Why do you think Dmitry Medvedev is not willing to participate in the media campaign debates?


Debater 29 January, 2008, 08:41	I fail to see the significance of debates in the absence of REAL ISSUES! Today, whether somebody likes it or not, there is a lack of credible opposition in Russian politics, probably because people are fed up with politics for the sake of politics and want PROGRESS WITH STABILITY. Putin's charisma, the recent increases in GDP and unwarranted hostility from the 'Wester' NEO-COLONISTS has made the people of RF see all those who advocate change W/O any real alternatives, with a suspicious eye. Therefore, it is probably the right decision on Medvedev's part not to debate and DEFEND all those wild accusations about rising prices, Conscription, Politskaya, human rights etc! permalink quote 0 Debater
cebele 29 January, 2008, 13:45	The December's election campain by the United Russia was a bit too aggressive - many supporters felt bitter about it. Maybe Medvedev just doesn't want us to feel embarrassed again. Besides, why waste money on campaigning if he's going to win anyway? permalink quote 0 cebele
MihalMihalich 29 January, 2008, 16:43	Dear Ladies & Gentlemen IMHO reason why Dmitry Medvedev is not willing to participate in the media campaign debates is the same reason why United Russia didn’t do it. It is a simple matter of strategy. If some debates may improve your chances you should participate, but if you know you are wining election why would anyone in right mind do debates, which could make things worse? What to debate, all those candidates will only debate on how to squander billions or trillions out of Stabilization Fund.you will see it soon when 1 guy says ill give 100 billion to people and other guy will say I will give 200billion! haha in your face. Dmitry Medvedev is very much like Vladimir Putin they work on the same projects, pursue same goals and think very much alike, so you KNOW WHAT TO EXPECT because a lot of Dmitry Medvedev future work & goals is written into 3 year budget, Presidential message…etc. Best Regards permalink quote 0 MihalMihalich
Sanjay 29 January, 2008, 16:54	The refusal to debate is shocking. Why would the presidential candidate not debate. The process of debate is a deeply institutionalized process in democratic countries. Such debates, particularly in Russia's case should focus on: 1. The acute demographic crises Russia is facing today. 2. Social issues such as education and particularly health care. 3. What is going on with the trillion dollars which have been stashed in anglo-american banks. What is being done with that money while the masses are poor. 4. Why are russian people not being made stakeholders through stock-market mechanisms in the nations natural resources companies particularly in the area of metals and energy. 5. How is Russia dealing with americans and british on the expansion of NATO and what is being done to stop this encirclement of Russia. 6. Why are such meager funds not even 1% of GDP being invested in the four national projects. 7. What mechanisms of accountability are being laid out in the disbursement and use of these funds. 8. Why is there such shortage of food. Why despite living on the largest land mass, russia is not able to produce and supply abundant food to its peoples. FOOD PROBLEM: What I really find shocking in Kudrin's policies is a remarkable degree of dishonesty and the equally frightening degree of stupidity in the kremlin and the Duma. Take for example the free market policies which are totally devoid of common sense. Without any export controls the food supply is obviously going to funnel out through export. This simple fact has been disregarded in the senseless pursuit of free-market neoliberalism. It is a pity that in a country of such natural abundance with a highly educated population such criminal mismanagement is prevalent. Even after four centuries even the most basic problem of food abundance has not been solved. In order to create food abundance the following steps borne from commonsense could be followed: 1. Encourage high-tech farming to increase yield. Give state incentives and subsidies to increase production. Focus on clear cut targets for increase in food production. 2. Enforce export controls so that food is not shipped out of the country while the citizens are living in famine like conditions or exhausting almost their entire income or pensions on food. 3. Plan a strategy for food distribution which ensures there is no hoarding and no mismanagement in food transport and supply to each and every region. 4. When necessary relax import controls so that there is sustained supply. 5. Refrain from asinine activities such as biofuels until food supply for eating purposes is abundant and clear institutionalized mechanism s have been worked out and their efficacy demonstrated over a period of at least a decade. permalink quote 0 Sanjay
Norman 29 January, 2008, 19:05	In one way debates are a good source to get political candidates to answer questions in one place, and to compare candidates and policies. In another way debates can be used in one candidate's favour. Last, directly refusing to take part in a debate creates questions. If we only knew his reasons. permalink quote 0 Norman
Sevodnya_Net 29 January, 2008, 19:20	Don't die of shock, but I agree with MihalMihalich on this. Of course I deplore the lack of a debate, but I am sure, broadly speaking, that the reasons are as MM states. It isn't unusual for candidates (notably also in Britain) to refuse televised debates for similar reasons, although they would not admit it. Entirely a matter of strategy. We may not like it (and I certainly don't) but like it or not I'm sure that's the reason. permalink quote 0 Sevodnya_Net
