Will Ukraine situation lead to World War III?

[snugglestruggle]

Sorry Scotty but...

The EU stats you quote are for the Euro zone. Which the UK and several other EU members have not joined. If the whole EU is considered, it is significantly larger than the USA in both GDP and population.

I've been googling for stats, but the EU ones are all in Euros, with no dollar equivalent that I've yet been able to unearth.

When I can find comparable EU/US stats, I'll post them. Meantime, considering the Eurozone stats you posted, the addition of the UK population alone (around 63m in 2012), and the UK GDP (around $2.4 trillion in 2012) certainly takes the EU population well over 400m. And the EU GDP very close to the US figure.

Other EU members which are outside the Eurozone: Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Croatia, Lithuania, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Sweden.

If they are included, as they ought to be, the EU population is over 500m, and its GDP is larger than that of the USA.

My case regarding EU dependence on Russian gas is unchallenged, and unchallengable.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia_in_the_European_energy_sector

AS far as who is in the EU zone or not the World bank lists the GDP numbers under Euro Area so take it up with them. The World bank is a bigger authority that either of us. So whatever

I think the only ones challenging Europe's dependence on Russian Gas are the Ukrainian people wanting closer ties to the west. This article supports that supposition

Heres a link to an interesting article. I heard about this back in February but didn't follow up. It lays it out pretty clear. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/02/26/why-putin-hates-fracking.html

Heres the meat of it......

If the natural gas reserves in Ukraine are anything like as large as analysts believe—and that is a big “if,” but far from an impossibility—then the geopolitical and economic position of the former Soviet republic could be transformed; its independence from Moscow assured; its value to the West unquestioned.

Even the ousted President Viktor Yanukovych understood that. (He was never so reliable a Putin ally as his opponents painted him.) Last November, Yanukovych’s government signed a $10 billion deal for shale gas exploration and exploitation with the American-based multinational Chevron, following on another massive deal with Royal Dutch Shell. Together, Yanukovych claimed, those agreements would enable Ukraine “to have full sufficiency in gas by 2020 and, under an optimistic scenario, even enable us to export energy.”

You can imagine how happy Putin was about that.

 

[Scotsman69]

The stats quoted earlier were indeed from the world bank

and as a professional working economist for forty years I'm not going to challenge them. But the stats quoted were not for the EU, but the Euro-zone, ie those EU states which have adopted the Euro as their national currency. I have listed the significant number of EU states which are not members of the Euro-zone.

My case stands unchallenged.

AS far as who is in the EU zone or not the World bank lists the GDP numbers under Euro Area so take it up with them. The World bank is a bigger authority that either of us. So whatever

I think the only ones challenging Europe's dependence on Russian Gas are the Ukrainian people wanting closer ties to the west. This article supports that supposition

Heres a link to an interesting article. I heard about this back in February but didn't follow up. It lays it out pretty clear. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/02/26/why-putin-hates-fracking.html

Heres the meat of it......

 

[unregistered]

 

[Scotsman69]

Interesting...

So you don't believe the CIA-sourced stats I offered you?

There are many ways of comparing relative international wealth, but most economists believe GDP per capita is the most reliable. As apparently does the CIA.

And pray tell me, wiseman, where would the US figures be without Alaskan, Gulf, and other sources of hydrocarbons?

Working longer hours does not mean working more productively.

I did:

Americans Are World's Most Productive Workers, U.N. Report Finds
Published September 03, 2007Associated Press

GENEVA – American workers stay longer in the office, at the factory or on the farm than their counterparts in Europe and most other rich nations, and they produce more per person over the year.

They also get more done per hour than everyone but the Norwegians, according to a U.N. report released Monday, which said the United States "leads the world in labor productivity."

The average U.S. worker produces $63,885 of wealth per year, more than their counterparts in all other countries, the International Labor Organization said in its report. Ireland comes in second at $55,986, followed by Luxembourg at $55,641, Belgium at $55,235 and France at $54,609.

The productivity figure is found by dividing the country's gross domestic product by the number of people employed. The U.N. report is based on 2006 figures for many countries, or the most recent available.

