Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Europe
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 05-28-2018, 01:02 PM
 
26,787 posts, read 22,549,184 times
Reputation: 10038

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrat335 View Post
For the US, the WWI was a lucrative business ( I am sure the WWII as well ( initially at least.))
That's why they wanted it to keep it going - they invested in it.

"My first question at the Treasury of an international
character was our American debt. At the end of the war, the
European Allies owed the United States about ten thousand
million dollars, of which four thousand million were owed by
Britain. On the other hand, we were owed by the other
Allies, principally by Russia, seven thousand million dollars.
In 1920, Britain had proposed an all-round cancellation of
war debts. This involved, on paper at least, a sacrifice by us
of about seven hundred and fifty million pounds sterling. As
the value of money has halved since then, the figures could
in fact be doubled. No settlement was reached. On August
1, 1922, in Mr. Lloyd George’s day, the Balfour Note had
declared that Great Britain would collect no more from her
debtors, Ally or former enemy, than the United States
collected from her. This was a worthy statement. In
December of 1922, a British delegation, under Government,
visited Washington; and as the result Britain agreed to pay
the whole of her war debt to the United States at a rate of
interest reduced from five to three and one-half per cent,
irrespective of receipts from her debtors.

This agreement caused deep concern in many instructed
quarters, and to no one more than the Prime Minister
quarters, and to no one more than the Prime Minister
himself. It imposed upon Great Britain, much impoverished
by the war in which, as she was to do once again, she had
fought from the first day to the last, the payment of thirty-
five millions sterling a year for sixty-two years. The basis of
this agreement was considered, not only in this island, but
by many disinterested financial authorities in America, to be
a severe and improvident condition for both borrower and
lender. “They hired the money, didn’t they?” said President
Coolidge. This laconic statement was true, but not
exhaustive. Payments between countries which take the
form of the transfer of goods and services, or still more of
their fruitful exchange, are not only just but beneficial.
Payments which are only the arbitrary, artificial transmission
across the exchange of such very large sums as arise in
war finance cannot fail to derange the whole process of
world economy. This is equally true whether the payments
are exacted from an ally who shared the victory and bore
much of the brunt or from a defeated enemy nation. The
enforcement of the Baldwin-Coolidge debt settlement is a
recognisable factor in the economic collapse which was
presently to overwhelm the world, to prevent its recovery
and inflame its hatreds.
The service of the American debt was particularly difficult to
render to a country which had newly raised its tariffs to
even higher limits, and had already buried in its vaults
nearly all the gold yet dug up. Similar but lighter settlements
were imposed upon the other European Allies. The first
result was that everyone put the screw on Germany. I was
in full accord with the policy of the Balfour Note of 1922,
and had argued for it at the time; and when I became
Chancellor of the Exchequer I reiterated it, and acted
accordingly. I thought that if Great Britain were thus made
not only the debtor, but the debt-collector of the United
States, the unwisdom of the debt collection would become
apparent at Washington. However, no such reaction
followed. Indeed the argument was resented. The United
States continued to insist upon its annual repayments from
Great Britain.
It, therefore, fell to me to make settlements with all our
Allies which, added to the German payments which we had
already scaled down, would enable us to produce the thirty-
five millions annually for the American Treasury. Severest
pressure was put upon Germany, and a vexatious régime
of international control of German internal affairs was
imposed. The United States received from England three
payments in full, and these were extorted from Germany by
indemnities on the modified Dawes scale."

W. Churchill "The Gathering Storm."

I think we know by now that it's the Wall Street, the bankers that really rule the US; rarely do politicians take the front seat.
So Russians are correct in many ways, when they are saying that "money is the source of all evil in the world."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-29-2018, 12:16 PM
DKM
 
Location: California
6,767 posts, read 3,858,538 times
Reputation: 6690
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrat335 View Post
No video? It didn't happen.
I do sympathize... but you can find this out on your own. it was the 166th and 167th test launch of the Trident 2 D5. So much for your alternative facts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2018, 12:46 PM
DKM
 
Location: California
6,767 posts, read 3,858,538 times
Reputation: 6690
Quote:
Originally Posted by grega94 View Post
I'm aware that they track cities, there is a simple wiki page of it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._by_population

The question is if they track metropolitan populations, you know when you combine all of the suburbs together.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_area

And no Russia's population has stopped shrinking, and even then many of the rural population is moving into cities still so the Urban population is still growing as can be testified by many of Russia's cities having huge population growth rates such as Tyumen growing at +27.95% since 2010. Tyumen had 581,907 people in 2010 vs 744,554 in 2017. Though of course there are many that are shrinking such as Tula which shrunk by −3.18%, Tula had 501,169 people in 2010 and in 2017 had 485,221 people. Speaking about urban population, Russia is number 7, ahead of countries such as Nigeria, Pakistan, and Bangladesh, all of which have a larger total population.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ban_population

