Military Review

Comrade Lavrov does not throw words to the wind

126
Comrade Lavrov does not throw words to the wind



When Sergey Viktorovich Lavrov made a statement that “the era of political and financial domination of the West is coming to an end,” he reported this to the whole world not as an individual, but as the minister of one of the leading world powers. And not just as the Minister of Agriculture or Natural Resources, but as the Minister of Foreign Affairs, whose every word should be “cast in granite” (I did not want to be distracted from the canvas of this post, but apparently our “St. Petersburg” Prime Minister still knows that the granite embankments of St. Petersburg, like the rest of the granite St. Petersburg, including the Alexandrian and other columns, are the WALKS from granite like concrete, and were not cut out with a hammer and chisel).

Let's continue.

If Yevgeny Maksimovich Primakov, not in such a distant 1999 year, said that the world would be multipolar, then Sergey Lavrov simply picked up and snapped (put Klyazma) that the world is at least multipolar, and as a result - the era of leadership of the West or the Anglo-Saxon world is coming to an end: "We are seeing attempts (of the West) to preserve domination by artificial means ..."

What are some of the reasons for S. Lavrov? There are grounds!

In economics, and simply in public life, there are only two ways of financing, that is, the allocation of money and other means:
- money in exchange for labor (results of labor);
- and money in exchange for money plus interest (loan financing).

Here you can bring another way of financing, for example, charity: giving money to a beggar, and in return you get nothing. But this is not the case: in return, a charity beneficiary receives inexhaustible hands of the giver, salvation of his own soul, and joy from helping his neighbor who is in need (or simply earning on people's feelings). And even just a coin in a fountain is an appeal to external forces, coaxing them to return to this memorable place again.

In general, there are only two ways of financing money:
- money in exchange for the results of labor or any tangible or intangible benefits;
- money in exchange for money with interest for their use.

So, one of these financing methods stopped working. Not that it completely ceased, but in those global volumes of the previously constant expansion of the world market, beginning with the era of great geographical discoveries and ending with world wars and the destruction of the USSR and the socialist system, it no longer works.

The fact is that global GDP growth on 2-3% per year does not give the world's leading banks the necessary profitability for existence. Banks also have COST. They can not lend to businesses that grow per year by 2-3%. And if enterprises do not grow at all in a crisis, they cannot be credited categorically.

But at the same time, banks are the main financial instrument of the West, with the help of which the West controls the entire global financial system, as well as the economic and political life of countries, peoples and continents. They, banks, worked well when capitalists quickly expanded their production in extensively expanding new markets. But the global market has closed and can no longer expand extensively. And intensive development does not involve super-profits, under which you can lend to borrowers, which is actually the main income from banking.

US banks hold trillions of dollars in the Fed’s accounts and don’t know where to invest them:
- to finance the real sector of the national economy is unprofitable, and even simply risky, when there is no growth;
- to invest in Asia (China) or Russia - it is possible, but not possible;
- to invest in inflating bubbles in the stock market and in real estate (the main two bubbles, which still hold a bank deposit) - have long been impossible, but still, as it were, necessary;
- to start the next Ku-Ku (quantitative easing) ... And what's the point, if the banks are already head-to-head in dollars like shit. Here are just these dollars except for the Fed or in treasure accounts to store more simply nowhere - all around WESTERN. There are money-wrappers, but it is impossible to exchange them for something worthwhile - inflation. Let in growth - nowhere;
- to scatter money from a helicopter so that they reach the “real sector” (there was such a journalistic idea in 2008-09) ... Well, this is classical inflation, and the end of the standard is in the sense of the dollar, and at the same time the hegemon. Hence, it is also impossible;
- arrange instability all over the world ... Yes, you can - set fire to the sheds in your backyard in the hope that the hated neighbor will also burn the shed. With the same success, you can type in the mouth ... jam;
- it is also possible to make a fire in Europe. But only at the expense of its ally, the EU - without the participation of Russia. Because, as before, Germany is no longer willing and unable to fight with Russia, but Ukraine wants, but it cannot either (of course, this is not about the peoples of these countries);
- to launch infrastructure programs at the expense of state financing and to disperse the economy as in 30 - to restore hopelessly aging infrastructure - roads, bridges, overpasses ... Also impossible. Because the budget is already full of holes, and the state is in debt like silk. Yes, and plundered most (our Chubais still learn and learn from their American teachers).

That Obama the other day and said that US will grow icebreakers. The question is, if the US does not have money to repair roads, bridges and overpasses, which are not regularly used by polar bears, but by US citizens, why did he, Obama, need icebreakers so urgently? Just because they have Putin and in large quantities? Well, then America needs to take the program urgently: catch up and overtake Russia and Putin (I worked somehow due to my youth on DIP-200) ...

We have already got used to the “Kuz'kina Mother” from America. But “we will catch up and overtake Russia” - this is already a new note of the degradation of the hegemon. So Comrade Lavrov was right when he said: “We are witnessing the end of a very long era, the end of a long era of domination of the historical West, domination of economic, financial, political”.

And his words are heard all over the world.
Author:
126 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Andrey Yuryevich
    Andrey Yuryevich 3 September 2015 05: 54 New
    +87
    I believe that Sergey Viktorovich can be trusted, unlike other ministers.
    1. Alex_Rarog
      Alex_Rarog 3 September 2015 06: 04 New
      +72
      I agree, but Shoigu is also possible.
      1. tol100v
        tol100v 3 September 2015 11: 20 New
        +31
        Quote: Alex_Rarog
        I agree, but Shoigu is also possible.

        Vitaly Ivanovich Churkin also needs to be trusted!
        1. Talgat
          Talgat 4 September 2015 15: 26 New
          +16
          Yes, all these people are worthy of respect, but they completely unjustly forget about Sergey Ivanov - who is often considered the leader of the "security forces"
          Whether he is a leader or not - but in any case he is clearly a decent person and a patriot
          1. palmse
            palmse 5 September 2015 10: 11 New
            +2
            I thought that it was Sergei and not Dima politician
        2. palmse
          palmse 5 September 2015 10: 03 New
          0
          phone call Natasha can definitely
      2. palmse
        palmse 5 September 2015 09: 59 New
        0
        He’s the third on my list of lexicon to fix or find a guy with boilers
    2. Tanais
      Tanais 3 September 2015 06: 07 New
      +32
      Quote: Andrew Y.
      I believe that Sergey Viktorovich can be trusted, unlike other ministers.

      According to the majority of Russians with whom I communicate, only Shoigu and Lavrov inspire confidence in them ...

      Well, at least these two "stop" the threat from the outside. If "Serdyukovschina" and "Kozyrevshchina" flourished, there would be krants ...
      1. Voha_krim
        Voha_krim 3 September 2015 07: 53 New
        +16
        Quote: Tanais
        they only trust Shoigu and Lavrov ...

        I would add Rogozin here!
        1. Oleg14774
          Oleg14774 3 September 2015 09: 07 New
          +9
          Quote: Voha_krim
          I would add Rogozin here!