Only part of the U.S. productivity growth, which has outpaced that of many other developed economies, can be explained by the longer hours Americans are putting in, the ILO said.

The U.S., according to the report, also beats all 27 nations in the European Union, Japan and Switzerland in the amount of wealth created per hour of work — a second key measure of productivity.

Norway, which is not an EU member, generates the most output per working hour, $37.99, a figure inflated by the country's billions of dollars in oil exports and high prices for goods at home. The U.S. is second at $35.63, about a half dollar ahead of third-place France.

Seven years ago, French workers produced over a dollar more on average than their American counterparts. The country led the U.S. in hourly productivity from 1994 to 2003.

The U.S. employee put in an average 1,804 hours of work in 2006, the report said. That compared with 1,407.1 hours for the Norwegian worker and 1,564.4 for the French.

It pales, however, in comparison with the annual hours worked per person in Asia, where seven economies — South Korea, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Hong Kong, China, Malaysia and Thailand — surpassed 2,200 average hours per worker. But those countries had lower productivity rates.

America's increased productivity "has to do with the ICT (information and communication technologies) revolution, with the way the U.S. organizes companies, with the high level of competition in the country, with the extension of trade and investment abroad," said Jose Manuel Salazar, the ILO's head of employment.

The ILO report warned that the widening of the gap between leaders such as the U.S. and poorer nations has been even more dramatic.

Laborers from regions such as southeast Asia, Latin America and the Middle East have the potential to create more wealth but are being held back by a lack of investment in training, equipment and technology, the agency said.

In sub-Saharan Africa, workers are only about one-twelfth as productive as those in developed countries, the report said.

"The huge gap in productivity and wealth is cause for great concern," ILO Director-General Juan Somavia said, adding that it was important to raise productivity levels of the lowest-paid workers in the world's poorest countries.

China and other East Asian countries are catching up quickest with Western countries. Productivity in the region has doubled in the past decade and is accelerating faster than anywhere else, the report said.

But they still have a long way to go: Workers in East Asia are still only about one-fifth as productive as laborers in industrialized countries.

The vast differences among China's sectors tell part of the story. Whereas a Chinese industrial worker produces $12,642 worth of output — almost eight times more than in 1980 — a laborer in the farm and fisheries sector contributes a paltry $910 to gross domestic product.

The difference is much less pronounced in the United States, where a manufacturing employee produced an unprecedented $104,606 of value in 2005. An American farm laborer, meanwhile, created $52,585 worth of output, down 10 percent from seven years ago, when U.S. agricultural productivity peaked.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/2007/09/03/americans-are-world-most-productive-workers-un-report-finds/

Economy got you down? 5 Ways America is still on top


Biggest and most productive economy


The Chinese may buy more Prada handbags these days than most Americans, but the U.S. is still the world's biggest and most productive economy in the world.

Around this time last year, China passed Japan to become the world's second-largest economy. But while many analysts say the East Asian giant could eventually surpass the U.S. by 2027, most Americans are still far richer than most Chinese. China's GDP per capita was $4,393 in 2010, while the U.S. is much wealthier at $47,184 per capita, according to the World Bank.

The U.S. is also the most productive economy in the world, with just as much output in a year ($14.6 trillion) as the next three biggest economies -- Japan, China and Germany. Admittedly, while American workers are the world's most productive on an output per person basis, Norway in 2010 produced 25% more per hour (the best measure of productivity) than the U.S., according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

http://money.cnn.com/galleries/2011/fortune/1109/gallery.america_economic_strengths.fortune/2.html

 

[KingOrfeo]

You liberals just don't get the fact that the world is what it is, not what you wish it would be:

Moscow signals concern for Russians in Estonia
Reuters By Robert Evans
2 hours ago

If Russia invades Estonia (a NATO member) and NATO does not respond, then NATO is impotent.

But, do you really think that is going to happen?

 

[KingOrfeo]

I did:

Americans Are World's Most Productive Workers, U.N. Report Finds
Published September 03, 2007Associated Press

GENEVA – American workers stay longer in the office, at the factory or on the farm than their counterparts in Europe and most other rich nations, and they produce more per person over the year.