Sanjay 30 January, 2008, 01:19	More burning questions for Presidential Debate: 1. Why Russia's Income to GDP ratio is so low 0.4 versus 0.6 or higher for developed countries including US. 2. Why is the industrial production growth rate meager 7-8% on an average for last 6 years while the real inflation is 15-20% on average. 3. What is the state of technology and infrastructure compared to other advanced countries like US, Japan, Germany. 4. In US the Investment on Infrastructure is 16-17% of the total GDP while in Russia it is a chronically low 7-8% (even this figure is optimistic and many commentators think fraudulant). This does not even take into account that Russian infrastructure is in shambles. Investment in Infrastructure should be close to 20% of GDP, which means Russia is investing 1/3 of what is actually required. Sergei-Ivanov said 3 months ago that russia will invest 1 trillion dollars over next 10 years in infrastructure which is half of what is required. I am not sure with this pace of investment and with the rapidly declining population Russia will survive. Most likely it will break-up into smaller countries, an outcome of mismanagement of the century. The neoliberal cabal of Kudrin, Gref etc have largely succeeded in their aims of destroying what was left, medvedev will probably take russia back to the 90s to finish the job. The more I see it the more Russia is in terminal decline. Its a pity that Putin made such a bad choice for presidency and his team of advisors is nothing but a cabal of crooks, idiots and traitors. One only has to go through the works of Stiglitz, Sen, Desai, Menshikov and others to see how Russia is being destroyed. The failure of GLONASS, the chronic problems in agriculture, shortage of food supply, medicines, chronic dependence on imports, chronic dependence on energy and metals exports, stashing of trillions of dollars in foreign exchange in anglo-american banks, practically no investment in people and infrastructure, a dying populace, no industrial base, decaying infrastructure, skyrocketing electricity prices, rising inflation, these are the results of 8 years of neoliberal finance capitalism under Kudrin. Russian people are perhaps the most unlucky in the world. permalink quote 0 Sanjay
Drawbridge 30 January, 2008, 17:39	A pervious contributor - The failure of GLONASS, the chronic problems in agriculture, shortage of food supply, medicines, chronic dependence on imports, chronic dependence on energy and metals exports, stashing of trillions of dollars in foreign exchange in Anglo-American banks, practically no investment in people and infrastructure, a dying populace, no industrial base, decaying infrastructure, skyrocketing electricity prices, rising inflation, these are the results of 8 years of neo-liberal finance capitalism under Kudrin. Russian people are perhaps the most unlucky in the world. - This response - This is perhaps the most vicious of drivel served up in the annals of RT forums! Most certainly, RF faces problems - but which country doesn't? USA, China, India, Brazil others have their entire general as well as specific problems. Plus you've see from where RF has to where - from around the 22nd place in the world economy to now 5/6th.Probably by the year 2010/11 it'll be the biggest economy in Europe, at least (by GDP by PPP), and among the first 5.[ By nominal Dollar terms] it could take a few years more. However, the most important thing is that now the Russians have hope backed by 'the richest resources' in the whole wide world. Plus their innovative minds, educational standards and pride! It would be indeed surprising if with all these advantages, the Russian state or even an enlarged UNION will not take its pre-destined place in the world, among the top 3/4 or maybe even higher. It’s all a case of sticking to the basics and proper management. However, it’s the political scenario, that's actually alarming - what with the increasing pressures by NEO-Fascists and NEO-Colonists, Military Blocs, etc etc. A debate on how to effectively contain and counter these external threats, if anyone has proper/effective ideas, would indeed be VERY WELCOME. permalink quote 0 Drawbridge
MihalMihalich 30 January, 2008, 17:46	RE Sanjay Fair questions, which have been answered publicly many times over. What you cry about is noting in particular but about necessity of debate with Dmitry Medvedev because you can once again mention that country needs more, in your point of view, say not 1 but 2 trillion dollars. Read my first post it mentions people like you. So what are you saying? A debate with Dmitry Medvedev would make him do more if elected? Or you think there is better candidate? Because debate is about winning elections and not really about resolving issues. Dear Ladies & Gentlemen Currently there is almost no surplus in Russian Budget in future there will be 0 surplus because all money are & will be spent on needs. They don’t have another trillion you want, the only money left to waste is Stabilization fund, as I mentioned in my first post, that fund will be used to balance budget at ZERO as demand or price on energy resources drops in future or anything as a mean of “insurance”. If you take insurance away you can get screwed and not able to pay your bills, benefits, pensions etc. if “climate” changes. This matter is not for debate, because it was all debated for years publicly and now they just making effective state system. PS IMHO Kudrin is working for any government but Russian, but it is whole another story. Best Regards. permalink quote 0 MihalMihalich
Marzipan6 3 February, 2008, 03:01	Once again I find myself in broad agreement with Sanjay. permalink quote 0 Marzipan6
Regular_John 4 February, 2008, 12:30	As we know Mr. Medvedev has been overseeing Russia’s social reforms since 2006 and as sanjay has pointed out in his hard-hitting post these reforms have had little or no real impact the sums of money being proposed are just a drop in the ocean I mean 400 million dollars extra for schools is nothing in a country the size of Russia even releasing 30 or 40 billion from the stabilisation fund will help but with an inflation rate of between 12 and 13 percent this will be quickly swallowed up. Russia has sever infrastructural problems even Moscow the jewel in Russia’s investment crown still needs 50 billion dollars worth of foreign investment to complete its proposed building projects. And now that we all face a period of recession the money Russia needs may be a lot harder to find. Mr Medvedev as I have stated has not made any difference in social reforms many proposed schemes were cancelled due to lack of funds and there have been horrendous problems in even providing the raw materials needed. If I was a Russian citizen Mr. Medvedevs record would not fill me with much confidence especially during a period of recession. And as foreign investment may become harder to find his in-experience on an international level will not help Russia through the tuff patch ahead. permalink quote 0 Regular_John