          I wouldn’t! Populist and pi ... hollow!
          1. FID
            FID 3 September 2015 09: 19 New
            +8
            Quote: Oleg147741
            I wouldn’t! Populist and pi ... hollow

            "Talking head" - without a mat and other words ... It’s easier to call it, by the way, in the government there are VERY many of these ...
            1. scorpiosys
              scorpiosys 4 September 2015 22: 59 New
              -13
              "Lavrushka leaf" for seasoning with western soup. Rough and stupid. Breathing out a SMOKE head, in between smoking, trying also to TRY - to think ...
            2. scorpiosys
              scorpiosys 4 September 2015 23: 05 New
              -4
              There are few heads speaking there. Basically, there they try to “speak another place”.
          2. NordUral
            NordUral 3 September 2015 10: 36 New
            +3
            I would say more sharply, but it’s impossible.
          3. udincev
            udincev 4 September 2015 17: 58 New
            +1
            Quote: Oleg147741
            Quote: Voha_krim
            I would add Rogozin here!

            I wouldn’t! Populist and pi ... hollow!

            It seems like that. Was at the construction site of the Vostochny cosmodrome - everything is OK, forward in seven-march boots. And the workers after raised the issue of theft and pilots (so that they have nothing to eat) on a cosmic scale. What is it like? Unfinished or framed?
          4. scorpiosys
            scorpiosys 4 September 2015 23: 03 New
            -8
            Fools, such ... (Rogozin). OAK ... It's the same, too - TREE !!! What, you offend him?
            Like, blurt out, so - blurt out .... flight over the cuckoo's nest.
            Under the Kings always "fools" kept.
            I do not see differences from the "CENTURIES".
          5. palmse
            palmse 5 September 2015 10: 14 New
            0
            NATO got it and VPK gets it for me so the choice is good
          6. VeteranS
            VeteranS 5 September 2015 13: 03 New
            +1
            The Holy Scripture says, “By the fruits you know them ...” Dmitry Olegovich, as the Deputy Prime Minister of the Government is personally responsible for our defense industry, and the facts say that the number of military orders of other countries is constantly growing, and the needs of our armed forces are being successfully fulfilled, so Rogozin’s publicity does not prevent him from being a patriot and an effective leader!
      2. cyberhanter
        cyberhanter 3 September 2015 11: 00 New
        -34
        According to most Russians

        Tell me, this is the majority of Russians, they can say WHY DO THERE TRUST LAVROV? Or are they just looking a lot at zombies? :) With all due respect.
        He says something like the right thing, and the Foreign Ministry has been trashing one event after another for many years. And no, I will not say that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is necessarily working poorly, I am not an expert, but certainly not as good as it should be, hardly satisfactory. And every modest achievement has to be advertised in the media as a great victory for diplomacy.
        There are no questions about Shoigu
        1. Tanais
          Tanais 3 September 2015 11: 31 New
          +9
          Quote: cyberhanter
          The Foreign Ministry has been trashing one event after another for many years.


          I, too, have complaints about the work of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Ukraine ... To the "ambassador" who really "sits" in Kiev ...

          But minus this, the Lavrov’s department, on other “fronts,” has shown undoubted successes.

          Maybe for us, you see, they will correct something?
          1. cyberhanter
            cyberhanter 4 September 2015 07: 10 New
            -17
            Quote: Tanais
            But minus this, the Lavrov’s department, on other “fronts,” has shown undoubted successes.

            Is Libya a success?
            1. Tanais
              Tanais 4 September 2015 13: 11 New
              +3
              Quote: cyberhanter
              Is Libya a success?

              Not the fact that the failure in Libya, the result of the work of the Foreign Ministry ...
              1. cyberhanter
                cyberhanter 4 September 2015 17: 21 New
                -4
                The fact that we did not veto the decision to introduce a no-fly zone, and this is the responsibility of the Foreign Ministry. Obviously, my point of view is not popular, but at least I'm trying to think. And the audience zomboyaschik stupidly minus
                1. Cat man null
                  Cat man null 4 September 2015 23: 06 New
                  +2
                  Quote: cyberhanter
                  The fact that we did not veto the decision to introduce a no-fly zone, and this is the responsibility of the Foreign Ministry

                  Yeah .. that is, the question of vetoing the UN is decided by the Minister of Foreign Affairs .. nu-nu .. and the question of declaring war is then decided by the Minister of Defense ..

                  "Well, you fucking give" belay

                  Quote: cyberhanter
                  but at least I'm trying to think

                  It's good..

                  Quote: cyberhanter
                  And the audience zomboyaschik stupidly minus

                  I'm not a minus. Apparently, because I haven’t turned on the scaffold for seven years already laughing
                  1. cyberhanter
                    cyberhanter 5 September 2015 12: 07 New
                    -2
                    "Well, you damn give" belay

                    The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is in charge of foreign affairs, and also giving the president proper advice in certain cases is all the responsibility of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Our votes at the UN are also under the jurisdiction of the Foreign Ministry.
                    I'm not a minus. Apparently, because I haven’t turned on the scaffold for seven years already

                    Zomboyaschik, the media .... all one. Why I love Topwar, there are many opinions. And still cheers without brains are enough. And those who believe that our troops were not in the Donbas. By the way, do not talk about it at all, I have first-hand info.
              2. scorpiosys
                scorpiosys 4 September 2015 23: 11 New
                -4
                Yes, we are after beer - we did not finish it ...
                OUR with YOU - WINE !!!
        2. OlegLex
          OlegLex 3 September 2015 22: 35 New
          +2
          and the Foreign Ministry has been trashing one event after another for many years.
          Operate with facts, please do not be unfounded.
          1. cyberhanter
            cyberhanter 4 September 2015 07: 12 New
            -11
            Quote: OlegLex
            Operate with facts, please do not be unfounded.

            Libya, Syria, Ukraine, Transnistria, Karabakh. Plums and freezing are constant. No progress. I remember Voronin in the Customs Union wanted, but we weren’t allowed
        3. Sasha_Sar
          Sasha_Sar 4 September 2015 14: 29 New
          +1
          Gentlemen, do you know how Shoigu is called in the army and navy? "Showman"
          1. Evgen_Vasilich
            Evgen_Vasilich 4 September 2015 15: 52 New
            +1
            Quote: Sasha_Sar
            Gentlemen, do you know how Shoigu is called in the army and navy? "Showman"

            Kozhugetovich, his name is in the army, and you minus!
            1. user
              user 4 September 2015 20: 12 New
              -8
              Kozhugetovich, his name is in the army



              His name is different, and Kozhugetovich only when they look into the anus.
              1. user
                user 7 September 2015 15: 28 New
                0
                It seems that some orderlies read these comments (judging by the minuses).
          2. scorpiosys
            scorpiosys 4 September 2015 23: 12 New
            -6
            Costumed cock.
          3. scorpiosys
            scorpiosys 4 September 2015 23: 27 New
            -5
            A person trying to jump over himself will never become a real person. The problem of subordination and disobedience will remain before his eyes until the last day of his life.
            Until the last day, he will shift the "bones" real and virtual ....
            And, that's all, to think .... Right, I, or - not right ....
            In some ways, he’s right, but in life, he’s not right. Don't you (you) see it yourself?
            Raise "yourself" over the army of the people and make of it a "police" (protection of cities).
            Is this your flight, Shoigu ???
            Kill in the Russian army the last remnants of "The honor of having an army."
            Make a cast of the enemy Jewish-Amer army from it ???
            This was YOUR - task ??? I apologize for the appeal "YOU" ...
            I consider it appropriate when referring to YOU, as the son of OUR MOTHERLAND.
            Think where are we going? Realize !!!
            See the truth of God.
            Serve the present, not the past in the shoes of the "future."
            Sorry if I offended ...
            Should have offended.
            No other way.
        4. scorpiosys
          scorpiosys 5 September 2015 00: 33 New
          -4
          ... Ah, could you marry a "radical" ???
          ... For the sake of WHAT ???
      3. Temples
        Temples 4 September 2015 14: 26 New
        +1
        According to the majority of Russians with whom I communicate, only Shoigu and Lavrov inspire confidence in them ...


