Oh dear, I thought you were at least smart enough to gather the economy isn’t personal finances.
Have you tried mailing your thought provoking posts to Putin? Maybe it will change the reality I described. Maybe he never considered it’s not very nice and he should simply leave, and actually you can win anytime.
Have a nice Sunday night seething at the internet in your mansion, be sure to get your butler to telegram Putin before bed
Yeah and public spending is just like personal finances, don’t you agree?
Wow, not even a crumb of cope? What about the jets? Potential gamechanger I think.
Eager to see what coping everyone switches to when it becomes obvious to Ukraine that the deal Russia offered in 2022 before the Kiev withdrawal was the best possible reality they would ever see again. Little Weimar on the Dnieper. No NATO, no EU, no Donbass, no Crimea.
Then again the epic bacon sirs will probably be given a new shiny thing in Asia or Africa to focus on.
Although there is quite a gap between saying metals are dual use, and playing coy about specific chemicals that are most useful as precursors for advanced chemical weapons being dual use
But, this is about as international as sanctions get.
Not true, North Korea is sanctioned by everyone via the UNSC with more specific sanctions from other countries and bodies like the EU.
And the word “international” doesn’t imply global, planetary or a majority.
Right, when they say the international sanctions by the international community they’re definitely not trying to imply anything. I wonder in that case what they mean when they mention the rules based international order.
A large majority of the world engaging in sanctions and not the usual suspects regularly framed in the press as the “international community.” It’s framed that way to imply that the entire world is doing it besides a few “rogue states” like China, North Korea or Venezuela, as if they were handed down by the UN or the world is united in agreement with the western sanctions regime. What would be far more accurate than “international sanctions” would be “western sanctions.”
For a more immediate example of how framing effects perception, look at all the people in this thread upset about China giving Russia weapons. No weapons are listed, just drones, helicopters, and metals. Upon opening the article you’ll see the drones arrived before the war and are presumably consumer electronics, and there are six undefined types of helicopters. Some posters even mentioned attack helicopters, as if the Telegraph would not be screaming about attack helicopters and not helicopters if that was the case.
It’s a complete nothingburger and like all nothingburgers it plays with language to let you fill in the gaps using the context they have provided. Russia is being “armed” with some consumer drones, six personal helicopters, and metal, and the whole world is in uproar about it.
It’s the informal group known as the International Community.
Dual-use goods
Such goods are classified as dual-use, meaning they also have civilian purposes, allowing China to skirt international sanctions and claim that it conducts only legal trade with Russia
The “international sanctions” btw:
You can’t just unilaterally decree someone can’t be traded dual use goods
False dichotomy☝️🤓
8 minutes ago
7 updoots
Are you even trying lmao
Should be fine tbh, China actually had a bit of shrinking of consumer spending recently so this is well timed.
You know exactly what someone means when they say the US did a coup, stop playing dumb.
The last coup was Bolivia in 2019, unless we’re doing the old it’s not true because it hasn’t been declassified yet shtick
But there’s no law that governs what a ceo can or can’t do with regard to profit or success, as long as they can show they were acting in the best interest of the company.
This may be technically true but it doesn’t play out like that and can’t due to structural reasons. The situation arose from Henry Ford paying his workers substantially above what was deemed necessary because he wanted the workers to become consumers, preferably Ford consumers, and the shareholders instead wanted the extra bit in those pay packets to go to them instead. The shareholders took Ford to court and won. Now shareholders for the most part aren’t even people or small groups who can be persuaded by things like growing a healthy consumer base in the economy, they’re various large funds trying to simply maximize the amount of money they generate independent of any thought about overall economic health.
I think you can jailbreak lots of them, although I’ve never tried
The up-votes are also mapped to favourites in Mastodon
Explains why this obvious issue is not brought up by Mastodon lol
lmao, still seething? Let that virgin rage out