Has it never occurred to you that that constitutes a problem?

 

[KingOrfeo]

This may be the source of vette's confusion:

Wiki: List of countries by GDP (nominal). Four lists, from different sources; U.S. heads one, and in the other three is topped only by the EU as a unit.

However: Wiki: List of countries by GDP (nominal) per capita. Four lists, and on none does the U.S. rank higher than 10. (The EU as a unit, BTW, ranks from 35 to 43 on the three lists that count it; not surprising, the EU being a federation of very-rich to moderately-poor countries.)

 

[Scotsman69]

Thank you Orfeo.

You have demonstrated the international comparison of wealth is a rather fraught matter. But the four lists from Wiki, of countries' GDP (nominal) per capita, do reflect interesting parallels. And they're all from internationally impeccable organisations.

Those who seek for stats to back their case will usually be able to dredge up some article to support their view. But when the IMF, World Bank, CIA, and UN all come up with broadly similar figures, it's rather hard to challenge them seriously. Even for those who really want to prove that the USA is biggest and best, when these lists show it to range from tenth to fourteenth in the world league tables for per capita GDP.

This may be the source of vette's confusion:

Wiki: List of countries by GDP (nominal). Four lists, from different sources; U.S. heads one, and in the other three is topped only by the EU as a unit.

However: Wiki: List of countries by GDP (nominal) per capita. Four lists, and on none does the U.S. rank higher than 10. (The EU as a unit, BTW, ranks from 35 to 43 on the three lists that count it; not surprising, the EU being a federation of very-rich to moderately-poor countries.)

 

[unregistered]

 

[Sean Renaud]

I hate to say it but I have my doubts the US under the present regime will go to war in Europe for any reason. FDR gave 10 million people to Communism. Democrats today are just as naive about Putin as FDR was about Stalin, I see little on that side of the aisle that would lead me to believe that they wouldn't just beat their gums about an invasion of Estonia and then shrug their shoulders and forget it. Who thought a year ago that Putin would invade Ukraine and get away with it?

Everybody thought Putin could and get away with it.

As for the rest I'm more inclined to believe Obama would honor our treaties and go to war but honestly I hope your right. I don't give two shits how many people FDR gave to Communism. It wasn't our problem then and it's not our problem now. The only reason it's even sorta our problem is thanks to guys like you making it our problem most of Europe has small militaries incapable of defending themselves against much.

I wish I lived in your Republican Paradise but here in the real world there is enough wrong in America that fucking with Europe should only be done under the most dire of situations.

 

[unregistered]

 

[snugglestruggle]

and as a professional working economist for forty years I'm not going to challenge them. But the stats quoted were not for the EU, but the Euro-zone, ie those EU states which have adopted the Euro as their national currency. I have listed the significant number of EU states which are not members of the Euro-zone.

My case stands unchallenged.

I think You should sue the world bank for mis representation of stats.

 

[snugglestruggle]

If Russia invades Estonia (a NATO member) and NATO does not respond, then NATO is impotent.

But, do you really think that is going to happen?

It wouldn't be the first time in history. Right now those former soviet states are asking themselves the same question. All the advantages are in Putins corner.

As a side note don't think China isn't watching with great interest. They have their dispute with japan over those 2 islands. They were talking smack last week about them. I wouldn't be surprised if we wake up one morning in the near future to find out china landed troops on them.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Yeah people like me who understand the long term strategic interests of the United States. A Russian dominated Europe is in nobody's interests, except the Russians. Tell me, how many weaker people who needed your immediate help defending themselves have you walked on by?

No. Mr. Socialism makes slaves of people does not get to defend making slaves of entire nations by paying for their military with our dollars.

 

[Scotsman69]

Nobody misrepresented stats.

Those I originally quoted clearly referred to the Euro-zone and not the EU. Maybe you should sue your education system and media for not teaching you to be knowledgeable about European matters.

I think You should sue the world bank for mis representation of stats.