        Communicate with most Russians? recourse Excellent!
        It differs from the majority of Russians, who basically do not communicate with tens of millions of compatriots.
      4. Nikoha.2010
        Nikoha.2010 4 September 2015 23: 40 New
        +1
        Quote: Tanais
        According to the majority of Russians with whom I communicate, only Shoigu and Lavrov inspire confidence in them ...

        Tanais, in opinion, is still how to look. The military raised salaries, Dartans, exercises, and the like. Here, it’s not so clear that we never dreamed of sofas. Ask the acting warriors how they perceive Shoigu and they say great. Ask the firefighters (36000 employees retired in 2012 (on site) in order not to pay a decent salary from January 1, 2013
        ), maybe they will say the opposite. This is politics. First Serdyukov was needed, then Shoigu was pulled up. And what, no one saw anything? The show was arranged with Zhenya, the girl was promoted, Mistral, the collapse of universities and so on. Politics, and nothing more. Business in a word! A bow to Lavrov and Churkin hi ! IMHO!
        1. scorpiosys
          scorpiosys 4 September 2015 23: 42 New
          -4
          First, they pulled their "tail" ... and then ....
        2. Eternal Watch
          Eternal Watch 4 September 2015 23: 50 New
          0
          Quote: Nikoha.2010
          Serdyukov was needed, then Shoigu was pulled up. And what, no one saw anything? The show was arranged with Zhenya, the girl was promoted, Mistral, the collapse of universities and so on. Politics, and nothing more

          burn, Man, ZHGGIIII !!!! laughing laughing laughing
        3. The comment was deleted.
    3. tronin.maxim
      tronin.maxim 3 September 2015 07: 09 New
      +46
      Quote: Andrew Y.
      I believe that you can believe Sergey Viktorovich

      I agree! If he said it means the way it is, especially considering the whole west:
      1. B.T.V.
        B.T.V. 3 September 2015 08: 46 New
        +8
        Quote: tronin.maxim
        I agree! If he said it means the way it is, especially considering the whole west:


        These T-shirts, in the form of humanitarian aid, would be sent to all Western politicians.
        1. Baikal
          Baikal 3 September 2015 13: 09 New
          +4
          Quote: B.T.W.
          These T-shirts, in the form of humanitarian aid, would be sent to all Western politicians.

          Guys, with “morons” everything can be much simpler and not at all the same as inspiredly draw on t-shirts wink

          1. scorpiosys
            scorpiosys 4 September 2015 23: 44 New
            -5
            on t-shirts did not learn (yet) to draw for some idiots - other idiots so that they wouldn’t arise - third ...
    4. Alexey-74
      Alexey-74 3 September 2015 09: 52 New
      +12
      that's for sure, he definitely knows what we don’t know ... with such words a minister of this rank will not be scattered!
    5. NordUral
      NordUral 3 September 2015 10: 35 New
      +2
      At least I really want to believe. I hope that we will not make a mistake in it.
    6. WKS
      WKS 3 September 2015 12: 18 New
      +1
      Quote: Andrew Y.
      I believe that Sergey Viktorovich can be trusted, unlike other ministers.

      You can believe in God. And such statements are confirmed by facts about which our Foreign Ministry also mentions.
    7. palmse
      palmse 5 September 2015 09: 55 New
      0
      diplomat from God and it seems like the devil full respect master of words and deeds crying
  2. VseDoFeNi
    VseDoFeNi 3 September 2015 05: 59 New
    +4
    But at the same time, banks are the main financial instrument of the West, with the help of which the West controls the entire world financial system, as well as the economic and political life of countries, peoples and continents.

    I think it’s more correct to say so - But at the same time WEST is the main financial instrument of BANKSwith the help of which BANKS manage the entire world financial system, as well as the economic and political life of countries, peoples and continents.
  3. Armored optimist
    Armored optimist 3 September 2015 06: 02 New
    +9
    I hope Putin will remind the Americans at the session of the General Assembly about Kuzkin’s mother. Of course, without using a boot, he is a polite person.
  4. evil partisan
    evil partisan 3 September 2015 06: 04 New
    +10
    Good article, wonderful syllable, to the author -Thank you! hi
    1. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 3 September 2015 06: 08 New
      +4
      Quote: wicked partisan
      Good article, wonderful syllable, to the author -Thank you! hi

      just say that you liked the letters ... wassat hi
      1. evil partisan
        evil partisan 3 September 2015 07: 29 New
        +3
        Quote: Andrew Y.
        I liked the letters.

        And you, Colleague, as I understand it, did not like my advice: how to make a feasible contribution to equipping our fleet with new engines without leaving home ... sad
        Of course, I’m not vindictive, but ... I can shootam
        1. Andrey Yuryevich
          Andrey Yuryevich 3 September 2015 08: 02 New
          -3
          Quote: wicked partisan
          but ... I can shoot

          all the same it is necessary to give you a slap from a stainless steel a slap to the head ... it is necessary !!! laughing
          1. evil partisan
            evil partisan 3 September 2015 09: 46 New
            +2
            Quote: Andrew Y.
            all the same it is necessary to give you a slap from the stainless steel

            Duel on dummies? what What are the little things? request Let’s go right through the turns! good
            1. VseDoFeNi
              VseDoFeNi 3 September 2015 10: 16 New
              +2
              Quote: wicked partisan
              Let’s go right through the turns!

              On ice drills !!! laughing
              1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                Andrei from Chelyabinsk 3 September 2015 10: 19 New
                +4
                On the snowballs. From a hundred meters to death!
              2. evil partisan
                evil partisan 3 September 2015 10: 22 New
                +4
                Quote: VseDoFeNi
                On ice drills !!

                Namely, Colleague hi . On them dear. Am I so brave? I just know that I have longer ... repeat
    2. afdjhbn67
      afdjhbn67 3 September 2015 06: 40 New
      +7
      “Cast in granite” (I didn’t want to be distracted from the canvas of this post, but apparently our “St. Petersburg” prime minister still knows that the granite embankments of St. Petersburg, like the rest of the granite St. Petersburg, including Alexandria and other columns, are EXTENDED from granite like concrete, not carved with a hammer and chisel).

      I hung on this phrase .. Montferrand turned over in his grave .. doubts appeared whether everything was right in the article after that ... fool
      1. Niki
        Niki 3 September 2015 06: 51 New
        0
        And you just need to show interest in the architecture of St. Petersburg and look in the internet for information, opinions on granite and not quite granite embankments, bridges, fortresses, etc.
        1. afdjhbn67
          afdjhbn67 3 September 2015 06: 59 New
          0
          the rest is granite St. Petersburg, including Alexandria and other columns, it is MOLDED from granite like concrete, and not carved with a hammer and chisel).
          Google will help you, scrabble, Petersburgers will read here will be rzhach ...
          1. VseDoFeNi
            VseDoFeNi 3 September 2015 08: 06 New
            0
            Quote: afdjhbn67
            Petersburgers will read here rzhach will be ...

