Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Ace_of_Spades wrote:Sebster - That would be Russians increased their military budget with an additional 25% of the GDP.

Okay, I wondered if that’s what you’d meant but wasn’t certain because that’s such a massive claim. To put it in perspective, the US spends around 4% of GDP on its military. China spends about 5%, and Russians spend around 5% again, based on things I read on the subject around 2000 or 2001.

Spending on the scale of 25% or thereabout is reserved for basket cases like Angola and N Korea. Russia is not a happy place, but it isn’t broken nation like N Korea.

At the height of the cold war spending wasn’t any greater than this, just dedicated more towards immediate readiness, while now there’s more committed to research and development projects.

Deadshane1: Even government jobs aren't completely safe. Mayor Daley has made
a bunch of city workers take furlough days in order to whether to storm. Basically they
take three to four unpaid days off to save money. On top of that, if you wanted a promotion
that wasn't just an incremental step you might find governments "freezing" the hiring
of those positions. Or just cutting them from the payrolls altogether.

As a union teacher, I'm relatively safe, but there are plenty of people around me who
are not, and I do worry for them. Pension is a long way away for me, too, but if the
government and markets go completely bust now, then how will they continue to fund
them in the future?

That's why I'm voting for Jack the Giant Killer in 08'.

Stealing Wealth from Giants since the beginning of Fairy Tales.

Again however....

Cops are going to be amongst the LAST of those government/city workers to be cut back on....

....so I'm not too worried.

sebster wrote:

Ace_of_Spades wrote:Sebster - That would be Russians increased their military budget with an additional 25% of the GDP.

Okay, I wondered if that’s what you’d meant but wasn’t certain because that’s such a massive claim. To put it in perspective, the US spends around 4% of GDP on its military. China spends about 5%, and Russians spend around 5% again, based on things I read on the subject around 2000 or 2001.

Spending on the scale of 25% or thereabout is reserved for basket cases like Angola and N Korea. Russia is not a happy place, but it isn’t broken nation like N Korea.

At the height of the cold war spending wasn’t any greater than this, just dedicated more towards immediate readiness, while now there’s more committed to research and development projects.

They plan to increase their gross military expenditure by 25.7% in 2009.

Deadshane1 wrote:Again however....

Cops are going to be amongst the LAST of those government/city workers to be cut back on....

....so I'm not too worried.

True enough.

But as unemployment and foreclosures and all that good stuff goes up, I imagine your
job will get more difficult :(

dogma wrote:They plan to increase their gross military expenditure by 25.7% in 2009.

Ah, thankyou. That statement makes sense.

Deadshane1 wrote:Again however....

Cops are going to be amongst the LAST of those government/city workers to be cut back on....

....so I'm not too worried.

Sure, but they won’t be hiring as many cops, so natural attrition may see a drop in overall numbers. Numbers most likely won’t grow to meet the expanding needs of the city. Also, training and equipment budgets will get slashed. That means each guy out on the street will be needed to cover more turf, with crappier gear and less training.

But in general, yeah, a recession isn’t automatically bad for everyone. Similarly a boom isn’t automatically good for everyone (as some sectors won’t benefit from rising wages, but will still feel the full brunt of rising costs). In general, in recession you’re generally do okay if you’re in stable employment, and your major financial consideration is your house and it’s mortgage (especially if you don’t plan on selling for 5+ years). On the other hand, in a recession you’re probably in a bit of trouble if you’re in a field that’s vulnerable to economic swings (venture capital, geologists) or are employed on a fixed term or casual basis. You’re also in trouble if you’ve extended yourself financially, leveraging a share portfolio or similar, but then, you did take the risk.

Course, with things tending to work out like they do, the people in risky industries, with short term contracts, and with risky investment portfolios are exactly the people who benefit the most from a rapidly growing economy.

sebster wrote:

Ace_of_Spades wrote:Sebster - That would be Russians increased their military budget with an additional 25% of the GDP.

Okay, I wondered if that’s what you’d meant but wasn’t certain because that’s such a massive claim. To put it in perspective, the US spends around 4% of GDP on its military. China spends about 5%, and Russians spend around 5% again, based on things I read on the subject around 2000 or 2001.

Spending on the scale of 25% or thereabout is reserved for basket cases like Angola and N Korea. Russia is not a happy place, but it isn’t broken nation like N Korea.

At the height of the cold war spending wasn’t any greater than this, just dedicated more towards immediate readiness, while now there’s more committed to research and development projects.

PM Putin said in an interview in the spring, that he wants to see Russia back to its place of power and prominence in the world. So we are starting to see more Russian long range air patrols near Alaska....over the Baltic out towards Ireland again. The recent long range bombers participating in an exercise with Venezuala. The Russian navy moving into long range blue water cruises again and making port calls across the golbe. It's all part of the plan to show that the Russian military has emerged from years of neglect and is now a major force to be recongnized again.