But again I'm more interested to know if Russia keeps track of metropolitan areas or not?
Not specifically in the way we do in America. I remember studying this in university. In the USSR times, they established classifications of cities and work or resort settlements (a posolyok). This was done because they had to control where people lived and to plan the economy. Russia doesn't really have cities with suburbs in the way we do, so tracking them as a metro area would be pointless. So you had cities and the nearby areas were traditionally dachas. But few people lived in the dachas, so they were 2nd homes and not suburbs to move to. Each major city, such as Moscow, has okrug districts which function in a way sort of like suburbs as far as local governance. Moscow and SPB are their own districts within the Russian federation, not unlike Washington DC.

So for Moscow, take the city plus Moscow Oblast and you basically have your metro area. Certainly Krasnogorsk is a suburb of Moscow and I would argue that Klin and Kolomna are suburbs of Moscow. Back in the day, the federal district of Moscow would include all of Moscow and that's it. Same goes for SPB, but from what I understand it's metro is also growing outside of the district borders. Massive construction going on there as people move in from the shrinking smaller towns in the region.

If Russia's population isn't shrinking, you should perhaps question why the UN reported that it has shrunk even with 250k of Asian migrants last year. We know the cities are growing because the villages have nothing to offer people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2018, 12:47 PM
 
12,022 posts, read 11,572,686 times
Reputation: 11136
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure View Post
I think we know by now that it's the Wall Street, the bankers that really rule the US; rarely do politicians take the front seat.
So Russians are correct in many ways, when they are saying that "money is the source of all evil in the world."
Financial institutions can be used as weapons. The relationship between the political center and the financial center is often referred to as political or regulatory capture and often the two seem to overlap due to the revolving door between the two. See the politicians at the EU and ECB have been threatening a financial attack on Italy's new populist government for the past week has just started.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2018, 01:24 PM
 
Location: Europe
4,692 posts, read 1,165,924 times
Reputation: 924
Russia is terrorist state

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBPW0UJan1M
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2018, 02:22 PM
 
Location: Brooklyn, New York
5,464 posts, read 5,710,417 times
Reputation: 6098
Quote:
Originally Posted by DKM View Post
Not specifically in the way we do in America. I remember studying this in university. In the USSR times, they established classifications of cities and work or resort settlements (a posolyok). This was done because they had to control where people lived and to plan the economy. Russia doesn't really have cities with suburbs in the way we do, so tracking them as a metro area would be pointless. So you had cities and the nearby areas were traditionally dachas. But few people lived in the dachas, so they were 2nd homes and not suburbs to move to. Each major city, such as Moscow, has okrug districts which function in a way sort of like suburbs as far as local governance. Moscow and SPB are their own districts within the Russian federation, not unlike Washington DC.

So for Moscow, take the city plus Moscow Oblast and you basically have your metro area. Certainly Krasnogorsk is a suburb of Moscow and I would argue that Klin and Kolomna are suburbs of Moscow. Back in the day, the federal district of Moscow would include all of Moscow and that's it. Same goes for SPB, but from what I understand it's metro is also growing outside of the district borders. Massive construction going on there as people move in from the shrinking smaller towns in the region.
As car ownership and road network improved, there are suburbs now in pretty much every Russian city. They do track them, they are called "agglomerations". All that Soviet stuff is irrelevant, USSR has been gone for 27 years now.
Quote:
If Russia's population isn't shrinking, you should perhaps question why the UN reported that it has shrunk even with 250k of Asian migrants last year. We know the cities are growing because the villages have nothing to offer people.
No idea why UN reported that since Russia gained net 76,000 people last year (2017), and gained net 168,000 the previous year (2016).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2018, 04:19 PM
DKM
 
Location: California
6,767 posts, read 3,858,538 times
Reputation: 6690
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gantz View Post
As car ownership and road network improved, there are suburbs now in pretty much every Russian city. They do track them, they are called "agglomerations". All that Soviet stuff is irrelevant, USSR has been gone for 27 years now.

No idea why UN reported that since Russia gained net 76,000 people last year (2017), and gained net 168,000 the previous year (2016).
In the context of his question, the Soviet stuff is relevant. They came up with agglomeration frameworks but like other things in Russia, the concept/idea was never realized. Russia may count people in an urban area but there is not much done with it. So in a strange way, we are both right.