-Little Jim 4 February, 2008, 13:02	"As somebody said, great voyages begin with small steps". Approx 10/12 years ago, RF was faced with a multitude of problems - Terrorism, rampant looting by Oligarhs,hostility from both within and without, mounting debts etc etc. Putin has stabilized the country, bought it in the forefro0nt of World Economy and as someone mentioned - what is going to the biggest in Europe and among the 5/6 biggest in the world in the next 2/3 years. It is already the biggest car mart, the largest retail sector and easily the fastest growing. The next evolutionary step will be the transformation from a raw material based economy to an innovation-based one. One whose brands are not only recognized but revered all over the world and not just the CIS, for their quality and reliability and not only their cheap prices. This takes time, effort and money - maybe a start can be made with Lada Motors - make it among the top 10 car manufacturers in the world, if not top 5. Unfreeze commodity prices within the country, unshackle production, heavily support agriculture, IT and demography. The results will come automatically, and within no time or little time, the world shall benefit in having a third/fourth driver in world economy apart from China, US, India , Brazil etc. Politics and Economics are two different debating pionts aren't they? permalink quote 0 -Little Jim
dan 5 February, 2008, 07:44	no doubt on advice or rather orders from putin.I dont think Medvedev has a mind of his own permalink quote 0 dan
Marzipan6 5 February, 2008, 08:50	I would never vote for a candidate who disrespects and patronises – or fears – his would-be constituents, myself included, enough to where he does not even deign to show his face in a debate in an election campaign. Such a candidate either considers the public to be something akin to mushrooms (ie, keep them in the dark, and feed them you-know-what), or he is scared of them and thinks that if he actually reveals his real self to them, they will reject him. Yet surprisingly enough, Russians apparently would, and will, vote for precisely such a candidate. In my view this is because Russians are not used to thinking of themselves as the masters of their country. They do not look at their government as being their servants, to rule on their behalf and in their interests, do not require their government officials to be answerable to them and are not in the habit of dismissing governments and officials who are incompetent, self-seeking or corrupt. Instead, Russians are habitually in love with some heroic myth. In tsarist times used to be “Holy Russia”, in Soviet times it was the messianic nonsense of Marxist gobbledegook, and in post-Soviet times it is Russian chauvinism, pure and simple, boosted by the fact that for once they have had a leader who is neither a murderer, a geriatric nor a drunkard, and therefore he must be perfect. n the name of various heroic myths, Russians have been quite prepared to abandon all responsibility for their own country and their own governance into the hands of the myth-spinners. They vote not for a realistic idea or for a practical program, nor even for a party – but for a fuzzy, emotionally-charged dream. And so it still is. All hail, Medvedev. Russians don’t care who you are or what you stand for. You’re not a murderer, not a geriatric, not a drunk, and you embrace the current myth – that’s all that counts. Russians don’t want to take responsibility for their own affairs or for their own country. You go ahead and do it for them. And if they eventually find out they don’t like where you’re taking them, no matter – there’ll be another “strong man” in the wings somewhere, ready to spin a new paternalistic mythology to head them off into different follies. permalink quote 0 Marzipan6
Sevodnya_Net 5 February, 2008, 10:16	I don't think the problem is just Putin. He doesn't run Russia on his own. It would be interesting to know what the Ivanovs, the Lavrovs and the other "siloviki" make of Medvedev's "appointment". They expended a lot of, shall we say hard effort, to get where they are today, and Mr Medvedev will have to tread very carefully not to upset them. Conspiracy theorists have Mr Medvedev meeting an unfortunate accident and being replaced should the need arise by Mr Putin (who I believe is able to stand again after a break), or at the very least being set up as expendable fall guy to be replaced, discredited, by one of the FSB "old boys" in due course. I honestly don't believe any of that, but the fact is United Russia is now starting to dominate life - not just political life - in Russia the way the old Soviet Communist party used to. permalink quote 0 Sevodnya_Net
Sanjay 5 February, 2008, 18:52	Draw Bridge Most of what you said are not based on facts and figures. What you are saying just some abstract predictions. If you read my post and can refute even a single fact or figure than we can talk further. Also, you are too focused on economy as a function of GDP. This is a very failing approach and very poor indicator indeed. What you failed to mention was that life expectency of males in Russia is an abominable 56 years, similar to many subsaharan countries. Women don't fare too well either. Human Development Index (HDI) which is a composite measure of prosperity, education and life expectency is a much more accurate indicator. Russia ranks a poor 65th in HDI which is really trajic and a direct effect of the neoliberal policies of Medvedev-Kudrin Nexus. Most of the GDP growth in Russia is a result of extremely imbalanced export oriented energy, metals and timber sector. Russia has not ivested in its people and its fixed-infrastructure. Schools, Hospitals, Transport Systems, housing. Russia a country of 140 million people where millions are dying from cancer and infectious diseases has only, here is the bombshell, only 70 machines for cancer