            Better when they laugh at you than when they cry. wink
          2. tamanski
            3 September 2015 14: 04 New
            +1
            Natural granite, in contrast to geopolymer, has a homogeneous structure and the "plaster" of natural granite does not fall off.
      2. VseDoFeNi
        VseDoFeNi 3 September 2015 06: 59 New
        +6
        Quote: afdjhbn67
        . doubts whether everything appeared correctly in the article after that ..

        Look at the subject of geopolymer concrete.
        1. afdjhbn67
          afdjhbn67 3 September 2015 07: 04 New
          +5
          The 17-18th century is the most it is geopolymer concrete, do not joke so half will believe in all seriousness .. laughing

          Granite (Italian granito, from Latin granum - grain) is an acidic igneous intrusive rock. It consists of quartz, plagioclase, potassium feldspar and mica - biotite and / or muscovite. Granites are very widespread in the continental crust.
          1. VseDoFeNi
            VseDoFeNi 3 September 2015 07: 20 New
            +1
            Quote: afdjhbn67
            The 17-18th century is the most it is geopolymer concrete, do not joke so half will believe in all seriousness ..

            But what about the granite sarcophagi of ancient Egypt? It’s impossible to do them even today ...

            You should immediately try to learn the fundamental fact of being: "Everything is not arranged exactly as we used to think. More precisely, not at all like that, sometimes exactly the opposite to the usual opinions and views".
            1. afdjhbn67
              afdjhbn67 3 September 2015 08: 01 New
              +3
              Montferrand showed the beauty of a giant polished pink granite monolith 25,6 meters high (12 fathoms).

              colleague, you distract me, stop Lavrov praise ... laughing
        2. scorpiosys
          scorpiosys 4 September 2015 23: 52 New
          0
          This "girl" has become so old on this development as many years as the whole truth ...
      3. Max otto
        Max otto 3 September 2015 08: 59 New
        +10
        Quote: afdjhbn67
        “Cast in granite” (I didn’t want to be distracted from the canvas of this post, but apparently our “St. Petersburg” prime minister still knows that the granite embankments of St. Petersburg, like the rest of the granite St. Petersburg, including Alexandria and other columns, are EXTENDED from granite like concrete, not carved with a hammer and chisel).

        I hung on this phrase .. Montferrand turned over in his grave .. doubts appeared whether everything was right in the article after that ... fool

        Yes, why are you hanging up, in this phrase there is a lot of sarcasm about Nedimon, I translate as I understand it. Classically, such a phrase should sound “carved in granite,” but the author jokes on Nedimon, apparently hearing somewhere his comment or answer to something with the words “cast in granite”. Those. the author is very subtle, I would say that superthin hinted to us at the level of professional suitability of the Russian prime minister. So subtle that not everyone understood right away.
        1. afdjhbn67
          afdjhbn67 3 September 2015 12: 26 New
          +2
          Well, it’s a very delicate banter, in order to understand such humor, you must at least have a DAM quote and know that with its “popularity” ... well, it’s unlikely
          be careful with the metaphors you have to be "these pen sharks, jackals of rotary machines" laughing
          Although in your words there is a certain logic .. hi
        2. pavelty
          pavelty 3 September 2015 13: 17 New
          -1
          I’ve just read somewhere that in some elements of St. Petersburg’s buildings some kind of technology was applied that made it possible to “cast” hard rocks, including granite ... I really can’t imagine how
      4. tamanski
        3 September 2015 13: 57 New
        +2
        Natural granite, in contrast to geopolymer, has a homogeneous structure and the "plaster" of natural granite does not fall off.
      5. tamanski
        3 September 2015 14: 03 New
        0
        Natural granite, in contrast to geopolymer, has a homogeneous structure and the "plaster" of natural granite does not fall off.
  5. VseDoFeNi
    VseDoFeNi 3 September 2015 06: 05 New
    +3
    With the same success, you can put in your mouth ... jam;

    They don’t need to type anything. For them, this "jam" is already whipping out of their ears, like from a fire hose.
  6. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 3 September 2015 06: 12 New
    +5
    “We are witnessing the end of a very long era, the end of a long era of dominance of the historical West, the dominance of the economic, financial, political.”

    How do you want this to really happen and as little blood as possible.
  7. svp67
    svp67 3 September 2015 06: 27 New
    +5
    Comrade Lavrov does not throw words to the wind
    That's for sure, if he said that there will be an answer, then the "partner" can have no doubt that the "answer will fly" from where he does not expect ...
  8. Don Cesar
    Don Cesar 3 September 2015 06: 30 New
    +8
    one of the few people in government worthy of respect
  9. Mitrich76
    Mitrich76 3 September 2015 06: 34 New
    +4
    Everyone sees a situation in which common sense is absent - the money that appeared as the exchange equivalent of the goods themselves became the main value through the efforts of the arrogant Saxons. But everyone stubbornly pretends that it is so, that otherwise it will be worse.
    Lavrov directly declares this, in other words, is not afraid to tell the truth about the naked king.
    Not diplomatically, but honestly. WELL DONE!!!
  10. askort154
    askort154 3 September 2015 06: 50 New
    +8
    Lavrov is a talented strategist. Do not talk about chatter.
    There would be more of them. I am concerned about the "revival of the tandem" recently. What is it for?
  11. Raptor_RB
    Raptor_RB 3 September 2015 06: 51 New
    +3
    I would like to share the author’s enthusiasm. So take it, screw up your eyes, and for a second imagine that the collapse of the West, together with its bloody bugs, has already happened. But. Objective reality is much less rosy. We have a long and exhausting war of attrition. The war of nerves, resources, moral stability of nations and the war of faith. The truth in this war is ours. It is impossible to imagine how much cleaner and kinder the world will become without a vampire cannibal “loan interest”, the world of “Half Day XXII Century”.
  12. 205577
    205577 3 September 2015 06: 58 New
    +9
    Lavrov is a block of world politics and I am very glad that such an official serves my country.
    In my opinion, this is exactly what the head of the Russian Foreign Ministry should be, he simply spreads waves of confidence in his innocence.
    Thanks to people like Lavrov and Churkin, our foreign policy has again become the policy of a superpower, I personally am glad about this.
    1. VseDoFeNi
      VseDoFeNi 3 September 2015 07: 00 New
      +3
      Quote: 205577
      Lavrov is a block of world politics and I am very glad that such an official serves my country.

      He would still quit smoking ...
  13. Monster_Fat
    Monster_Fat 3 September 2015 07: 13 New
    -5
    They say that "Sergey Viktorovich" daughter settled in the United States. Strange, huh? or vice versa, it’s not at all strange, but in the order of things ...
    1. VseDoFeNi
      VseDoFeNi 3 September 2015 07: 27 New
      +8
      Quote: Monster_Fat
      They say that "Sergey Viktorovich" daughter settled in the United States. Strange, huh? or vice versa, it’s not at all strange, but in the order of things ...