The UN has a system to estimate population in a current year basis. Their methodology is considered to be the most up to date. Your figures are mistaken, but I was off a bit too, going by memory. They had a net gain of 25k in 2017 and 76k in 2016, a net loss of 25k is the current year expected figure. Unless you have more accurate migration figures than the government (which uses estimates). The population did not quite reach 144 million and is forecast to slowly shrink the next 3 years then accelerate to a net loss of 2 million every 5 years for the next 3 decades.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2018, 05:36 PM
 
9,511 posts, read 5,443,411 times
Reputation: 9092
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure View Post
For the US, the WWI was a lucrative business ( I am sure the WWII as well ( initially at least.))
That's why they wanted it to keep it going - they invested in it.

"My first question at the Treasury of an international
character was our American debt. At the end of the war, the
European Allies owed the United States about ten thousand
million dollars, of which four thousand million were owed by
Britain. On the other hand, we were owed by the other
Allies, principally by Russia, seven thousand million dollars.
In 1920, Britain had proposed an all-round cancellation of
war debts. This involved, on paper at least, a sacrifice by us
of about seven hundred and fifty million pounds sterling. As
the value of money has halved since then, the figures could
in fact be doubled. No settlement was reached. On August
1, 1922, in Mr. Lloyd George’s day, the Balfour Note had
declared that Great Britain would collect no more from her
debtors, Ally or former enemy, than the United States
collected from her. This was a worthy statement. In
December of 1922, a British delegation, under Government,
visited Washington; and as the result Britain agreed to pay
the whole of her war debt to the United States at a rate of
interest reduced from five to three and one-half per cent,
irrespective of receipts from her debtors.

This agreement caused deep concern in many instructed
quarters, and to no one more than the Prime Minister
quarters, and to no one more than the Prime Minister
himself. It imposed upon Great Britain, much impoverished
by the war in which, as she was to do once again, she had
fought from the first day to the last, the payment of thirty-
five millions sterling a year for sixty-two years. The basis of
this agreement was considered, not only in this island, but
by many disinterested financial authorities in America, to be
a severe and improvident condition for both borrower and
lender. “They hired the money, didn’t they?” said President
Coolidge. This laconic statement was true, but not
exhaustive. Payments between countries which take the
form of the transfer of goods and services, or still more of
their fruitful exchange, are not only just but beneficial.
Payments which are only the arbitrary, artificial transmission
across the exchange of such very large sums as arise in
war finance cannot fail to derange the whole process of
world economy. This is equally true whether the payments
are exacted from an ally who shared the victory and bore
much of the brunt or from a defeated enemy nation. The
enforcement of the Baldwin-Coolidge debt settlement is a
recognisable factor in the economic collapse which was
presently to overwhelm the world, to prevent its recovery
and inflame its hatreds.
The service of the American debt was particularly difficult to
render to a country which had newly raised its tariffs to
even higher limits, and had already buried in its vaults
nearly all the gold yet dug up. Similar but lighter settlements
were imposed upon the other European Allies. The first
result was that everyone put the screw on Germany. I was
in full accord with the policy of the Balfour Note of 1922,
and had argued for it at the time; and when I became
Chancellor of the Exchequer I reiterated it, and acted
accordingly. I thought that if Great Britain were thus made
not only the debtor, but the debt-collector of the United
States, the unwisdom of the debt collection would become
apparent at Washington. However, no such reaction
followed. Indeed the argument was resented. The United
States continued to insist upon its annual repayments from
Great Britain.
It, therefore, fell to me to make settlements with all our
Allies which, added to the German payments which we had
already scaled down, would enable us to produce the thirty-
five millions annually for the American Treasury. Severest
pressure was put upon Germany, and a vexatious régime
of international control of German internal affairs was
imposed. The United States received from England three
payments in full, and these were extorted from Germany by
indemnities on the modified Dawes scale."

W. Churchill "The Gathering Storm."

I think we know by now that it's the Wall Street, the bankers that really rule the US; rarely do politicians take the front seat.
So Russians are correct in many ways, when they are saying that "money is the source of all evil in the world."
Agreed. Money is evil but only because humans can screw up a good thing every time. Money is a tool, greed is the instinct of reptile minds coming forth, dominating behavior. If you go back to the first banks and the first bankers guilds such as in Venice and the Teutonic Knights you'll find money lenders involved in almost all major wars since the beginning of the Middle Ages. It's kind of tedious to study though and solid information is hard to find.

I've never been into conspiracies but considering the way things are now and history I do believe that "destruction capitalism" in many forms is practiced.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2018, 05:41 PM
 
9,511 posts, read 5,443,411 times
Reputation: 9092
I'll just leave this here. Considering what he said about the people in the plane crash I think he deserved it.

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-europe-44296672

There are consequences.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-29-2018, 07:18 PM
 
26,787 posts, read 22,549,184 times
Reputation: 10038
Sorry for interruption - I can't stop loling while watching this.
Now you know why Russia is always functioning somehow, no matter what)))



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHAsNjMKAc8
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Europe
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top