Pre-New Year maneuvers around uranium projects in Kazakhstan

46
Pre-New Year maneuvers around uranium projects in Kazakhstan

Nuclear projects are not only financially significant for Russia – after all, this is one of the few areas where we have competitive advantages at the global level – but are also important as markers of foreign policy. The nuclear industry is even more politicized than oil and gas, since it is linked to security issues.

Nuclear power generation is developed and built for decades, and the production cycle is “tied” to the project executor or related structures. Not just industrial facilities, but large social clusters are powered by atoms, and the executing country, with goal-setting and persistence, can also gain access to the distribution of generation and income from this distribution.



The fight for these projects is no longer so much about economics as it is about long-term politics (One of the main ideological and political pillars of Kazakhstan will soon undergo a test of strength, Referendum on NPP in Kazakhstan. We talk about Kazakhstan, keep in mind Uzbekistan).

There were a lot of them last year News, that the domestic Rosatom practically controls production in Kazakhstan, by the way, this news in Kazakhstan caused a lively discussion. This year, France, China and Russia came together in the fight for the Kazakhstan NPP project, and now in December there is news again that Rosatom has withdrawn from some raw materials projects in Kazakhstan. Let's look at the situation.

Stocks and Market


In terms of relations with Kazakhstan, the role of projects in the nuclear industry is really hard to overestimate. Kazakhstan has the world's first reserves of uranium ore, from which uranium concentrate (cake) is produced. With its 21 thousand tons per year, Kazakhstan occupies 45% of the world market.

However, Kazakhstan not only produces semi-finished products, but also finished products - uranium dioxide tablets for filling fuel elements and fuel assemblies (FA). The customer and shareholder of its production at the Ulba Metallurgical Plant is the Chinese holding company "CGNPC-URC".

The output volume seems small at first glance - 200 tons per year, with the possibility of increasing to 400 tons. Moreover, each nuclear holding usually makes its own assemblies and at its own facilities.

But in this case, China is deliberately leaving Kazakhstan a “window of competence,” since there is no more “adequate” market for China in terms of political opportunities and geography.

Now, when we are talking about Kazakhstan building its own nuclear power plant, the production of its own fuel assemblies is no longer just a foreign policy factor, but also a domestic one, and here China, it turns out, “lent a shoulder as a partner.”

For example, Russia at one time closed the entire infrastructure on itself (logically in its own way), and China began to buy part of the products from Kazakhstan's UMP. Now this factor may actually somehow work in the negotiations on the future NPP. But precisely "somehow", since it is difficult to call it decisive.

Kazakhstan has several buyers of "cake". China will take 9,5 thousand tons this year (45%), Russia 8,4 thousand tons (40%), France 1,7 thousand tons (8%), the USA 1,3 thousand tons (6%) and Canada ±2% of the remainder. World prices for "cake" jumped at the end of last year and the beginning of this year, reaching as much as 205-208 thousand dollars per 1 ton.

Coincidence or not, the jump occurred at the time of the final resolution of the issue of the French presence in Niger. Then the prices fell, but still ended up significantly higher than in previous years - to 170-173 thousand dollars per ton.

Here it would be interesting to look at the export statistics by cost. Export statistics for such goods are, of course, never accurate in terms of cost, but if you look at the cross-section of open data, then with an average exchange cost of a ton of "cake" of $183 per 1 kg, it turns out that in the first half of the year Canada, France and the USA bought for $145 per 1 kg, China - $152 per 1 kg, and Russia - for $190 per 1 kg.

It is impossible to look only at the pure figures here, since much depends on the contractual basis, which, naturally, is closed to review, the contracting period, advance payments and a host of other nuances, and, in fact, the “price formulas” within joint ventures.

Here one can only evaluate “vectorially,” but it turns out that Russia has been moving more or less in the stock market mainstream, and working with it in terms of this strategic raw material is more profitable than with other players.

Having a full cycle, it is always possible to shift the costs in one process to the final products, therefore, on the one hand, it seems that France, Canada and the USA “saved” (possibly due to the political factor), but from the point of view of preserving and increasing the scarce raw material base as such, such savings may cause a failure in other trades, such as the same nuclear power plant.

It turns out that by pushing France out of Niger, Russia allowed Kazakhstan to earn money in line with the changes in the market, while France itself, which needs safety stocks and should make corresponding offers to Kazakhstan, is “saving”. Can such moments be used in the NPP trades? Not only can they, but they should, although this is not a guarantee.