      They say that in Moscow hens are being milked, a citizen is a gossip.
      1. Azovian
        Azovian 3 September 2015 22: 19 New
        0
        Gossip is not a true rumor spread in order to discredit someone or something. This, dear, is not suitable. Children of Lavrov from a long life beyond the hill, even speak Russian badly. So milk the chickens yourself.
        1. pensioneree
          pensioneree 4 September 2015 10: 21 New
          0
          Well, my brother is a crested Estonian and cho? He asked how are you there in the war? - Yes, they’ve gathered for a “rafting” in a purely male company! So, not everything is simple in the world!
    2. Kolka82
      Kolka82 3 September 2015 11: 56 New
      -1
      S-ss! Do not fall to the office - this is our agent bully
    3. navigator
      navigator 3 September 2015 12: 10 New
      +3
      “It’s said that“ Sergey Viktorovich’s daughter settled in the USA. It’s strange, right? Or vice versa, it’s not at all strange, but in the order of things ... ”

      Usually fat people are kind, you are “kind”.
    4. The comment was deleted.
  14. kartalovkolya
    kartalovkolya 3 September 2015 07: 48 New
    +2
    History cannot be stopped, and empires, like people, have the ability to grow old, become decrepit and finally die! The main thing is to prevent the States that lose their hegemony from finally deciding to “slam the door,” and this is quite possible, given the current level of degradation of leaders and yes and virtually all of their power structures! (they had a bit too much Makein and others. Psak and their presidents are no longer at the level that Roosevelt was and even can’t reach Truman, but I’ll keep quiet about Eisenhower!)
  15. dropout
    dropout 3 September 2015 07: 56 New
    +4
    I don’t want to offend anyone, but after reading the first comments, I involuntarily recalled Ilf and Petrov. Pique vests. “Brian is also a head,” “Do not put a finger in his mouth,” etc.
    1. VseDoFeNi
      VseDoFeNi 3 September 2015 08: 04 New
      0
      Quote: dropout
      "do not put a finger in his mouth"

      And the truth is, the mouth is not a place for fingers. laughing
    2. andj61
      andj61 3 September 2015 08: 30 New
      +3
      Quote: dropout
      "Briand's head too," "don't put a finger in his mouth," etc.

      And Lloyd George's head. And Chernomorsk should be declared a free city ...
  16. Zomanus
    Zomanus 3 September 2015 08: 21 New
    0
    Anything can be said. And I look at the facts. And the facts tell me that Europe will be bent earlier than America. This is how migrants will cut Europe, so you can think about America.
  17. Wolka
    Wolka 3 September 2015 08: 21 New
    +1
    from the American economic system, everyone has long been accustomed to the vicious, i.e. to live in debt, and it seems nonsense to live within our means today, but it turns out not at all, this is a normal (I will repeat the normal) state of a completely adequate average person, because for a completely successful comfortable life of a person very little is needed (the main thing is to choose the right priorities for life, life is it’s given once, there’s simply no chance to replay the game), because in fact luxury as such is not a need, but the individual’s desire to increase his image among equals, thereby hiding his inability to distribute material wealth owned by him, modern events in the Middle East are bright confirmation of this, and S.V. Lavrov is not a prophet, but a politician-analyst on a global scale, because he knows what he says, where he says how much it costs and will cost ...
  18. mikh-korsakov
    mikh-korsakov 3 September 2015 08: 45 New
    +4
    It's time to stop comforting the public with statements such as "on the edge." We have all heard many times that capitalism is rotting, it is coming to an end, but it is not coming and not coming. Our regular comforters, I remember, all our ears buzzed that Ukraine was on the verge of one. it’s another terrible thing, but she keeps everything and lives well, even invited a clown to the governors, and you must agree that you need money for this. So is the author’s argument. Each of the theses of his article can be successfully challenged. Lavrov’s statement should be interpreted as enforceable, but in a very future time. "It is a pity that only me and you will not have to live in this wonderful time." Particularly strange are the author’s arguments against the backdrop of a falling economy in Russia. If we agree with the author regarding the criticality of two to three percent growth, then our country should already come to an end. but she lives, lives, and I hope she will survive.
  19. GUKTU
    GUKTU 3 September 2015 08: 51 New
    +2
    I read somewhere that the structure of our economy, under the strict guidance of Gaidar and Chubais, was created to conveniently pump money and resources from it. Can not be so. Need to change
    1. VseDoFeNi
      VseDoFeNi 3 September 2015 09: 18 New
      +1
      Quote: GUKTU
      I read somewhere that the structure of our economy, under the strict guidance of Gaidar and Chubais, was created to conveniently pump money and resources from it. Can not be so. Need to change

      Something tells me that the gas transmission system of Ukraine and other pipelines were built by the Communists ... back in the USSR.
  20. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 3 September 2015 09: 04 New
    +5
    Terrible...
    What are some of the reasons for S. Lavrov? There are grounds!

    the author writes, after which he embarks on such ... such depths of economic illiteracy that there are simply no words left
    In general, there are only two ways of financing money:
    - money in exchange for the results of labor or any tangible or intangible benefits;
    - money in exchange for money with interest for their use.

    Financing is the supply of money to someone or the allocation of money for something. Distinguish paid financing (credit, loan, etc.) and gratuitous (gift, grant, grant). The difference between them is that paid financing is carried out on the basis of urgency (presented for a certain period) of repayment (repayment of disbursed funds is required) and payment (the recipient of financing pays for the presentation of money to him - usually by paying bank%). Well, gratuitous financing, respectively, is carried out on the terms of perpetuity, free of charge and irrevocability laughing
    “Money in exchange for any tangible or intangible goods” is not financing, it is buying and selling or exchange of goods.
    The thing is that the growth of world GDP at 2-3% a year does not give the leading world banks the necessary profitability for their existence. Banks also have a COST. They cannot lend to enterprises that grow by 2-3% per year. And if enterprises do not grow at all in a crisis, then they cannot be credited categorically.

    The author confused profitability and growth rates. Take for example a business. Growth rate = 0%, annual revenue is stable - 100 million dollars. Net profit is also stable - 20 million dollars. Will a bank lend to this company? Go ahead with your own screech! The bank is actually not interested in whether the volume of sales of the enterprise is expanding or narrowing; the bank is interested in PROFIT, because it is it that is the reserve for paying bank% and repaying the bulk of the loan. And if the company earns enough profit, the bank will lend it.
    US banks hold trillions of dollars in Fed accounts and don't know where to invest them

    Fantasy The funds held by banks in the accounts of the Fed are reserves; their size depends on the total mass of invested funds.
    But “catching up and overtaking Russia” is already new notes of hegemonic degradation

    According to data released on 20 in March, the Fed reported net profit, which would subsequently be redirected to the treasury, in the amount of $ 101,3 billion. This is almost 30% more than the 2013 year. The Fed also ended 2014 with nearly $ 4,5 trillion in assets, compared to about $ 4 trillion in 2013. Http://www.pfj.ru/news/1538/
    Well, the profit of our Central Bank amounted to 183,6 billion rubles, about the exchange rate for December 31 2014 g is already 3,2 billion dollars or 3,2% of the Fed’s profit “Catch up with Russia!”, Say ... wassat
    1. tamanski
      3 September 2015 13: 23 New
      +1
      “Money in exchange for any tangible or intangible goods” is not financing, it is buying and selling or exchange of goods.
      - Financing budget items of expenditure this is the sale. The issuance of a loan is also a sale and purchase (sale of money). Everything connected with money is all “buying and selling”, even when giving: you give money to a loved one for a reason, but for what he did or will do for you or in exchange for feelings that he has towards the donee (money in exchange for feelings) ...
      "The bank is really not interested in whether the volume of sales of the enterprise is expanding or narrowing; the bank is interested in PROFIT ..."
      - Naturally, banks also lend to unprofitable enterprises, which from year to year show a loss or zero growth, and do it with or without risk - it does not matter. The bottom line is that overall lending has plummeted. Banks are now lending under disproportionately growing real estate and disproportionately growing shares of Western companies (18% per year). This is a lending bubble and debt economy. Lending to growth is ALREADY IMPOSSIBLE. Banks will remain, loans will remain, but the number of banks and their weight in the world will decrease by an order of magnitude.
      And to compare Fed incomes with successes or failures in individual industries (icebreakers) ... I don’t even know how to comment here.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 3 September 2015 14: 16 New
        0
        Quote: tamanski
        Financing budget items of expenditure this is the sale. The issuance of a loan is also a sale and purchase (sale of money). Everything connected with money is all “buying and selling”, even when giving: you give money to a loved one for a reason, but for what he did or will do for you or in exchange for feelings that he has towards the donee (money in exchange for feelings) ...

