About those sanctions...

Are Markets "Punishing" Russia? ... Or All Emerging Markets?


Good day, ATS.

I saw this article on zerohedge on the weekend, but didn't have the time to post about it.
I thought maybe someone else would have postet it by now, but a search didn't show anything on ATS yet.

I'm also not sure what to make of it yet, but it looks like either the sanctions hit the West more than Russia (judging by the money in-/outflow charts), OR the outflows started even before the sanctions even started, and are much more serious for the rest of the emerging markets.



Add western Bank-exposure to the mix, and the sanctions make even less sense:


(Data straight from the monsters mouth)

Link:
Are Markets "Punishing" Russia? ... Or All Emerging Markets?(zerohedge.com)

Makes you wonder... are the Obama-administration (and their allies in this matter) just too stupid to see the consequences of this, or is something else at play here, and the "sanctions" are just a smokescreen?
Also, if sanctions prove to stay ineffective... what's next?

What say you, ATS?

a reply to: ColCurious

Well, from that data, it would appear that they only people being hurt are not Russian.

Unfortunately this is not enough data to verify the sanctions impact.

The russians .. along with many in asia have been quietly pulling their money out of western investments and banks over the past eight years that am aware of .. alot also dropping or not accepting western currencies either .. havent accepted any western currency the past five years myself and wont accept it .. as even though dont charge on the rare occasions I work these days leave it up to the individual to pay what they think is fair..

The west can sanction all it wants .. truth is it wont hurt russia or asia all that much ..

a reply to: andr3w68

Well, from that data, it would appear that they only people being hurt are not Russian.

Yep. Probably because the US is isolated by the moats of the Atlantic and Pacific as much as we are isolated from the real world "over there".

Europe (the EU) are economically intertwined with Russia and dependent on that continuing relationship for their very survival. The US may want to punish Russia and hope the Eu jumps on board but really?

They may be surprised if "NATO" nations abandon them completely and jump on board with Russia entirely. The alternative is more austere measures and their financial and economical doom.

Who you going to move in with? The neighbor thats about to be foreclosed on or the one down the street that pays their debts?

I don't get this business of sanctions because with corporations being multinational it can't be easy to actually sanction a large country like Russia. She also relies on China and the Far East for trade and we depend on Russia for energy so none of the current position makes sense.

With absolutely no disrespect meant to the American people personally I think it barmy that the Eu and UK don;t trade more with Russia simply because of its proximity. We have always trade throughout the world so suddenly to think of Russia as not part of that world and being told not to trade there makes precious little sense.

I noticed that when one buys arfticles with various components these come from all round the world, so who is actually in a position to pick something apart and isolate the Russian component or her allie's components, trade is too integrated today to be able to sanction much surely?

Thanks to all of you who contributed to this thread.

It saddens and frightens me that so few people care for economic topics - even here on ATS.
I don't care for stars and flags, but if they can be considered to be representative for interest and background knowledge about economic interrelationships - then MANY people are in for a very shocking awakening to a very grim reality. Very soon.

There is a religious thread about the theory of evolution on ATS that had more stars and flags than this one...

a reply to: ColCurious

You think people not caring about the economy is bad, people care even less for history. History is one of the best things to study to get an idea of where present events are going to take us in the future. Economists call this studying trends. It saddens me to see such a lack of concern for the events in our past, then it makes people look ridiculous when they get all surprised when something happens that could have easily been determined by just studying the past.

For instance, I could tell you that the period from 2008 onwards mirrors the time from 1930 to the start of WWII. I could also tell you that economics works on periods of about 7-8 or so years of growth before recessions kick in. It's been 6 years since the 2008 crash. But no one seems to care about these things. We have to study the here and now and that is it. Pure idiocy.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

Very true and exactly my point.

There is ignorance about alot of things in the world, but ignorance about history and economics come for a VERY high price nad EVERYONE will have to pay.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I've found this illustration of Kondratieff long-wave cycles to be very useful, as it combines the economic with historic.

Kondratieff K-Wave Chart

According to the theory, and the timeline suggested in the chart, we are currently somewhere between just past half and two thirds the way through the Winter cycle, with each 'season lasting between 15-18 years

a reply to: timski

Good post.

I heard about Nikolai Kondratjew's theory before (I think in applied economics).
Personally, I don't believe in "natural" causality in an "unnatural" (or rigged) global financial system.
(Aside from impulses via technological innovations perhaps)

But thanks for the reminder!