The Russians are stream lining their forces more along the lines of how we run our armed services. Professional military vice conscripts...better command and control...newer equipment...they are reviving research and development that was put on hold for years.

Sebster, I'm telling you this 25% is from petro-dollars and they are willing to take that chunk out of their GDP in the short term to crash course changes to their exising miliarty in order to make it first rate again. One of the things we learned at the end of the Cold War was that the big boogey man Russians ended up being pretty damn bad off. Now given a few years they could actually begin to have a first rate military on paper and in the field.

Ace_of_Spades wrote:PM Putin said in an interview in the spring, that he wants to see Russia back to its place of power and prominence in the world. So we are starting to see more Russian long range air patrols near Alaska....over the Baltic out towards Ireland again. The recent long range bombers participating in an exercise with Venezuala. The Russian navy moving into long range blue water cruises again and making port calls across the golbe. It's all part of the plan to show that the Russian military has emerged from years of neglect and is now a major force to be recongnized again.

The Russians are stream lining their forces more along the lines of how we run our armed services. Professional military vice conscripts...better command and control...newer equipment...they are reviving research and development that was put on hold for years.

Oh, I know about the Russians shifting focus back towards a world power military. And I also know what it’ll gain them (increased regional superiority, some increased leverage at the bargaining table, and an increase in domestic popularity through nationalist sentiment).

Sebster, I'm telling you this 25% is from petro-dollars and they are willing to take that chunk out of their GDP in the short term to crash course changes to their exising miliarty in order to make it first rate again. One of the things we learned at the end of the Cold War was that the big boogey man Russians ended up being pretty damn bad off. Now given a few years they could actually begin to have a first rate military on paper and in the field.

And I’m telling you no way, no how is Russia spending 25% of its GDP on the military. That kind of spending is only given by broke ass economies – N Korea for instance. You cite it comes from petrodollars… Russian govt royalties on petrodollars isn’t anywhere near 25% of its GDP – more like 7 or 8%.

It might be one of those dodgy stats you see sometimes, where they’ve taken the five or ten year cost of the expansion and compared it to a single year’s GDP. Or, more likely, it’s Dogma’s cited 25% increase. That makes sense, so I would run with that. It still fits the general argument you want to make (and one I am not disagreeing with in any substantial way).

The long and short of it is that the Russians are willing to make some serious investment in their military future. Along with the Chinese and the Indians (yep I said it the Indians) and now you've got 4 kids on the block (no pun intended) who could theorectically be walking around with big sticks. Sooner or later they are going to itch to see who can swing their stick the hardest.

The scarier side of this is that the Indian and Chinese economy is booming...over a Billion per in population each and sharing the same sphere of influence. Makes for interesting times in the future.

Also Dogma is right on track with the US government having to produce "force-multipliers" for a synergistic effect on battlefield capabilities for the US military. It's a simple fact. My point was that Barney Frank (he always makes me think of that purple dinosaur) wants to take 25% of the mil budget away. The money has to come from somewhere and usually it comes from the personnel end strength. So less folks = more toys. Those toys better really kick some tail is all I have to say.

If that happens I'll just retire and take a gig in the gray area as a contractor. Same job different uniform.

Ace_of_Spades wrote:The long and short of it is that the Russians are willing to make some serious investment in their military future. Along with the Chinese and the Indians (yep I said it the Indians) and now you've got 4 kids on the block (no pun intended) who could theorectically be walking around with big sticks. Sooner or later they are going to itch to see who can swing their stick the hardest.

The scarier side of this is that the Indian and Chinese economy is booming...over a Billion per in population each and sharing the same sphere of influence. Makes for interesting times in the future.

True, but I think the increasing importance of trade is going to put a damper on any major military action. At least for the foreseeable future. In some sense the growth of China and India as military powers can work to our benefit. It will allow us to contract our global footprint and focus more on R&D. Hopefully breaking our reliance on permanent deployments.

Ace_of_Spades wrote:
Also Dogma is right on track with the US government having to produce "force-multipliers" for a synergistic effect on battlefield capabilities for the US military. It's a simple fact. My point was that Barney Frank (he always makes me think of that purple dinosaur) wants to take 25% of the mil budget away. The money has to come from somewhere and usually it comes from the personnel end strength. So less folks = more toys. Those toys better really kick some tail is all I have to say.

Too true, this is especially problematic when considering ground forces. Though I suspect that the US isn't going to be in the business of putting boots on the ground for quite a while.

As an aside, I'm willing to bet that as economic mobility becomes more viable you'll see an upswing in recruitment. Right now there simply isn't much incentive to enlist unless you see yourself as a lifer. However, if the services can make a decent case for skill development you may see an influx of the kind of people who will actually utilize their education stipend. Something which would also free up some of that increasingly precious budget, currently being thrown at run-at-loss contractors like Brown&Root, for the development of professional combat personnel.