 

[Dazzle1]

Perhaps Russia thinks they take a page from the Israeli playbook and keep conquered lands in violation of the Geneva Accords via....via....um, National Security!

Might makes Right, dontcha know!!

A few differences Russia invaded both countries without provocation and in the case of Ukraine has a treatysaying it will protect its borders.

Israel was attacked by islamic nazis in 67 and won, so the anology is more like the U.S and Mexico.
But you won't see a BDS for Russia not will racist celebs like Alice Walker and Roger Waters complain about russia. Nor will the U.N pass any resolution in the general assembly

 

[phrodeau]

It wouldn't be the first time in history. Right now those former soviet states are asking themselves the same question. All the advantages are in Putins corner.

As a side note don't think China isn't watching with great interest. They have their dispute with japan over those 2 islands. They were talking smack last week about them. I wouldn't be surprised if we wake up one morning in the near future to find out china landed troops on them.

Who's in the Coalition of the Willing this time? Which countries want to spend blood and treasure to push Russia out of Crimea?

 

[BotanyBoy]

Yeah people like me who understand the long term strategic interests of the United States.

REALLY? Do tell there Cpt. Strategy Master!!!

What strategic interest does the US have in Ukraine just NEEDING to be defended by the US of course at a staggering cost of billions of tax dollars per day into almost entirely republican controlled companies and contractors of course......(that's the real reason you and the rest of the GOP dick sucks are crying for war, but I want to hear the steamer you come up with).

What specifically in Ukraine must we defend for it's fall into Russian control will destroy the US and the American way of life as we know it?

I bet you got not a single fucking thing because you're a liar and a bitch made coward.

 

[snugglestruggle]

Who's in the Coalition of the Willing this time? Which countries want to spend blood and treasure to push Russia out of Crimea?

There shouldn't be a coalition, let Europe defend Europe.

 

[Beco]

Who's in the Coalition of the Willing this time? Which countries want to spend blood and treasure to push Russia out of Crimea?

That's it in a nutshell....so Russia does what it feels like. North Korea is watching....and so is Syria

 

[snugglestruggle]

Those I originally quoted clearly referred to the Euro-zone and not the EU. Maybe you should sue your education system and media for not teaching you to be knowledgeable about European matters.

Well to begin with if I was going to study foreign economic or political matters it would be South America or Asia, China in particular. They are far more important to the US than Europe.

However on a personal note.....Fuck European matters. Enough American blood was spilled over Europe in 2 World Wars.

 

[KingOrfeo]

From The Nation:

How to Avert a New Cold War Over Crimea

Bellicose posturing could lead to disaster. The only way out is through diplomacy.

The Editors March 20, 2014 | This article appeared in the April 7, 2014 edition of The Nation.

The unnecessary confrontation over Ukraine has not only restored the Cold War between the West and Russia, but has done so in an exceedingly dangerous form. The epicenter is no longer in Berlin; it’s on Russia’s borders—with official rhetoric and military gestures on both sides approaching something like the Cuban missile crisis of 1962.

The urgent issue today is to stop the drift toward hot war. Yes, Vladimir Putin’s annexation of Crimea trespasses on international law, though it is difficult to bear US officials’ invocation of a principle that Washington itself has often violated (see, most recently, Kosovo and Iraq, the latter now marking the eleventh anniversary of an illegal US invasion and occupation). Financial and visa sanctions, while inflicting a cost on Russia, will not deter Moscow. As Putin argued in his March 18 speech before the Russian Federal Assembly, Russia feels “cornered” and has been repeatedly “deceived” by the West—particularly Washington—since the Soviet Union broke apart more than two decades ago, especially in light of the expansion of NATO to its borders.

The only way out, the only possible return to stability and cooperation in East-West relations, is through diplomacy and negotiations. For this to happen, Washington and Moscow must recognize that the other side has legitimate grievances and interests. Certainly this must be acknowledged in Washington, where such admissions are hardly ever made.

