 90ies - what was going on there exactly.
It was basically the same thing Russia went through. Same privatization processes, same mafia wars, same hyperinflation (both early in the 90s and when Russia defaulted). Same corruption schemes were hatched and ideas traded across the border. Same growth cycles too in much of the the 2000's. As the economies were closely linked, this makes sense. But as you alluded to elsewhere, a lack of hydrocarbon commodities to export kept the overall output lower and caused the 2008 recession to hit Ukraine much harder after about 8 or 9 years of growth that saw the economy double in output.
You're also correct about the east being very socialist. Mines and factories tend to create these feelings.
Ukrainians will benefit with land LEASED from the government if they have good government to spend the money on Ukraine. Fat chance though when you have politicians who steal 50% of the take for themselves. Corporations buying the Ukrainian land and exploiting it will give them nothing but a desert, and poverty.
You misunderstand the facts (again). This isn't about privatizing government farm land. Sovkhozy have been gone for a long time now. This is about allowing private owners to sell their land so they can put it up for collateral and have an incentive to increase its value. This is how it works in the rest of Europe (which, surprise has better performing farms). Ridding the vestiges of Soviet laws is how Ukraine can catch up with the part of the world they want to be a part of. You and other Russian supporters have clearly come out against a policy which helps Ukraine's economy... count me as not surprised. They are doing it anyway for the reasons I already mentioned.
I expected you to ignore the fact that GDP PPP there is now at an all time high since the USSR collapsed. Its not at a level I would call "great" but it certainly is inconvenient to the narrative that things are heading worse. Even in eastern Ukraine the contrasts between government side and Russian side are growing stronger. Normal life vs. ghost towns.
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure
I am curious now what's coming next.
I'm afraid Ukrainegate isn't going to give you much of what you hope for, at least beyond the short term. It highlights the importance of Ukraine to our own national security. It certainly brings Democrats into the fold of supporting Ukraine. This used to be the GOP's thing and they railed against Obama for not lending more support. Now both parties are on board (less the Trump wing which is on its way out). So unless you are sure the Dems won't be coming into power next year, this is bad for the Ukraine haters. Whether it hurts Trump or Biden more for next year I guess we have to wait and see what the investigations will bring. Volker resigned because it came to light that he was trying to mitigate the damage Trump was doing with his "favors" requests. He would have been fired anyway.
EDIT: I mistakenly deleted the part about Danyliuk. Indeed this was likely related to the failure of the recent IMF mission. From what I've heard it failed because of the unresolved issue of Kolomoisky and his bank. Certainly the IMF won't be loaning money until that situation is unresolved. Its going to be a litmus test to see if Ze is truly as anti corruption as he said he will be or if he's going to half-way do it.
You misunderstand the facts (again). This isn't about privatizing government farm land. Sovkhozy have been gone for a long time now. This is about allowing private owners to sell their land so they can put it up for collateral and have an incentive to increase its value. This is how it works in the rest of Europe (which, surprise has better performing farms).
Sell to WHOM?
"Put up for collateral" WHAT exactly and with what purpose?
Sell to WHOM?
"Put up for collateral" WHAT exactly and with what purpose?
"To increase value" of what and what for?
In order to get financing, farmers have to collateralize their farms. This is how farming works: You pay for it, you do some work, you wait, work some more and THEN get paid when you sell the harvest some time later. Its not a continuous operation with year round cash flows. They need financing. Without the ability to sell, the land cannot be collateral. Land is the farmer's main asset.
If you are a farmer who no longer wants to (or can) farm, your only choice right now in Ukraine is to lease it out long term to a big corp... or your neighbor. Either way, the value you get from improving the land is less if you are constantly leasing it. If instead you can sell because you aren't farming anymore, then you can get more money by improving the value.
Its the same economic principals that create slums where rent controls are enacted.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
) started ringing me a bell. 
where Poroshenko is promising to "help out" Zlochevsky with his problems, because, you know, "Kolya is a good guy." 