radiotherapy whereas US has 3000. Why couldnt they buy a thousand machines from that stabilization fund to immediately address the equipment shortage for cancer patients in Russia is beoynd belief. The pharmaceutical sector in Russia is so underdeveloped that its astonishing how carelessly people talk about Russia as a trillion dollar economy. Forget about cutting edge Biotech, Russia does not even have a functional generic drugs market. Can you name even a single billion dollar pharmaceutical firm developing producing and distributing affordable generic drugs in Russia. Drugs for cardiovascular, diabetes, vaccines and medicines for infectious diseases. None. Its one of the worst human trajedies unfolding in any part of the world today except Subsaharan Africa. Why is Medvedev not willing to dicuss these problems? Why were the social projects not launched in 2001 instead of 2005. Why is so less money, less than 0.9% of GDP being invested in social projects (housing education, health, pensions etc). The problem of Inflation is not a monetary problem in Russia, it is a deep production deficit that is haemorrhaging the economy. Due to shoddy infrastructure and ill-concieved programs to boost small buisnesses and a deeply unjest tax system Russia continues to be in a depressed state forever. Medvedev-Kudrin nexus are deliberately accelerating the decay and death of RUssia through their policies. permalink quote 0 Sanjay
Sanjay 5 February, 2008, 19:47	Sevodnya My prediction is that most of these so called Siloviki will either be purged or will retire with their billions stashed in anglo-american banks. The ones who are purged will get nothing. The ones who retire will get billions. The ones who are still in power will eventually get mega-billions. The fourth group,the tiny monority, the patriots, will go down fighting like Stolypin, or if some miracle happens, they will triumph aginst the first three groups. But so far it looks like the short-term opportunists and long term opportunists will win and a section of the patriots will be purged. permalink quote 0 Sanjay
Draw Bridge 5 February, 2008, 20:41	Draw Bridge Most of what you said are not based on facts and figures. What you are saying just some abstract predictions. No it is not. See – The latest ‘CIA’ year Book! And check out the figures. Probably the figures are a bit understated for Russia (7th), but with latest figures by ROSSTAT, it’s almost certainly 6th! If you read my post and can refute even a single fact or figure than we can talk further. Also, you are too focused on economy as a function of GDP. This is a very failing approach and very poor indicator indeed. The GDP is the starting point in any policy. If you don’t have the money, no matter how well intentioned you are, no money, no implementation. PLAIN and SIMPLE. Drugs for cardiovascular, diabetes, vaccines and medicines for infectious diseases. None. Its one of the worst human tragedies unfolding in any part of the world today except Sub-Saharan Africa. Agree, the Russian Health care system is not up to the levels required or even desired. That’s the reason for the NATIONAL PROJECTS. Something better than nothing. Why is Medvedev not willing to discuss these problems? Who said that? But you think these will be discussed? No the opposition, if there is one, will discuss Politskaya, Human Rights etc etc. Why were the social projects not launched in 2001 instead of 2005? Why is so less money, less than 0.9% of GDP being invested in social projects (housing education, health, pensions etc)? – Please check out your figures and state sources. In any case, the US medical sector is abdominal, though that’s no excuse… The problem of Inflation is not a monetary problem in Russia; it is a deep production deficit that is hemorrhaging the economy. Due to shoddy infrastructure and ill-conceived programs to boost small businesses and a deeply unjust tax system Russia continues to be in a depressed state forever. – Please compare today with 1998 and you’ll get the idea. Medvedev-Kudrin nexus are deliberately accelerating the decay and death of Russia through their policies.- Maybe you can suggest someone BETTER? Sanjay, I’m not for one minute defending Medvedev’s refusal to debate NOR SUGGESTING that everything is hunky-Dory in RF. My contention is that, UNLIKE many other Emerging Economies, RF has had to face many challenges that are unique. Among them – The dependence on BLOOD-SUCKING neighbors for transit routes, an almost unworkable industrial base inherited from 70 years of “ Misguided” Socialism, the lethargy of the post0soviet era, bad decisions on part of many ‘west dependent’ advisors etc etc. What I’m saying is that, Russia today is a VASTLY UNDERPERFORMING COUNTRY considering its potential, and Putin has built a momentum, that is more or less Ok considering the internal and external pressures him and Russia faces. Unless and until there is viable opposition, laden with constructive insights and alternative solutions to these problems, a debate for a debate’s sake MAY NOT get any credible results, other than WILD accusations and denials. In any case, one who doesn’t engage – Does he loses or wins?? AND I’M TALKING IN GENERAL TERMS. permalink quote 0 Draw Bridge
Norman 26 February, 2008, 01:57	Simply put: Zyugannov is just romanticising the old failed policies of the USSR. Zhironovsky is still getting into fights. The other candidate is a 4% candidate. Mr. Medvedev is out there doing things and giving his vision of Russia's possible future! As much as I love debates, I question whether they would work in Russia's election. permalink quote 0 Norman
Alex 26 February, 2008, 06:40	Medvedev clearly fears being put in the same spotlight as Zyuganov and to a much lesser extent Bogdonov. Medvedev is seen as Putin's successor and therefore the right man for the job. The people think Putin is infallible and his support of Medvedev transfers their support for Putin to Medvedev. If Medvedev is seen as an equal to Zyuganov in a debate then his arguments will fail. The Putin government has no real plan for Russia and are just sitting on oil revenue. A debate on policy between Medvedev and Zyuganov would be disastrous for Medvedev. permalink quote 0 Alex