Redistribution of assets


In mid-December, the Internet was filled with news that Rosatom was selling off its shares in joint ventures in Kazakhstan related to uranium mining. Allegedly, it was exiting part of the market due to sanctions pressure. But Rosatom is not even the target of European sanctions, although no one has cancelled political pressure, as well as the multifaceted influence of “friendly” France.

Russia withdrew from the following projects in Kazakhstan: Zarechnoye (flow rate of 3,5 thousand tons), Kharasan-1 (flow rate of 33 thousand tons) and the Kyzylkum enterprise, which processed the obtained raw materials. 36,5 thousand tons is a significant volume, but it makes up a rather modest 815% of Kazakhstan's total recoverable uranium reserves (4,4 thousand tons). But the flow rate of the Budenovskoye cluster with all the sites, where Rosatom has 50%, is a quite significant 250 thousand tons and 30,5%. The sold assets would exhaust their flow rate in 2028-2032, Budenovskoye only has a contract until 2045, without exhausting the reserves.

Russian assets also ended up in safe hands - sold to the Chinese CGNPC.

In general, the contract for the development of the Budenovskoye cluster was perceived by a number of observers and speakers in Kazakhstan a couple of years ago as a terrible disaster. Russia, in their logic, is a teeth-chattering empire that wants nothing more than to exploit the subsoil of its unfortunate neighbors, make the Kazakhs poor - its existential goal, take away gas and oil, and also uranium, molybdenum, chromium, nickel, and so on down the list.

This logic is being peddled in specific circles and for specific interests. France and the Rothschild group are rushing into Central Asia with their projects, and here such “Western logic” plays into their hands, although their project is not exactly about the current Euro-elite and their policy. They are simply synergistic in this case.

The sale of these assets to China allows this political tension to be partially relieved, since the empire is handing them over to a kind and neutral "eastern panda". The amount of the deal is not disclosed, but it is unlikely to be high, since China is already receiving residual reserves here, but it is increasing its influence exactly according to the same principle by which it buys fuel assemblies from UMP.

Russia can focus on developing the main and most promising cluster here, but for France, the situation is not getting any better - it was necessary to invest in additional supplies of raw materials before, and the same is true now. The remaining volumes are still in China.

Here it looks more like a commercial game with two hands against France, while the Kazakh pro-Western alarmists are falling short of political arguments on the topic of “Russian expansion”. Since Moscow has withdrawn from the projects, it means that the expansion has been heroically stopped, and the speakers can go behind the scenes to “drink cocoa”. Is it better for the French customer? No, but the pro-Western speakers can say that they have honestly earned their bet.

The two-handed game with China here is purely tactical. The competition between us, although not as politically charged as with France, has not been cancelled. Nevertheless, the combination is quite sound, and we must take advantage of the fact that the Chinese are waiting for Paris with technology in China, but in Central Asia the interests are different.

The southern route will have to be fought for


Before us is a rather interesting episode of the struggle not only for a rather valuable raw materials piece of the market in a strategically important industry for us, but also an episode of a broader competitive struggle in Central Asia.

Russia has a completely absurd migration policy, which is simply shocking, stifling the understanding that we will have to fight for this region one way or another. All our logistics are aimed at the European direction, both the southern route and the northern one. The eastern direction is complicated by the capacity of the railway network, and it is aimed at China.

We will not fight for the south - through projects in the nuclear industry, among other things, we risk ending up in a blockade sooner or later. For some reason, we think that we can come to an agreement with Europe, but there is no agreement there, they want to fight there.

They really want this, and it is possible that if they do not achieve this in terms of a traditional war, then they can definitely reach an economic blockade of transit. The routes to the south must be broken through, laid, and without competition in Kazakhstan, there is no way to do it, and V. Zhirinovsky's "throw to the South", which has already become a meme, is not political humor at all in the current conditions, but a necessity.
46 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -1
    23 December 2024 04: 43
    Kazakhstan will also have to be dispossessed later. It is not right for them to own Russian lands... It is time to reassemble the Russian empire
    1. +6
      23 December 2024 05: 13
      Quote from: FoBoss_VM
      Kazakhstan will also have to be dispossessed later. It is not right for them to own Russian lands... It is time to reassemble the Russian empire

      That's true. But if in the strange military operation against Ukraine China is at least not against us, then in the case of Central Asia...
      1. +2
        23 December 2024 06: 21
        These are our lands, Russians. We don't interfere with the Uyghurs. We don't interfere with Taiwan. Who knows what China is there.
        1. +4
          23 December 2024 06: 45
          Quote from: FoBoss_VM
          We don't interfere with the Uyghurs. We don't interfere with Taiwan. Who knows what China is doing there.

