Putin's Russia

jnifw3nloi · 04-30-2007, 04:17 AM

President Vladimir Putin of the Russian federation has spent his last two terms trying to get the nation back onto its feet. What with the fall of the Soviet Union and all. Putin has resorted, at times, to semi-totalitarian tactics in order to ensure the continued stability, more or less, of Russia. Despite the support of the people, however, other nations have made statements that Vladimir Putin is acting like a dictator. US news has, for example, called Putin a "Soviet Strongman" with policies that seek to create a new Soviet Union.
It seems very strange that the US should make such comments especially since it has long since tried to dominate international politics with armed forces.
Is Putin trying to ensure a future for Russia or is he trying to build an empire?

FutureNavyMan08 · 05-04-2007, 05:55 AM

Putin, who silences the voice of the people with police force? Putin, who has done more to bring the shadow of communism back to the country it nearly destroyed?

Putin is exhibiting a starteling trend with his increasingly common returns to communist policy. Russia is in turmoil, due at least in part to his poor leadership. Evidence:

Life Expectency in Russia
Life expectancy at birth: total population: 65.87 years
male: 59.12 years
female: 73.03 years (2007 est.)
source: CIA World Factbook online

As a point of comparison, the average life expectency in the UK and US hovers just above 78 percent and Canada with an incredible high of 80, and you get an idea of how bad the situation is. To provide another example, the Chinese life expectency is 72.

Conclusion: Puten has a negetive influence on Russia and will only drag his country down.

jnifw3nloi · 05-04-2007, 06:19 AM

The life expectancy declined as a result of the collapse of the Soviet Union, in the Soviet Union the life expectancy being 65 and 74 years for men and women, respectively. The drop in life expectancy is due much more to the conversion to a "free market" economy and the inherent phycological stress brought on by such change. This change occured before Putin was elected President of Russia.
Putin's leadership is far from poor. The economy and government have both become much less corrupt as a result of his actions. He jailed Russia's oil tycoon who was guilty of tax fraud and numerous other crimes. He also dealt effectively with the terrorists in Chechneya. Vladimir Putin has done more in order to save Russia than the Western goals to better the life of the workers by institutiin "free market".
The reason for Putin's bad image is that the US is afraid of a strong and unified Russia.
I implore that next time you do your research.

FutureNavyMan08 · 05-05-2007, 04:59 AM

If you honestly cannot spot Putins gradual return to communism, then there is nothing I, or pretty much anyone, can do for you. The signs of a "reversion", if you will, are becoming more apparent.

jnifw3nloi · 05-05-2007, 05:23 AM

Russia is not returning to its Soviet past. While it is true that Russia has become more centralized since the fall of the Soviet Union, this was needed in order to remove the corruption and crime that were rampant during the switch from communism. I would ask you not to blurt out statements that cannot be backed up. Supercillious remarks will not win the debate.

FutureNavyMan08 · 05-06-2007, 05:05 AM

Talk all you want, but Russia is in a downslide. Her people are dyeing at young ages and the standerd of living is low.

Russian GDP Per Capitia: $12,100 (2006 est.)
Unemployement Rate: 6.6% plus considerable underemployment (2006 est.)
Pop. below poverty line: 17.8% (2004 est.)
Inflation Rate: 9.8% (2006 est.)

Theese are what we call facts. They are used in debates to prove points. They are also referred to as evidence. All of the above relate to the economy of Russia.

jnifw3nloi · 05-06-2007, 06:11 AM

Ofcourse the standard of living is low. As I was telling you the entire time, Russia has experienced the collapse of its former governmental and economic regime. With such a collapse a drop in living standards, as well as all other things, is inevitalbe. I never said this was not the case. I hope this is the last time I will have to mention the impact that the dissolution of a former government can have on the lives of the people, both material and phycological.

jnifw3nloi · 05-06-2007, 06:31 AM

As you can see from the picture below, the economies of a number of the former Soviet republics are still recovering
<<<<<http://www.culiuc.com/archives/img/sizematters_gdp.gif>>>>

FutureNavyMan08 · 05-06-2007, 09:24 AM

Thanks for clearly stateing for all to see that communism is a self destructive force. Moving on, it took the US far less time to recover from the great depression. And look at the idiot that lead us then! Why then has Russia not recovered? Its due to poor and self-promoting leadership.

jnifw3nloi · 05-06-2007, 09:28 AM

The countries mentioned in the graphic are all capitalist, as you can see their GDP has fallen. Capitalists claimed that the fall of communism would result in benefits to the workers, that economies would grow and people would be free to make money. This is not the illustraited case. It is the capitalists who are at a contradiction. The Union collapsed in 1989-1990, that is the year at which the graphic begins.

jnifw3nloi · 05-06-2007, 09:44 AM

Quote:

This is not a country on the verge of an orange or rose revolution.
Mr Putin enjoys widespread, genuine, public support. The electorate is thankful for the economic stability he has presided over. Russia has a new sense of national pride.

This is from the BBC News Website:
BBC NEWS | Europe | Putin's next generation make their mark

FutureNavyMan08 · 05-06-2007, 10:35 AM

Rather than constantely double posting, how about acting semi-literate and keeping it simple? That said, since capitalists are all so poor, explain this.

Per Capitas
Russia- $12,100 (2006 est.)
UK- $31,400 (2006 est.)
US- $43,500 (2006 est.)
Austrailia- $32,900 (2006 est.)

What I am doing here is providing points for comparison, a debate tactic used to compare and contrast data. As you can see, the greatest difference in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita occurs betweeen Russia at 12,100 and the United States (Pure Capitalism) at 43,500. This is far by the largest GDP on the charts; I beleive the greatest is held by Canada. Nevertheless, the point it made. The Russian economy is vulnerable, and Putin has allowed that vulnerability to remain for too long.
You never countered my statement as to why exactly the horrible, capitalistic US pulled itself out of its most severe depression, while the cold war has been over since 1990 and Russia is still humiliatingly low on the chart. tBy the way, nice job quoting yourself.

jnifw3nloi · 05-06-2007, 11:30 PM

No, the US is not pure capitalism. Notice government intervention, social security, health care, taxes, welfare, public education, stock monitorig, and a myriaad of other things. You do not know pure capitalism. And the country of Luxembourg has the largest per capita of 69,800. It was not capitalism that pulled the US out of the depression. It was the rather socialist rhetoric of FDR. Social security, relief and nationalization of a bunch of things. Hoover's capitalism would have seen the end of the US, ha Rugged Individualism is what got the US into the depression. And for the last time, the economic difficulty suffered by Russia is the result of the fall of the Soviet Union. That being said, Russia has made gigantic strides in bettering the life for its people since then.

jnifw3nloi · 05-07-2007, 01:49 AM

It is unfortunate what Stalin did. But if he had not industrialized the Soviet Union, it is very likely that when Hitler invaded he would have conquered all of it, and killed many more than Stalin.

Scruff · 05-07-2007, 02:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jnifw3nloi

It is unfortunate what Stalin did. But if he had not industrialized the Soviet Union, it is very likely that when Hitler invaded he would have conquered all of it, and killed many more than Stalin.

And that my good friend is the big Stalin debate. Without him Russia would've never ended up as the 2nd biggest industrial power in the world by the end of 1939 and the Soviet union would have surely fell, but with the break-neck speed industrialization and the war, 26 million people died.

Political genius or cruel tyrant?
I have my opinion.