Debater 29 January, 2008, 08:41

I fail to see the significance of debates in the absence of REAL ISSUES! Today, whether somebody likes it or not, there is a lack of credible opposition in Russian politics, probably because people are fed up with politics for the sake of politics and want PROGRESS WITH STABILITY. Putin's charisma, the recent increases in GDP and unwarranted hostility from the 'Wester' NEO-COLONISTS has made the people of RF see all those who advocate change W/O any real alternatives, with a suspicious eye. Therefore, it is probably the right decision on Medvedev's part not to debate and DEFEND all those wild accusations about rising prices, Conscription, Politskaya, human rights etc!

permalink quote Debater

cebele 29 January, 2008, 13:45

The December's election campain by the United Russia was a bit too aggressive - many supporters felt bitter about it. Maybe Medvedev just doesn't want us to feel embarrassed again. Besides, why waste money on campaigning if he's going to win anyway?

permalink quote cebele

MihalMihalich 29 January, 2008, 16:43

Dear Ladies & Gentlemen IMHO reason why Dmitry Medvedev is not willing to participate in the media campaign debates is the same reason why United Russia didn’t do it. It is a simple matter of strategy. If some debates may improve your chances you should participate, but if you know you are wining election why would anyone in right mind do debates, which could make things worse? What to debate, all those candidates will only debate on how to squander billions or trillions out of Stabilization Fund.you will see it soon when 1 guy says ill give 100 billion to people and other guy will say I will give 200billion! haha in your face. Dmitry Medvedev is very much like Vladimir Putin they work on the same projects, pursue same goals and think very much alike, so you KNOW WHAT TO EXPECT because a lot of Dmitry Medvedev future work & goals is written into 3 year budget, Presidential message…etc. Best Regards

permalink quote MihalMihalich

Sanjay 29 January, 2008, 16:54

The refusal to debate is shocking. Why would the presidential candidate not debate. The process of debate is a deeply institutionalized process in democratic countries. Such debates, particularly in Russia's case should focus on: 1. The acute demographic crises Russia is facing today. 2. Social issues such as education and particularly health care. 3. What is going on with the trillion dollars which have been stashed in anglo-american banks. What is being done with that money while the masses are poor. 4. Why are russian people not being made stakeholders through stock-market mechanisms in the nations natural resources companies particularly in the area of metals and energy. 5. How is Russia dealing with americans and british on the expansion of NATO and what is being done to stop this encirclement of Russia. 6. Why are such meager funds not even 1% of GDP being invested in the four national projects. 7. What mechanisms of accountability are being laid out in the disbursement and use of these funds. 8. Why is there such shortage of food. Why despite living on the largest land mass, russia is not able to produce and supply abundant food to its peoples. FOOD PROBLEM: What I really find shocking in Kudrin's policies is a remarkable degree of dishonesty and the equally frightening degree of stupidity in the kremlin and the Duma. Take for example the free market policies which are totally devoid of common sense. Without any export controls the food supply is obviously going to funnel out through export. This simple fact has been disregarded in the senseless pursuit of free-market neoliberalism. It is a pity that in a country of such natural abundance with a highly educated population such criminal mismanagement is prevalent. Even after four centuries even the most basic problem of food abundance has not been solved. In order to create food abundance the following steps borne from commonsense could be followed: 1. Encourage high-tech farming to increase yield. Give state incentives and subsidies to increase production. Focus on clear cut targets for increase in food production. 2. Enforce export controls so that food is not shipped out of the country while the citizens are living in famine like conditions or exhausting almost their entire income or pensions on food. 3. Plan a strategy for food distribution which ensures there is no hoarding and no mismanagement in food transport and supply to each and every region. 4. When necessary relax import controls so that there is sustained supply. 5. Refrain from asinine activities such as biofuels until food supply for eating purposes is abundant and clear institutionalized mechanism s have been worked out and their efficacy demonstrated over a period of at least a decade.

permalink quote Sanjay

Norman 29 January, 2008, 19:05

In one way debates are a good source to get political candidates to answer questions in one place, and to compare candidates and policies. In another way debates can be used in one candidate's favour. Last, directly refusing to take part in a debate creates questions. If we only knew his reasons.

permalink quote Norman

Sevodnya_Net 29 January, 2008, 19:20

Don't die of shock, but I agree with MihalMihalich on this. Of course I deplore the lack of a debate, but I am sure, broadly speaking, that the reasons are as MM states. It isn't unusual for candidates (notably also in Britain) to refuse televised debates for similar reasons, although they would not admit it. Entirely a matter of strategy. We may not like it (and I certainly don't) but like it or not I'm sure that's the reason.