          So we don’t interfere with the States, and other Britains, and the LPR and DPR, without even remembering history, ours, however...
          And who knows, all our sniveling FPVs are in fact Chinese.
    2. man
      0
      23 December 2024 07: 57
      Quote from: FoBoss_VM
      Kazakhstan will also have to be dispossessed later. It is not right for them to own Russian lands... It is time to reassemble the Russian empire

      You have noticed this accurately. And most importantly, in time...
    3. 0
      23 December 2024 11: 11
      NATO is near Kursk and some people here are dreaming about Kazakhstan.
      1. -4
        23 December 2024 11: 14
        So what? Hitler was near Moscow, just a step away. And people dreamed of a flag over Berlin, although it seemed that Moscow would fall any minute. You have to believe in the truth. Although what do you care, you already shit your pants when NATO entered Kursk
        1. 0
          23 December 2024 12: 17
          Quote from: FoBoss_VM
          Although what do you care, they already shit their pants when NATO entered Kursk

          I understand that you are now on the front lines bringing victory over NATO closer - do you believe in the truth?
    4. 0
      23 December 2024 11: 18
      Well then don't shout why they are running to NATO.
    5. +1
      23 December 2024 14: 30
      Kazakhstan will also have to be dispossessed later

      Thanks for the offer, we have enough problems in Ukraine.
      And if you consider that Kazakhstan is almost five times larger than Ukraine, there will be many problems.
  2. +10
    23 December 2024 05: 51
    In order to talk about strategic projects, it is necessary to determine the level of partnerships. Otherwise, politicians say one thing, their actions say another, and their brains are a complete mess.
    If we are talking about objectivity, then firstly, Kazakhstan supports sanctions against Russia. The internal national policy towards Russians and the Russian-speaking population may be less radical than in Ukraine, but it is more pragmatic and effective. It is enough to simply look at the statistics for the last 30 years. The percentage of the Russian population has decreased almost 10 times during this time. And even now, despite the SVO, there is an outflow of population, the Russian-speaking population is trying to leave there. Now in the state bodies of Kazakhstan, in the army and security forces in general 99,9% are Kazakhs or as it is written in their Constitution "the titular nation". That is, by definition, all non-titular nationalities are second-class people, worthy only of serving the masters of Kazakhstan. Now among the population there, various pro-American organizations are actively spreading rumors about the seizure of important economic sectors and even entire regions by Russia.
    Not only does this split the population of Northern Kazakhstan that is loyal to Russia, but for over 20 years there has been a whole state program in place to resettle Kazakhs from the southern regions, providing them with free housing and work.
    There are also dozens of other state programs directly aimed at reducing the influence of Russia and the Russian-speaking population on the domestic policy of Kazakhstan, the list of which would take a long time.
    Therefore, we can definitely say that under the guise of a lot of scribbling designed in the form of "friendly" documents such as the CIS, CSTO, EAEU, SCO, there is another failure of Russia's foreign policy towards a neighboring state, similar to Ukraine. Therefore, the sale of shares and Russia's exit from Kazakhstani projects and their transfer to China is the most reasonable action of our Government.
    1. +2
      23 December 2024 07: 25
      Quote: Vitaly_pvo
      Therefore, the sale of shares and Russia’s exit from Kazakhstani projects, transferring them to China, is the most reasonable action of our Government.

      Otherwise they will simply take it away?
      1. +2
        23 December 2024 09: 12
        Quote: Stas157
        Otherwise they will simply take it away?

        Easy. As far as I remember, before 2014, Russia's investments in the country's economy 404 were more than $40 billion. And it is doubtful that they will be able to return them even after the successful completion of the SVO.
        In Kazakhstan, the instructors and the system of training officials are exactly the same as in Ukraine. There is even a state program Bolashak for training officials and managers in the USA and the West.
        This is not the main thing. If we recall history, it was the threats from the Dzungars, and then China, that forced the Kazakh khans to first conclude a military alliance, and then ask to join the Russian Empire. Let them now rewrite history in Kazakhstan in a pro-Western vein, telling children that the Russians captured Kazakhstan and even committed genocide. But if someone is not satisfied with real history, it always repeats itself.
    2. +1
      23 December 2024 10: 43
      It is enough to simply look at the statistics for the last 30 years. The percentage of the Russian population has decreased almost 10 times during this time.