Instead, Senator John McCain, his Democratic colleague Dick Durbin and an assemblage of politicians from both parties are recklessly stoking the flames of folly. They’ve demanded that the United States arm the new government in Kiev, with McCain calling for installation of missile-defense systems in Poland and the Czech Republic. Such bellicosity appeases the hawks at home but enrages the war party in Moscow, which is urging the Russian president to resist caving in to the West.

Amid hysterical talk from frustrated Cold Warriors like McCain, Helmut Kohl, the father of the reunified Germany, admitted that there have been “great omissions” in European Union policy toward Ukraine. He noted a “lack of sensitivity” in the EU’s relations with Putin and Russia, warning against a reckless call to arms.

In such a charged environment, it’s all the more important to pay close attention to diplomatic initiatives, even if they come from the Kremlin. While it may not be an ideal solution, there is merit in the Russian foreign ministry’s “road map” calling for establishing an international support group—with the EU, United States and Russia as members—to help Ukraine stabilize itself. Among other crucial points, the proposal calls for a Ukrainian national assembly to draft a constitution that would create a new federal system in which regions would have a reasonable degree of autonomy, confirm Russian as a second official language and, critically, uphold Ukraine’s military and political nonalignment—that is, maintain Ukraine’s geopolitical independence from Russia as well as the West, which will require an end to NATO expansion.

A settlement is possible if all countries’ security interests are taken into account. This would mean that Ukraine would hold elections with participation and guaranteed protection for ethnic Russians; would have a nonaligned government (stripped of neofascists); would pledge never to join NATO; and would develop economic relations with Russia and the EU (unavoidable if Ukraine is to survive economically).

It is a good sign that the Kiev government appears ready to heed common sense. Acting Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk, who visited the White House, said on March 18—in comments designed to reassure Russia and Ukraine’s large population of ethnic Russians—that the country will not seek NATO membership and that decentralization of state power is a key plank of the interim government’s platform.

There is also good reason to think Putin—who emphasized that Russia has no designs on other regions of Ukraine—is ready to negotiate. A successful outcome could include Moscow’s recognition of a legitimate Kiev government; demobilization of troops; resumption of gas discounts as well as favorable trade relations to prevent Ukraine’s economic collapse; and perhaps even establishing a special relationship between Crimea, now annexed by Russia, and Ukraine (though, of course, without affecting Russia’s naval base at Sevastopol).

Even more is at stake in this profound crisis. Washington needs Russia’s cooperation in addressing global and regional issues such as the Syrian civil war, now in its third year; negotiations with Iran; exiting Afghanistan; the fight against Al Qaeda and other terrorists; relations with China; and managing North Korea.

We cannot afford a new Cold War. This crisis must not be framed as a US-Russia showdown or as a question of American “weakness” or “fecklessness.” Resolution will demand leadership on both sides. Obama and Putin must transcend their respective war parties and hardliners at home—as Ronald Reagan did, from 1985 to 1988, when he met Mikhail Gorbachev halfway—and provide real leadership so that a broad, pluralistic and democratic center in Ukraine emerges that is committed to establishing a new constitutional order: one that is capable of reconciling the interests and concerns of all parts of that country.

 

[unregistered]

 

[trysail]

The Russian Federation hasn't done anything that qualifies as aggression (by standards of U.S. behavior in Grenada or Kosovo).


Attempts to isolate Russia are just as likely to backfire as they are to accomplish anything useful. The only thing the West has accomplished thus far in this imbroglio is to arouse Russian nationalism, thereby enhancing Putin's popularity.


Twenty years of Western encirclement and encroachment had the effect of making Russia feel cornered. The country has been humiliated by the last twenty years of Western triumphalism.


Ukraine is none of the West's business. Don't get sucked in by the attempts of meddlers to involve the West in the region's affairs.


In realpolitik only fools bluff when the cards are dealt face up. Everybody knows who holds the cards in this game.


​

 

[Beco]

Well to begin with if I was going to study foreign economic or political matters it would be South America or Asia, China in particular. They are far more important to the US than Europe.

However on a personal note.....Fuck European matters. Enough American blood was spilled over Europe in 2 World Wars.

So you're an isolationist?