        I strongly recommend that you leave your feelings alone and move on to generally accepted economic terminology, ignorance of which, alas, does not relieve you of responsibility.
        Quote: tamanski
        All that is connected with money is all “buying and selling”

        Within the limits of which consumption is distinguished (when money is the equivalent of a commodity exchange, i.e. exchanged for goods to satisfy their needs with this very product, for example: you bought a suit that you will wear), investments (when money represents capital and exchanged for goods in order to organize commodity production, create added value and thereby increase the initial capital, for example: you opened a sewing workshop and bought fabric and a sewing machine to sew costumes) (when money is a service - that is, you transfer money to someone who needs it and charge a fee for this service, for example - you transferred money to a person who is going to open a sewing workshop on them to sew costumes, and he then them It will be returned to you and paid for use) and free financing (when you donated money)
        So the banks are engaged in exactly the third variety and the others need not be shoved to them.
        Quote: tamanski
        Naturally, banks also lend to unprofitable enterprises, which from year to year show a loss or zero growth, and do it with or without risk - it doesn’t matter

        Again. Banks lend to PROFITABLE enterprises. And whether revenue rises or falls, it is not too important.
        Quote: tamanski
        The bottom line is that overall lending has plummeted.

        And here, please, in numbers and with links to sources.
        Quote: tamanski
        And to compare Fed incomes with successes or failures in individual industries

        Unlike you, I do not compare warm with soft. I compared the profit of the US Federal Reserve and the profit of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation - i.e. two banking systems that perform similar central bank functions. And he pointed out that the profit of our structure is already 3,2% of the American. Against this background, statements about the “catch-ups and stages of Russia” look a little mockingly
        1. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm 3 September 2015 19: 47 New
          0
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          . Against this background, statements about the “catch-ups and hauls of Russia” look a little mockingly

          It all seems to be so, but only against the backdrop of the Fed’s profit of $ 100 billion, the increase in government debt by almost a trillion dollars looks paradoxical.
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            Andrei from Chelyabinsk 4 September 2015 07: 12 New
            +1
            Quote: saturn.mmm
            only against the background of the Fed’s profit in 100 billions, an increase in government debt by almost a trillion dollars looks paradoxical

            These are completely unrelated things, so no paradox can be seen here.
            1. saturn.mmm
              saturn.mmm 4 September 2015 10: 48 New
              +1
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              These are completely unrelated things, so no paradox can be seen here.

              And who is the main borrower from the Fed who pays the debt with interest, sort of like the US government, and they have a budget deficit every year, they almost got those defaults in 2011, they wouldn’t borrow, the Fed wouldn’t pay debts, etc. .
              If I'm wrong, explain
              1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                Andrei from Chelyabinsk 4 September 2015 12: 54 New
                0
                Quote: saturn.mmm
                If I'm wrong, explain

                A situation in which the USA does not pay its debt to the Fed is simply impossible, just as a situation is impossible in which your right hand tries to kill your left. The US budget that takes money is the right hand, and the Fed - the left :)))
                To begin with, it should be understood that the Fed, in essence, is not a bank. The Bank exists in conditions of limited resources (financial) - it has its own ultimate value, the Fed - it is unlimited, since there is a printing press. Now the function of the Fed is essentially reduced to improving the banking system of the United States and rid it of bad papers, return money. funds for which, most likely, will not be.
                It works like this:
                1) A US bank has an asset - a debt of a certain borrower, but AAAAAAA !!!! - the borrower is almost bankrupt and will not give back the money. What to do?
                2) The Fed buys a government loan from the US budget (the United States pays the United States - the same as you would transfer money from the right pocket to the left)
                3) A good Fed comes to the bank and buys a debt obligation, but in return gives not money, but a US government bond. This is good for the bank - instead of dead paper, which costs almost nothing, it receives a quite worthy government loan and does not incur any losses (the US government loan is still highly quoted)
                4) However, a problem arises - not only has the bank been saved and the United States (represented by the Fed) has taken all the risks of non-refund, so now the state must pay the bank a percentage for using den. means. It would be honest if the bank bought a bond from the United States for money, but he bought it for a payroll letter! So wrong.
                5) Fed cuts the printing press
                6) The Fed buys a government loan from the bank. Now it is the Fed that receives dividends on this bond, and then transfers them (in the form of Fed income) to the budget. Thus, the US budget pays for itself :)
                7) The bank, having received the money, is obliged to put it on the Fed's deposit, on which the Fed pays 3 kopecks (0,25% per annum, and soon this will not happen)
                And what is the result? The budget issued a loan bond and received money for that, it’s good for him. But he will pay interest on this bond to the Fed, which will then return them in the form of Fed profit to the same budget. Perfectly!
                The bank had a dead asset (a debt obligation for which the borrower will not pay, which is a loss and can collapse the bank) and now instead of a possible loss he has a deposit in the Fed, MONEY, the bank has increased its liquidity and is simply handsome. True, he will not be able to use this money (the Fed will not), well, well ... The bank suffered a loss, of course (there was nothing to give to anyone who was in debt), but this loss was not reflected in the statements.
                The only bad thing is the Fed - it accumulates a lot of dead obligations. But the Fed doesn't care. What is the danger of failure to repay debt on time? Liquidity loss, i.e. creditors want to receive money from you, and debtors do not give your money to you. But what kind of liquidity loss can a person who prints money himself have? In addition, it should be understood that most of the deposits in the Fed are those deposits that banks will not withdraw under any circumstances.
                1. tamanski
                  4 September 2015 15: 33 New
                  +2
                  "... what kind of liquidity loss can a person who prints money himself have?"
                  - well! But to launch the next Ku-Ku and raise the bet above zero (0,25) is somehow scary. China, Russia and the whole non-Western world no longer want the dollar to spread its inflation around the world. If, more recently, there was (most likely) an agreement with many countries: you consider yourself a PART of the Western world, and we provide you with high world prices for hydrocarbons and raw materials, then now all (and not only this) or almost all of the agreements are blacked out (Colonel Gaddafi will not lie).
                  The hegemon cannot keep high prices for oil and other raw materials. It DOESN’T CAN, but does not want, or so conceived, to annoy Russia. So he will lose the third world countries, and China will acquire them (which he actually does).
                  And to print money to pay off your debts is to accelerate inflation.
                  Yes, now the dollar is expensive in relation to other currencies. But this will also destroy him very soon.
                  The dollar is now like the stern of a drowning Titanic - it has risen high above the water - the propeller is still spinning - but passengers are already falling down ...
                2. saturn.mmm
                  saturn.mmm 4 September 2015 19: 33 New
                  0
                  Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                  Only the Fed is bad - it has accumulated a lot of dead obligations.