      2.5 times. It was 45%, now it's 18%. Or do you want to say that now in Kazakhstan there are 4.5% Russians?

      Now in the state bodies of Kazakhstan, in the army and security forces in general 99,9% are Kazakhs or as it is written in their Constitution "the titular nation"


      Outright lie. The Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan is available online and there is not a single mention of the titular nation there.

      That is, by definition, all non-titular nationalities are second-class people, worthy only of serving the masters of Kazakhstan.


      By definition, a titular nation is the nation after which the state is named.

      Not only does this split the population of Northern Kazakhstan that is loyal to Russia, but for over 20 years there has been a whole state program in place to resettle Kazakhs from the southern regions, providing them with free housing and work.


      And this is the pure truth. And the capital was moved to the north for the same reason.
      1. +3
        23 December 2024 10: 51
        Quote: Zymran
        And the capital was moved to the north for the same reason.
        Away from China wink
  3. 0
    23 December 2024 08: 03
    Firstly, despite the visible policy of Kazakhstan, we need to look at the fulfillment of obligations under agreements exclusively on energy, and there the picture is absolutely accurate and clear. The article is about energy, right? And regarding the construction of nuclear power plants, we need to look at the data on nuclear power plants built on planet Earth in the 21st century. There, too, the picture is clear and understandable. Everything has already been described and argued by comrade Martsinkevich. In my opinion, with sadistic sarcasm. hi
    1. +2
      23 December 2024 15: 46
      The goal of a "big energy review" was not set. This is a different format and many issues need to be linked differently. In this case, specific maneuvers were considered, which in general look good for Russia. The maneuvers between Tokayev's players are also interesting, he is not very popular in our public space, but here you can see how he maneuvers between large currents. Look at the method, which allows you to look at other processes, by the way. I have had general reviews on this topic, but the task was never to create some kind of alternative to a specialty, like Geoenergetics by Martsinkevich. For example, Qatar went to Central Asia with investments, why now and why Kazakhstan, the UAE - their own position, they have now taken a lot of things for themselves, not only entrenched in Turkmenistan, how does this fit in with the interests in the Astana-Expo zone and even the processes in Georgia, etc. These are these connections and how we and the same Kazakhs swim inside them. The struggle for the region is ongoing, on different platforms and in different ways.
  4. +1
    23 December 2024 08: 04
    Michael hi , with the "yellow cake" with the price everything is clear. Western resources write that now the prices for enriched "energy uranium" are exorbitant (nobody gives the prices), not many have enrichment technologies, probably no more than 10 players in the world? I completely agree with your conclusions in the article.
    1. +2
      23 December 2024 15: 51
      And no one will give contract prices on such a narrow market, they can only be looked at in mutual export statistics and, as in the joke, "plus-minus". Nevertheless, there is a KEK exchange, even with these volumes, and you can see that the story with Niger pulled the price almost twice. Although in terms of net volume to the general market it is not even 10%, but such mathematics does not work here. As a maneuver against the French, the exchange of assets is interesting, even very interesting. This means that Tokayev is resisting the French, but the fact that Qatar is now active there is rather a minus for the French and us, and a plus for Erdogan. In general, the maneuvers are interesting and they should be kept in mind.
      1. +1
        23 December 2024 15: 54
        Mikhail, Tokayev started to rush his people with the start of construction of the nuclear power plant. Are we waiting for the opening of the tender?!
        1. +1
          23 December 2024 15: 57
          Well, he promised "openness, transparency, inclusiveness" and so on. So we wait.
  5. +2
    23 December 2024 08: 59
    Russian assets also found themselves in in safe hands - sold Chinese "CGNPC".

    for me: they are not reliable at all...
    or reliable in relation to political risks?
  6. +1
    23 December 2024 11: 04
    Russia ...... ---- its existential goal is to take away gas, oil, uranium,....................

    This is understandable, but none of them will remember who was doing all the reconnaissance and creating it for them.
    profitable production. Really by yourself? Doubtful.
    1. +1
      23 December 2024 20: 24
      This is understandable, but none of them will remember who was doing all the reconnaissance and creating it for them.
      profitable production.
      They will proudly declare that they hired Russians to do this.
      1. +1
        23 December 2024 20: 51
        They will probably say that they paid more than the Russians at home. Which is partly true, since there were allowances for Northern Kazakhstan under the USSR. Only they received subsidies, which they forgot about, of course.
  7. 0
    23 December 2024 11: 13
    Quote: Vitaly_pvo
    The internal national policy towards Russians and the Russian-speaking population may be less radical than in Ukraine, but it is more pragmatic and effective.