Ace_of_Spades wrote:
If that happens I'll just retire and take a gig in the gray area as a contractor. Same job different uniform.

That might not be a terrible idea. While they are planning to cut the military budget, Congress has little control over special intelligence projects. Generally that type of stuff is leveraged through under the State Dept. budget, and is almost exclusively handled by private contractors.

Dogma ... What do you do for a living? Great insight on things I get to deal with pretty regularly.

Ace_of_Spades wrote:The long and short of it is that the Russians are willing to make some serious investment in their military future.

Certainly, no argument there. Even without a clear plan to expand military force, military size and effectiveness will naturally grow as a nation expands. As other country’s economies grow, the current US dominance in military spending (50% of total world spending) looks certain to drop off.

Along with the Chinese and the Indians (yep I said it the Indians) and now you've got 4 kids on the block (no pun intended) who could theorectically be walking around with big sticks. Sooner or later they are going to itch to see who can swing their stick the hardest.

The scarier side of this is that the Indian and Chinese economy is booming...over a Billion per in population each and sharing the same sphere of influence. Makes for interesting times in the future.

Maybe, India is a tricky one. At present Indian GDP is around 10% greater than Australia, and we’re hardly being considered as a future world power. While India is growing, much of that growth is built around industries that can’t sustain a world power, low level service delivery, light manufacturing. They’ve got a billion people so they can’t ever be discarded, but while China should be noticed because they’re rapidly turning potential into actuality, India is still pure potential.

Also Dogma is right on track with the US government having to produce "force-multipliers" for a synergistic effect on battlefield capabilities for the US military. It's a simple fact. My point was that Barney Frank (he always makes me think of that purple dinosaur) wants to take 25% of the mil budget away. The money has to come from somewhere and usually it comes from the personnel end strength. So less folks = more toys. Those toys better really kick some tail is all I have to say.

True, but as everyone gets more money they all get more toys. The US technological advantage is a direct result of spending piles more money than everyone else. To maintain that expected kill ratio through the technological edge, you have to maintain that spending barrier.

Or possibly there’s another way. The US accepts it can’t have absolute global dominance, or certainly not unilateral global dominance.

Ace_of_Spades wrote:Dogma ... What do you do for a living? Great insight on things I get to deal with pretty regularly.

I'm a personal trainer at the moment. Though I also do defense and economic research for one of my former college professors. Long story short, I'm sitting in transition between undergrad and grad school. In terms of concentration: its a toss-up between conflict studies, and futurist thought.

Sebster....your last bit might be right it'll depend on the next president and how his vision shapes the near term. But I remember working for a guy alot like the One who had the same similar vision. His vision kept us pretty busy.

Dogma...interesting, very interesting. Me I'm looking at a degree in Strategic Intelligence-Counter-Terrorism with a concentration on the Pac-Rim.

The intelligence community will get a workout under Obama, that's for sure. It'll be a lot like the Nixon/Kissinger proxy era.

Deadshane1 wrote:I just read a yahoo article on how the Fed is possibly going to 0% interest to save the crashing economy.

Nothing I read in the article filled me with dread.

I just realised that hardly anything I've experienced during this "calamity" has bothered me by much, quite the opposite, I'm loving the 2.03 gas I'm putting into my car right now...and the price of coffee creamer just went back down at wal-mart, so I'm SOLID.

Maybe someone will give me a long winded explanation why I should fear for the economy? I'm basically paycheck to paycheck with no investments. Living as cheaply as I can to be comfortable and also support my son. I dont buy ANYTHING unless I have the cash to pick it up, in otherwords, I dont borrow money, from banks OR credit card companies. Gas prices dropping is a nice thing for me...yet everywhere I read...ITS TERRIBLE. I dont get it.

When is the crashing economy gonna start effecting the 'po folks? Those of us that are lower to lower middle class americans without investments and working on a 20 year pension with our federal/city jobs.

Is it really just terrible for the Rich people with tons of property and investments in business? I can understand the feelings of dread they must have and they own the media, so.....

Should this be the time that us poor people sit back and laugh, and vote McCain for more of the SAME?

wow, well done you.

My mother has lost 80 grand through a share saver account. Not everyone affected by shares is a shareholder you know. and btw shes anything but rich, shes had to take up a second job.

but if your alright then thats ok.

"hey, all these africans are starving but do i care, because i aint" same logic as your argument

I also know someone who has been made redundant because of the issue.

Tbh i probably shouldnt have posted here because I'm taking this fairly personally. But it just pisses me right off when people are so ignorant. Your alright well that's great perhaps you can just keep it to yourself instead of rubbing it in the face of people who arent having such a good time.