                  This question was of interest, the forum users helped under the nickname 007, I try to understand the essence, so to speak, to get to the truth.
                  Thank you for the clarification.
                  1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 4 September 2015 21: 29 New
                    +1
                    Good luck, dear Michael! In fact, in the way everything is arranged in the United States regarding finance, the Antichrist himself will break his leg.
                3. scorpiosys
                  scorpiosys 5 September 2015 00: 21 New
                  -2
                  For "especially gifted" I can strike out that the right hand MAY tick the left in the case of "gangrene" on the RIGHT hand. When you bring "documents", then learn to have them.
                  Child...
                  1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 5 September 2015 16: 28 New
                    0
                    Quote: scorpiosys
                    For the "especially gifted" I can strike out that the right hand CAN tick the left in the case of "gangrene" on the RIGHT hand

                    I will tell you a terrible military secret. Firstly, "gangrene" is written with one "H", "gangrene". And secondly, the right hand CANNOT “chick” the left, neither in the case of gangrene, nor in the case of anything else.
                    Man - yes, maybe. Having considered the situation with HEAD, he can decide to get rid of his left hand - and HEAD will also give the order to truncate this hand. But not a "hand."
                    However, judging by the text of your comment, what is a head - you do not know. I will explain - this is where you eat.
                    Quote: scorpiosys
                    When you bring "documents", then learn to have them.

                    Have an argument? Well, this is just a new word in the Kama Sutra.
        2. VseDoFeNi
          VseDoFeNi 4 September 2015 05: 56 New
          +1
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          I strongly recommend that you leave your feelings alone and move on to generally accepted economic terminology, ignorance of which, alas, does not relieve you of responsibility.


          “Economists say that there is completely cut down the forest, sell and put money in the bank, then you can get 6-7%. If you cut down the forest and invest the proceeds in the economy of Malaysia or Papua New Guinea, you can get 30-40%. Nobody cares about preserving the forest, cut it down and invest money in something. When the forest runs out, take up the fish. When the fish is over, we will invest money in computers. The amount of money races faster than everything else in this world. In fact, economics is a brain damage in our world. "The economy is so far from the real world that it entails its destruction." David Suzuki 55:00


          The flip side of progress.

          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          And here, please, in numbers and with links to sources.

          I will send you to Shlensky.
          Quote: Trade in future income as a cause of the financial crisis

          First, a few well-known trivialities. The economic process consists of discrete transactions. When the transaction amount is small, it usually includes two direct participants - the seller and the buyer, which are usually joined by the third participant - the state, which is not directly involved in the transaction, but receives a percentage of the transaction in the form of tax.

          When the purchase amount exceeds the financial capabilities of the buyer, the latter takes a loan from the bank. Thus, the bank becomes a party to the transaction, known by the name of the lender. Banks draw up debt obligations of borrowers in the form of securities that bring income to their owners and at the same time expose them to the risk of default.

          The bank sells the debts of its borrowers to other banks along with the risk of default and buys other people's debts, also with the risk. Thus, the debts of various borrowers, drawn up by law in securities, comprise a significant percentage in the capitalization of any bank. In contrast to real assets (land, capital buildings, consumer goods, etc.), the debts of the borrowers are not real, but future assets. This is the added value that has not yet been produced, but is only supposed to be produced, but in the reporting and analytical financial documents this possible future value is no different from the actual value (after reading the article, you will understand why).
          1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
            Andrei from Chelyabinsk 4 September 2015 07: 50 New
            0
            Quote: VseDoFeNi
            Economists say there is a complete deforestation

            You know, I know enough about economists :))) For example, one of my favorites: "An economist, this is a person who will very clearly explain tomorrow why what he planned yesterday did not come true today"
            But why take these stories seriously?
            Quote: VseDoFeNi
            I will send you to Shlensky.

            Another "co-op", why send me to him? A man does not know the subject about which he writes. Here is this fragment:
            Quote: VseDoFeNi
            Thus, the debts of various borrowers, legally executed in securities, make up a significant percentage of the capitalization of any bank. In contrast to real assets (land, capital buildings, consumer goods, etc.), the debts of borrowers are not real, but future assets. This is the added value that has not yet been produced, but is only supposed to be produced, but in the reporting and analytical financial documents this possible future value is no different from the actual

            He talks about the complete ignorance of the basics of banking by the author.
            Debt is a real asset, like, say, a car. You have given 1 000 dollars to the borrower and the borrower is obliged to return this money to you, for which he is entrusted with personal property or other people are entrusted with him. Naturally, there is a risk that he will not return them to you, but then he will have to part with the property or the guarantor will have to pay money for him.
            Of course, there is a risk of loan default (loss of an asset), but do you seriously think that a tangible asset has no risks? The same car can be stolen, it can break down, the driver-bulda can break it on a pole or the car can be damaged in an accident. Thus, the risk of loss of an asset is always present and it does not matter whether it is tangible or not.
            At the same time, there can be no question of any added value - you had 1 000 dollars, you transferred 1 000 dollars to a person, it is this 1 000 dollars that will be recorded as your asset. In fact, it is still funnier.
            Suppose you are a bank. You constantly credit 100 individuals for 1000 dollars each and a couple of people do not constantly repay loans to you. You are still lending to 100 people by giving them a total of 100 000 dollars. So your asset will not include 100 000 dollars, but 98 000 dollars - i.e. minus the probable non-return of funds. In other words, banks evaluate debt in the amount of funds issued by them or less, and there can be no question of any additional value. The interest that the borrower pays you to use this loan will be considered your income only when it is received, but into assets it will only be in the form of cash in your current account.
            Your Shlensky mixed up two completely different processes - accounting for assets and determining the market value of a company. The first case (about how assets are accounted for) I described above, and the second is a very specialized case when you need to evaluate whether or not to invest in a business and what is the marginal price of a company’s shares, above which they are obviously not worth buying.
            1. VseDoFeNi
              VseDoFeNi 4 September 2015 07: 56 New
              0
              Let’s start with the definitions then.
              What is the economy?

              PS
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              Your Shlensky mixed up two completely different processes

              Shlensky also caused a crisis by mistake !!! laughing
              1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                Andrei from Chelyabinsk 4 September 2015 08: 55 New
                0
                Quote: VseDoFeNi
                Let’s start with the definitions then.
                What is the economy?

                So start, who's stopping you? laughing
                Give a definition (if I start writing definitions I know - it will drag on until the evening :)))
                Quote: VseDoFeNi
                Shlensky also caused a crisis by mistake !!!

                In my opinion, Shlensky has the same attitude to the crisis as he does to the economy. Those. no.
                1. VseDoFeNi
                  VseDoFeNi 4 September 2015 14: 44 New
                  -1
                  Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                  Give a definition (if I start writing definitions I know - it will drag on until the evening :)))

                  I don’t even doubt such "experts." You really can’t say, you are resorting to idiotic terms such as volatility, liquidity and other crap.

                  Economics is the activity of people aimed at satisfying life needs.
                  Today's concept of economics consists in replacing the concept of economics with the term chrematistics, that is, self-enrichment. What everyone is doing without exception from the banal physical. persons ending states.
                  Meanwhile, moneylenders-bankers rivet money out of nothing.