    And in the Russian Federation, what is the national policy towards Russians? Russian regions are the poorest in the Russian Federation, Russians have become second-class people in their own country.
    1. +1
      23 December 2024 14: 41
      Russian regions are the poorest in the Russian Federation

      Do you mean Moscow, St. Petersburg, Novosibirsk, Omsk, Tomsk, etc.?
      Well, yes, compared to such rich and developed regions as Tuva, Altai, Buryatia, Yakutia, Yamalo-Nenets Autonomous Okrug. wassat
  8. +2
    23 December 2024 11: 54
    "Ours", "ours", "ours"... Whose "ours", Mikhail? Who are the owners and shareholders of the Russian nuclear industry? And with whom are they "on equal terms"? And how can we, the poor or frankly destitute population of Russia, influence the policy of "Rosatom" if we are not its OWNERS OR SHAREHOLDERS? Before arousing "political" interests in the population, and, even more so, calling on it to take any specific actions, this population, economically, must first become a corporate owner of the means of production, the entire infrastructure and mineral resources, at least in its own country! And the "patriotism" to which you call us is patriotism during the reign of PRIVATE PROPERTY, that is, the last refuge of the scoundrels who robbed and plundered their own population in the 90s and 2000s. Cynical and short-sighted (... But, VERY PATRIOTIC!
    1. +1
      23 December 2024 13: 02
      Who are the owners and shareholders of the Russian nuclear industry?
      In fact, the Russian Federation is, in fact, a state on shares. At the same time, the author is silent about the fact that the CIS did not become an equal commonwealth of shareholders, each shareholder has his own interests, the common interests of the commonwealth of shareholders do not concern him. But in the spirit of the times, to take away, to appropriate this is not "theirs", but ours. In the tsarist times, we built hospitals and schools with factories for them. We built highways in the deserts and railways in the mountains, and all the villages were illuminated with the "lamp" of Nicholas II. smile From the CIS, the remaining shareholders are not in a hurry to disperse. But if someone offers a more interesting option, they will run away in different directions, to the "father" who has more gold reserves. And the CIS is not getting stronger, day by day. In addition, I wrote that Kazakhstan is a member of the CIS, AZES.
    2. +1
      23 December 2024 15: 18
      The question is correctly posed. And how the Russian army fights terrorism in Syria, and Syrian phosphorites belong to Timchenko's companies, who exported them, including to the territory of the former Ukrainian SSR.
    3. 0
      23 December 2024 15: 54
      Well then let's write only about what we are "shareholders". Look at how much and what you have in your investment portfolio. Then we'll come up with a topic.
      1. +1
        23 December 2024 16: 06
        Well then let's write only about what we are "shareholders"
        Who are we and how many of us? And whose portfolios, especially investment ones... smile
        1. 0
          23 December 2024 16: 12
          Well, the author of the comment above apparently has some ideas, I suggested citing them.
      2. +2
        23 December 2024 16: 57
        Funny). But if we continue the "theme", then our educated and qualified population, first of all, must OWN market-valuable production, engineering, infrastructure and agricultural property, in the structures of which it works. That is, to become collective owners. Only then, as an economic entity, will it first have economic, and then political interests. And the poor and destitute population will not engage in politics. Which is what "our" financial and commercial oligarchy needs.
        1. +1
          23 December 2024 17: 19
          No, it's not funny. In principle, no one is stopping you from owning any infrastructure property. Even from buying up a bit of Rosatom's subsidiary. The problem here is different. But it is not connected with the system as such. In theory, pension and investment-pension funds should do these operations for you, and why this infrastructure is the way it is is not a problem of capitalism, but of a specific model.
          1. +1
            23 December 2024 18: 31
            Yes, this is not a problem of capitalism. Or rather, not of industrial capitalism, but of commercial capitalism, in which the authorities and organizations have formed a structure of ownership and an economic structure based on commercial interest, and not on the interest of profitable industrial production and its infrastructure of support and maintenance, engaged in printing money and selling it to commercial banks, which in turn lend to all other subjects of the market economy, at a very high financial usurious interest rate, as well as large trading and speculative structures and organizations, peddling "our" mineral wealth and "low-processed" goods all over the world. But their activities, almost like in a classic colony, do not affect the lives of the poor or, in general, the destitute population. Almost like in resource colonial "Papuasies", only in the place of the Papuans - we. And this is precisely the model of a "peripheral oligarchy", and not an industrially developed power. But this "squirrel cage" was created and mounted on dollar supports precisely in order to withdraw huge capital into the Western economy and to form fortunes and powerful dominance for "our" nouveau riche here. So yes, it's not funny.
            1. -1
              25 December 2024 11: 14
              Quote: Oleg Plenkin
              not industrial capitalism, but commercial capitalism,