permalink quote Sevodnya_Net

Sanjay 30 January, 2008, 01:19

More burning questions for Presidential Debate: 1. Why Russia's Income to GDP ratio is so low 0.4 versus 0.6 or higher for developed countries including US. 2. Why is the industrial production growth rate meager 7-8% on an average for last 6 years while the real inflation is 15-20% on average. 3. What is the state of technology and infrastructure compared to other advanced countries like US, Japan, Germany. 4. In US the Investment on Infrastructure is 16-17% of the total GDP while in Russia it is a chronically low 7-8% (even this figure is optimistic and many commentators think fraudulant). This does not even take into account that Russian infrastructure is in shambles. Investment in Infrastructure should be close to 20% of GDP, which means Russia is investing 1/3 of what is actually required. Sergei-Ivanov said 3 months ago that russia will invest 1 trillion dollars over next 10 years in infrastructure which is half of what is required. I am not sure with this pace of investment and with the rapidly declining population Russia will survive. Most likely it will break-up into smaller countries, an outcome of mismanagement of the century. The neoliberal cabal of Kudrin, Gref etc have largely succeeded in their aims of destroying what was left, medvedev will probably take russia back to the 90s to finish the job. The more I see it the more Russia is in terminal decline. Its a pity that Putin made such a bad choice for presidency and his team of advisors is nothing but a cabal of crooks, idiots and traitors. One only has to go through the works of Stiglitz, Sen, Desai, Menshikov and others to see how Russia is being destroyed. The failure of GLONASS, the chronic problems in agriculture, shortage of food supply, medicines, chronic dependence on imports, chronic dependence on energy and metals exports, stashing of trillions of dollars in foreign exchange in anglo-american banks, practically no investment in people and infrastructure, a dying populace, no industrial base, decaying infrastructure, skyrocketing electricity prices, rising inflation, these are the results of 8 years of neoliberal finance capitalism under Kudrin. Russian people are perhaps the most unlucky in the world.

permalink quote Sanjay

Drawbridge 30 January, 2008, 17:39

A pervious contributor - The failure of GLONASS, the chronic problems in agriculture, shortage of food supply, medicines, chronic dependence on imports, chronic dependence on energy and metals exports, stashing of trillions of dollars in foreign exchange in Anglo-American banks, practically no investment in people and infrastructure, a dying populace, no industrial base, decaying infrastructure, skyrocketing electricity prices, rising inflation, these are the results of 8 years of neo-liberal finance capitalism under Kudrin. Russian people are perhaps the most unlucky in the world. - This response - This is perhaps the most vicious of drivel served up in the annals of RT forums! Most certainly, RF faces problems - but which country doesn't? USA, China, India, Brazil others have their entire general as well as specific problems. Plus you've see from where RF has to where - from around the 22nd place in the world economy to now 5/6th.Probably by the year 2010/11 it'll be the biggest economy in Europe, at least (by GDP by PPP), and among the first 5.[ By nominal Dollar terms] it could take a few years more. However, the most important thing is that now the Russians have hope backed by 'the richest resources' in the whole wide world. Plus their innovative minds, educational standards and pride! It would be indeed surprising if with all these advantages, the Russian state or even an enlarged UNION will not take its pre-destined place in the world, among the top 3/4 or maybe even higher. It’s all a case of sticking to the basics and proper management. However, it’s the political scenario, that's actually alarming - what with the increasing pressures by NEO-Fascists and NEO-Colonists, Military Blocs, etc etc. A debate on how to effectively contain and counter these external threats, if anyone has proper/effective ideas, would indeed be VERY WELCOME.

permalink quote Drawbridge

MihalMihalich 30 January, 2008, 17:46

RE Sanjay Fair questions, which have been answered publicly many times over. What you cry about is noting in particular but about necessity of debate with Dmitry Medvedev because you can once again mention that country needs more, in your point of view, say not 1 but 2 trillion dollars. Read my first post it mentions people like you. So what are you saying? A debate with Dmitry Medvedev would make him do more if elected? Or you think there is better candidate? Because debate is about winning elections and not really about resolving issues. Dear Ladies & Gentlemen Currently there is almost no surplus in Russian Budget in future there will be 0 surplus because all money are & will be spent on needs. They don’t have another trillion you want, the only money left to waste is Stabilization fund, as I mentioned in my first post, that fund will be used to balance budget at ZERO as demand or price on energy resources drops in future or anything as a mean of “insurance”. If you take insurance away you can get screwed and not able to pay your bills, benefits, pensions etc. if “climate” changes. This matter is not for debate, because it was all debated for years publicly and now they just making effective state system. PS IMHO Kudrin is working for any government but Russian, but it is whole another story. Best Regards.

permalink quote MihalMihalich

Marzipan6 3 February, 2008, 03:01

Once again I find myself in broad agreement with Sanjay.

permalink quote Marzipan6

Regular_John 4 February, 2008, 12:30

As we know Mr. Medvedev has been overseeing Russia’s social reforms since 2006 and as sanjay has pointed out in his hard-hitting post these reforms have had little or no real impact the sums of money being proposed are just a drop in the ocean I mean 400 million dollars extra for schools is nothing in a country the size of Russia even releasing 30 or 40 billion from the stabilisation fund will help but with an inflation rate of between 12 and 13 percent this will be quickly swallowed up. Russia has sever infrastructural problems even Moscow the jewel in Russia’s investment crown still needs 50 billion dollars worth of foreign investment to complete its proposed building projects. And now that we all face a period of recession the money Russia needs may be a lot harder to find. Mr Medvedev as I have stated has not made any difference in social reforms many proposed schemes were cancelled due to lack of funds and there have been horrendous problems in even providing the raw materials needed. If I was a Russian citizen Mr. Medvedevs record would not fill me with much confidence especially during a period of recession. And as foreign investment may become harder to find his in-experience on an international level will not help Russia through the tuff patch ahead.

