An influential global body has forecast Russia’s economy will grow faster than all of the world’s advanced economies, including the US, this year.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) expects Russia to grow 3.2% this year, significantly more than the UK, France and Germany.

Oil exports have “held steady” and government spending has “remained high” contributing to growth, the IMF said.

Overall, it said the world economy had been “remarkably resilient”

“Despite many gloomy predictions, the world avoided a recession, the banking system proved largely resilient, and major emerging market economies did not suffer sudden stops,” the IMF said.

  • Buffalox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    63
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    7 months ago

    Russia is keeping the economy going by burning money on the war.
    Maybe 3.2% growth is a bit better than expected, but investments can’t be good with high National Bank interest rates, and AFAIK inflation is still hurting consumers in Russia. Consumer spending remains high, mostly because essentials is a high share of consumption.

    Just because Russia has decent economic growth on paper, doesn’t mean the economy is actually good or healthy if it’s based on deficits.

  • realitista
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Building things and then blowing them up increases your GDP but it provides negative benefit to your society. All of that labor is wasted just for products that are destroyed and cause destruction.

    And wage growth will be very robust if you force 1 million of your best workers to flee the country and then kill or cripple 300,000 more workers on top, and then create tons of jobs to build stuff that gets blown up instead of things people can actually use for something productive.

    Neither of these metrics tell the real story for a wartime economy. Subsidizing useless production that gets blown up has to take largely from state coffers, robbing from essential services for the population.

    And if you lose your revenue streams like oil because your refineries and pipelines keep getting blown up and you lose customers to sanctions, and you take workers from useful sustainable jobs with real benefit and move them to building things you blow up instead, eventually you will have to choose between any services for the population and funding the war.

    You don’t get tax revenue from state spending that you blow up. Take it far enough and you’ll just run out of money for the war and will have to enter hyperinflation to keep printing the money to fund it.

    These trends are under way in Russia, they spend 40% of their national budget on war already. They lost 20% of their refining capacity in the last couple months alone. It will take a while to reach a full disaster, but they can’t continue this way indefinitely. They will hit the wall at some point in the next decade.

    • Justas🇱🇹@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      A lot of unseen costs of this war will take decades to be seen.

      Reduced education spending? Less qualified workers to create added value.

      Reduced social services? More people getting sick and dying.

      Reduced infrastructure spending? Increased prices of transport and goods.

      • realitista
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Yes. Enshittification on a national scale.

    • Passerby6497@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 months ago

      It will take a while to reach a full disaster, but they can’t continue this way indefinitely. They will hit the wall at some point in the next decade.

      I’m curious to see if/how much those effects will be diminished by the war effort sabotage by the right will dampen the impact over the coming years

      • realitista
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 months ago

        It’s having a big impact right now. If they keep it going for another year, Ukraine will be in serious trouble.

    • reddit_sux@iusearchlinux.fyi
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      The question is not whether Russia will hit a wall, the question remains whether there will be a Ukraine before that happens. Russia just like big corporations is too big to fail.

      • realitista
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        It all depends on NATO. NATO countries have 20 times the GDP of russia and 5 times the population. If NATO stays in, Russia will lose. If they don’t, Ukraine will lose.

  • minibyte@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Kristalina Georgieva, Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund, born in Bulgaria. Bulgaria considered 16th Soviet Republic.

    Probably just a coincidence.

  • Granixo@feddit.cl
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    But how will Oil exports remain sustainable once most of the population uses EVs?

  • merthyr1831@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    Turns out the intl sanctions have just shifted Russia towards domestic industries and massive govt spending, invalidating half a century of propaganda against domestic spending and indigenous industry, oops!

    Yes, the war has its negative impacts hidden by this metric, but Russia did the objectively correct thing by not scrambling to replace lost intl trade. Compare with the UK that hasn’t made up for lost intl. trade since brexit and is still suffering for it.

    • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      Yep. When you spend your sovereign wealth fund on massive quantities of military hardware, your GDP goes up. The negative is that you quickly drain your sovereign wealth fund and you aren’t investing in the future of your country. This money could have gone to getting the last 20% of Russians indoor plumbing, but it instead went to refurbishing tanks to get blown up in Ukraine.

  • TransplantedSconie
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 months ago

    A flame that burns twice as bright

    Burns only half as long

    My eyes are growing weary as I finalize this song

    Sooooooooo

    Sit back, have a cup of Joe

    And watch those wheels go round

    Cause those damned blue collar tweekers are running this here town!

    🎵🎶

    Hyyyyuh

    🎵🎶

    Hyyyyuh

    🎵🎶🎵🎶🎵🎶🎵

    HYYYYYYUH!

  • Wanderer
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    7 months ago

    Maybe other governments should take note and have high government spending?

    I’m actually serious. Let’s remove low density from cities build high density housing and loads of public transport. Spend money to decrease costs to population, thereby further increasing growth with more disposable income.

    • bartolomeo@suppo.fi
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      Please no, not like that. Their government spending is only on things that go BOOM!

  • anticolonialist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    7 months ago

    While we are suffering with stagnant wages and inflation Russia China and Mexico were the only countries that had positive wage growth the last few years