              Do you even know what capitalism is?) Capitalism is the individual receiving the greatest profit with the least expenses. There is no such thing as "industrial" capitalism. Any industrialist dreams of getting rid of workers, equipment, and various other similar property in order to receive profit without expenses.
              Industrial production exists under capitalism solely because not everyone manages to get directly connected to the state budget. There will be no places...
              1. 0
                25 December 2024 14: 54
                You "operate" with concepts from Soviet propaganda "agitation", not knowing or not understanding that industrial capitalism can be VERY different. Thus, the capitalism of large owners of the means of production, large shareholders and large latifundists of agricultural lands, is oligarchic capitalism, like the rule of the rich. The capitalism of average owners, is the bourgeois classical industrial capitalism of a hundred years ago, which was "devoured" by the capitalism of "managers". And there is the petty-bourgeois social capitalism of collective private owners, not only working in production and in its infrastructure, but also OWNING them. And this, when analyzing the "model", must, in my opinion, be understood. Personally, I am against the "oligarchic" capitalism of big sharks, since its dominance destroys the petty-bourgeois middle class of collective owners ...
                1. -1
                  25 December 2024 17: 18
                  I operate primarily based on my own experience)
                  1. 0
                    25 December 2024 17: 30
                    I readily believe it). Especially since, in conditions when our population has finally split in relation to the former "Soviet" privatized property, each layer of the population today "operates" only with its own experience and its own property. And since, in these conditions, the absolute minority, which, just yesterday, was the Soviet party, economic and Komsomol nomeklatura, received practically everything, and the absolute majority of the common population - "a hole from a donut", then the experience of each layer of owners is different).
                    1. -1
                      25 December 2024 17: 32
                      You are a believer, as I understand it. Well, my experience is based on many years of communication with capitalists and on my own modest efforts. Well, and on knowledge, including Soviet knowledge, yes) You just throw words around without understanding their meaning...
                      1. 0
                        25 December 2024 18: 53
                        Well, the question of faith is a purely personal and intimate question. And about myself, I can only testify that my "experience" of communicating with "our" capitalists, I have, since the age of 24, since 1992. When I personally saw and know who they were, during the times of the USSR, when they managed and governed the planned distribution economy, ideology and culture, and who they became, when they carried out the privatization and corporatization of Soviet state property. And, yes, you are right, for me personally, as well as for tens of millions of former Soviet citizens, there was no sense. But, our newly-minted nouveau riche, who, just yesterday, were Soviet nomenklatura bastards, created a different perspective: "- Either you build squirrel cages for others, or you spin them yourself." Therefore, regarding the words, the meaning of which I do not understand, this is very subjective). Although... You become like who you hang out with.
                      2. 0
                        26 December 2024 08: 12
                        Well, I'm telling you - a plentiful, meaningless set of words. You don't understand the phenomenon, and you're trying to bury this misunderstanding under a pile of meaningless sentences. I don't care what exactly the capitalist owns, a latifundia, a factory, a bank, or the Great Round Seal of a government agency.
                        The essence of capitalism is one - obtaining maximum profit with minimum expenses. A factory requires huge expenses. For its entire structure. And the Big Round Seal gives only profit, with fixed expenses for "dividing" with others like it.
                        Well, there are also costs for security forces, both in uniform and in tattoos. Etc. Words without understanding mean little...
                      3. 0
                        26 December 2024 21: 34
                        Then I will answer briefly: "- For clinical idiots, capitalism is always one. And the world is black and white! (" What! Good luck...
  9. 0
    24 December 2024 20: 01
    Dear Mikhail Nikolaevsky! If I understood you correctly, Russia "played" with China in "one team" and "one piece", and this, from the section of performing skills - "a game of four hands".... In general, a fairly objective analysis of our victories and failures in the "Kazakh theater of non-combat operations"... In the "bottom line": with Kazakhstan, it seems, problems are still ahead and, quite serious...
  10. 0
    25 December 2024 11: 09
    Why are these strange guys hanging around near the container with limonite?!