permalink quote Regular_John

-Little Jim 4 February, 2008, 13:02

"As somebody said, great voyages begin with small steps". Approx 10/12 years ago, RF was faced with a multitude of problems - Terrorism, rampant looting by Oligarhs,hostility from both within and without, mounting debts etc etc. Putin has stabilized the country, bought it in the forefro0nt of World Economy and as someone mentioned - what is going to the biggest in Europe and among the 5/6 biggest in the world in the next 2/3 years. It is already the biggest car mart, the largest retail sector and easily the fastest growing. The next evolutionary step will be the transformation from a raw material based economy to an innovation-based one. One whose brands are not only recognized but revered all over the world and not just the CIS, for their quality and reliability and not only their cheap prices. This takes time, effort and money - maybe a start can be made with Lada Motors - make it among the top 10 car manufacturers in the world, if not top 5. Unfreeze commodity prices within the country, unshackle production, heavily support agriculture, IT and demography. The results will come automatically, and within no time or little time, the world shall benefit in having a third/fourth driver in world economy apart from China, US, India , Brazil etc. Politics and Economics are two different debating pionts aren't they?

permalink quote -Little Jim

dan 5 February, 2008, 07:44

no doubt on advice or rather orders from putin.I dont think Medvedev has a mind of his own

permalink quote dan

Marzipan6 5 February, 2008, 08:50

I would never vote for a candidate who disrespects and patronises – or fears – his would-be constituents, myself included, enough to where he does not even deign to show his face in a debate in an election campaign. Such a candidate either considers the public to be something akin to mushrooms (ie, keep them in the dark, and feed them you-know-what), or he is scared of them and thinks that if he actually reveals his real self to them, they will reject him. Yet surprisingly enough, Russians apparently would, and will, vote for precisely such a candidate. In my view this is because Russians are not used to thinking of themselves as the masters of their country. They do not look at their government as being their servants, to rule on their behalf and in their interests, do not require their government officials to be answerable to them and are not in the habit of dismissing governments and officials who are incompetent, self-seeking or corrupt. Instead, Russians are habitually in love with some heroic myth. In tsarist times used to be “Holy Russia”, in Soviet times it was the messianic nonsense of Marxist gobbledegook, and in post-Soviet times it is Russian chauvinism, pure and simple, boosted by the fact that for once they have had a leader who is neither a murderer, a geriatric nor a drunkard, and therefore he must be perfect. n the name of various heroic myths, Russians have been quite prepared to abandon all responsibility for their own country and their own governance into the hands of the myth-spinners. They vote not for a realistic idea or for a practical program, nor even for a party – but for a fuzzy, emotionally-charged dream. And so it still is. All hail, Medvedev. Russians don’t care who you are or what you stand for. You’re not a murderer, not a geriatric, not a drunk, and you embrace the current myth – that’s all that counts. Russians don’t want to take responsibility for their own affairs or for their own country. You go ahead and do it for them. And if they eventually find out they don’t like where you’re taking them, no matter – there’ll be another “strong man” in the wings somewhere, ready to spin a new paternalistic mythology to head them off into different follies.

permalink quote Marzipan6

Sevodnya_Net 5 February, 2008, 10:16

I don't think the problem is just Putin. He doesn't run Russia on his own. It would be interesting to know what the Ivanovs, the Lavrovs and the other "siloviki" make of Medvedev's "appointment". They expended a lot of, shall we say hard effort, to get where they are today, and Mr Medvedev will have to tread very carefully not to upset them. Conspiracy theorists have Mr Medvedev meeting an unfortunate accident and being replaced should the need arise by Mr Putin (who I believe is able to stand again after a break), or at the very least being set up as expendable fall guy to be replaced, discredited, by one of the FSB "old boys" in due course. I honestly don't believe any of that, but the fact is United Russia is now starting to dominate life - not just political life - in Russia the way the old Soviet Communist party used to.

permalink quote Sevodnya_Net

Sanjay 5 February, 2008, 18:52

Draw Bridge Most of what you said are not based on facts and figures. What you are saying just some abstract predictions. If you read my post and can refute even a single fact or figure than we can talk further. Also, you are too focused on economy as a function of GDP. This is a very failing approach and very poor indicator indeed. What you failed to mention was that life expectency of males in Russia is an abominable 56 years, similar to many subsaharan countries. Women don't fare too well either. Human Development Index (HDI) which is a composite measure of prosperity, education and life expectency is a much more accurate indicator. Russia ranks a poor 65th in HDI which is really trajic and a direct effect of the neoliberal policies of Medvedev-Kudrin Nexus. Most of the GDP growth in Russia is a result of extremely imbalanced export oriented energy, metals and timber sector. Russia has not ivested in its people and its fixed-infrastructure. Schools, Hospitals, Transport Systems, housing. Russia a country of 140 million people where millions are dying from cancer and infectious diseases has only, here is the bombshell, only 70 machines for cancer radiotherapy whereas US has 3000. Why couldnt they buy a thousand machines from that stabilization fund to immediately address the equipment shortage for cancer patients in Russia is beoynd belief. The pharmaceutical sector in Russia is so underdeveloped that its astonishing how carelessly people talk about Russia as a trillion dollar economy. Forget about cutting edge Biotech, Russia does not even have a functional generic drugs market. Can you name even a single billion dollar pharmaceutical firm developing producing and distributing affordable generic drugs in Russia. Drugs for cardiovascular, diabetes, vaccines and medicines for infectious diseases. None. Its one of the worst human trajedies unfolding in any part of the world today except Subsaharan Africa. Why is Medvedev not willing to dicuss these problems? Why were the social projects not launched in 2001 instead of 2005. Why is so less money, less than 0.9% of GDP being invested in social projects (housing education, health, pensions etc). The problem of Inflation is not a monetary problem in Russia, it is a deep production deficit that is haemorrhaging the economy. Due to shoddy infrastructure and ill-concieved programs to boost small buisnesses and a deeply unjest tax system Russia continues to be in a depressed state forever. Medvedev-Kudrin nexus are deliberately accelerating the decay and death of RUssia through their policies.

permalink quote Sanjay

Sanjay 5 February, 2008, 19:47

Sevodnya My prediction is that most of these so called Siloviki will either be purged or will retire with their billions stashed in anglo-american banks. The ones who are purged will get nothing. The ones who retire will get billions. The ones who are still in power will eventually get mega-billions. The fourth group,the tiny monority, the patriots, will go down fighting like Stolypin, or if some miracle happens, they will triumph aginst the first three groups. But so far it looks like the short-term opportunists and long term opportunists will win and a section of the patriots will be purged.

permalink quote Sanjay

Draw Bridge 5 February, 2008, 20:41

Draw Bridge Most of what you said are not based on facts and figures. What you are saying just some abstract predictions. No it is not. See – The latest ‘CIA’ year Book! And check out the figures. Probably the figures are a bit understated for Russia (7th), but with latest figures by ROSSTAT, it’s almost certainly 6th! If you read my post and can refute even a single fact or figure than we can talk further. Also, you are too focused on economy as a function of GDP. This is a very failing approach and very poor indicator indeed. The GDP is the starting point in any policy. If you don’t have the money, no matter how well intentioned you are, no money, no implementation. PLAIN and SIMPLE. Drugs for cardiovascular, diabetes, vaccines and medicines for infectious diseases. None. Its one of the worst human tragedies unfolding in any part of the world today except Sub-Saharan Africa. Agree, the Russian Health care system is not up to the levels required or even desired. That’s the reason for the NATIONAL PROJECTS. Something better than nothing. Why is Medvedev not willing to discuss these problems? Who said that? But you think these will be discussed? No the opposition, if there is one, will discuss Politskaya, Human Rights etc etc. Why were the social projects not launched in 2001 instead of 2005? Why is so less money, less than 0.9% of GDP being invested in social projects (housing education, health, pensions etc)? – Please check out your figures and state sources. In any case, the US medical sector is abdominal, though that’s no excuse… The problem of Inflation is not a monetary problem in Russia; it is a deep production deficit that is hemorrhaging the economy. Due to shoddy infrastructure and ill-conceived programs to boost small businesses and a deeply unjust tax system Russia continues to be in a depressed state forever. – Please compare today with 1998 and you’ll get the idea. Medvedev-Kudrin nexus are deliberately accelerating the decay and death of Russia through their policies.- Maybe you can suggest someone BETTER? Sanjay, I’m not for one minute defending Medvedev’s refusal to debate NOR SUGGESTING that everything is hunky-Dory in RF. My contention is that, UNLIKE many other Emerging Economies, RF has had to face many challenges that are unique. Among them – The dependence on BLOOD-SUCKING neighbors for transit routes, an almost unworkable industrial base inherited from 70 years of “ Misguided” Socialism, the lethargy of the post0soviet era, bad decisions on part of many ‘west dependent’ advisors etc etc. What I’m saying is that, Russia today is a VASTLY UNDERPERFORMING COUNTRY considering its potential, and Putin has built a momentum, that is more or less Ok considering the internal and external pressures him and Russia faces. Unless and until there is viable opposition, laden with constructive insights and alternative solutions to these problems, a debate for a debate’s sake MAY NOT get any credible results, other than WILD accusations and denials. In any case, one who doesn’t engage – Does he loses or wins?? AND I’M TALKING IN GENERAL TERMS.

permalink quote Draw Bridge

Norman 26 February, 2008, 01:57

Simply put: Zyugannov is just romanticising the old failed policies of the USSR. Zhironovsky is still getting into fights. The other candidate is a 4% candidate. Mr. Medvedev is out there doing things and giving his vision of Russia's possible future! As much as I love debates, I question whether they would work in Russia's election.

permalink quote Norman

Alex 26 February, 2008, 06:40

Medvedev clearly fears being put in the same spotlight as Zyuganov and to a much lesser extent Bogdonov. Medvedev is seen as Putin's successor and therefore the right man for the job. The people think Putin is infallible and his support of Medvedev transfers their support for Putin to Medvedev. If Medvedev is seen as an equal to Zyuganov in a debate then his arguments will fail. The Putin government has no real plan for Russia and are just sitting on oil revenue. A debate on policy between Medvedev and Zyuganov would be disastrous for Medvedev.

permalink quote Alex

Name*
Country, City
Valid e-mail*
Text*
Enter digits below*

	*Required fields