                  Actually, distinctly I’m sure you won’t be able to explain what modern money is, trying to dissuade yourself by "delaying until the morning."
                  1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 4 September 2015 21: 23 New
                    0
                    Quote: VseDoFeNi
                    You really can’t say, you are resorting to idiotic terms such as volatility, liquidity and other crap.

                    Well, generally speaking, if you’re getting into economic theory, then you could study at least the terminology.
                    But since you do not need it (apparently everything that you do not know for you is idiocy), then let's figure out what (you think) you know
                    Quote: VseDoFeNi
                    Economics is the activity of people aimed at satisfying life needs.
                    Today's concept of economics consists in replacing the concept of economics with the term chrematistics, that is, self-enrichment.

                    I don’t know who you got it from, but I know for sure where this “someone” got definitions of economics (and chrematistics) from.
                    This is Aristotle. And you will not believe it, but since his time the science of economics has gone far ahead. Aristotle, in his understanding of the economy, was, alas, categorically wrong - accordingly, your definition is also erroneous.
                    What is the “vital need” that Aristotle spoke of? If we consider the need broadly, as ANY need of a person, then the concept of chrematistics is absurd, since the desire for accumulation is the same need of individuals (not all, but many) and the allocation of chrematistics as a separate category is not justified.
                    Another thing is that Aristotle had a slightly different meaning: everything that goes to satisfy the rational need for providing livelihoods is an economy, something that goes beyond this is a statistic.
                    The fundamental fallacy of this definition lies in the fact that it is IMPOSSIBLE to draw a line between rational and unreasonable human need.
                    We define life's need as a set of goods necessary for survival - housing, food, clothes? And then art? It is not necessary for survival. So art is a statistician? Or do we recognize craving for beauty as a vital need? And the craving for knowledge? Also write down in natural needs? Well, how do you determine the Columbus expedition? As a craving for knowledge (because she was there) or as a thirst for profit (because she was there too)? Is it economics or statistics? And the accumulation of money, self-enrichment is certainly chrematistics. There was some guy, he made computer games, he made a lot of millions on it. Hrematistiki in its purest form ... and then he took it, collected these millions, and bought a ticket into space - flew into orbit by a space tourist. This is a craving for knowledge ... does it mean, after all, an economy?
                    And take such an interesting process as a medieval squad. Its equipment, with all the blacksmiths-gunsmiths, horses, skins, and so on and so forth - what is this? On the one hand, if a squad is used solely to protect the homeland, this is a pure economy, since it fulfills the vital need of a social group (oh, excuse me, this is too complicated a word for you) of a large group of people to protect themselves from an external enemy. Protecting life and health, what could be more vital?
                    And if this squad is used for raids on neighboring principalities in order to enrich the prince - then how? It turns out that hrematistiki? And if (oh horror!) The squad is protecting its principality, then it is robbing strangers? Then what should I call it? Eco-Economics? Chremanomics?
                    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 4 September 2015 21: 24 New
                      0
                      In general, Aristotle was wrong. And you too, although I strongly doubt that you read Aristotle.
                      But don't be discouraged. In fact, a perfect definition of the economy does not exist in nature :) Here is one of many, quite good:
                      Economics is a science that studies the whole variety of social relations arising from the use of capital, labor, material and natural resources in the processes of production, distribution, exchange and consumption
                      Quote: VseDoFeNi
                      Actually, I’m sure you won’t be able to clearly explain what modern money is, trying to dissuade yourself by "delaying until the morning."

                      Well, why so? :)) Of course, I asked you to give a definition of the economy not without intent - I need to know the level of the interlocutor. Now that I’ve found out that I’m talking to a child of 7-8 years old, it’s of course easy for me to find the definition that is available to you:
                      Money (especially modern money) is a product whose only consumer value is the ability to freely exchange for any other product
                      1. VseDoFeNi
                        VseDoFeNi 5 September 2015 08: 24 New
                        0
                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        Economics is a science

                        Economics is NOT a science. In economics, there is no metrology at all. And the statement that "investors believed" puts it on a par with sectarian teachings.
                        Can you imagine such a thing - did you believe in sopromat or did not believe?

                        The economy is governed arbitrarily - fixing, speculation and procyon delirium.
                        Can we issue a decree by analogy with the “science” economy, so that water freezes at a different temperature?

                        Finally, in the same USA, economics is taught in universities at the liberal arts school - liberal arts.

                        But there’s no point in talking to you, you’ll still stupidly stand your ground. As the Chinese said: arguing with a convinced person is just as futile as pouring tea into a cup of non-vodka.

                        On this optimistic note, let me take my leave.
                      2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 5 September 2015 09: 38 New
                        0
                        [quote = VseDoFeNi] Economics, this is NOT a science. [/ quote]
                        Yeah, and psychology too :)) About cybernetics, I generally keep quiet :)))
                        quote = VseDoFeNi] There is no metrology at all in the economy [/ quote]
                        Yeah. Methods, mathematical statistics, probability theory is present, but there is no metrology :)))
                        [quote = VseDoFeNi] And the statement that "investors believed" puts it on a par with sectarian teachings. [/ quote]
                        You would at least a LITTLE LITTLE have studied the subject, which are taken to judge. "Investors believed, ha!"
                        [quote = VseDoFeNi] The economy is controlled arbitrarily - fixing, speculation and procyon delirium. [/ quote]
                        Really nonsense. Well, for example, about such a concept - "enterprise economics" have you heard?
                        [quote = VseDoFeNi] On this optimistic note, let me take my leave. [/ quote]
                        I will miss you - with joy
                      3. VseDoFeNi
                        VseDoFeNi 5 September 2015 11: 41 New
                        0
                        Still write again. smile

                        And there are a lot of show-offs and flaring !!! laughing

                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        have you heard the "business economics"?

                        Loot, loot and again loot. laughing
                      4. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 5 September 2015 16: 15 New
                        0
                        Quote: VseDoFeNi
                        Loot, loot and again loot.

                        Of course, it never happened. One loot on my mind, right after old Freud laughing
                      5. VseDoFeNi
                        VseDoFeNi 6 September 2015 06: 43 New
                        0
                        What a, right, you are stubborn.

                        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                        One loot on my mind, right after old Freud


                        This is all according to Freud, you do not see chrematistics at point blank range.
                        ENTERPRISE COMMERCIAL - an independent business entity with the rights of a legal entity, acting in conditions of self-financing and aiming to maximize profits.


                        Although Pushkin has long clearly said - DO NOT GOLD (dollar, tugrik, etc.) to him, when he has a SIMPLE PRODUCT.

                        Actually, you confirm your complete zombies and inability to think.

                        PS You still about stock markets and other derivatives ala cds tell.
            2. VseDoFeNi
              VseDoFeNi 5 September 2015 08: 16 New
              0
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              minimum terminology could be studied.

              To study manipulative nonsense, do not respect yourself.
              Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
              So, art is a statistician?

              Art classes for the money, hrematistiki. It all depends on the goal setting.
              1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
                Andrei from Chelyabinsk 5 September 2015 09: 49 New
                0
                Quote: VseDoFeNi
                To study manipulative nonsense, do not respect yourself.

                When you go to bed, be sure to check under the bed - what if the economist is sitting there?
                Quote: VseDoFeNi
                Art classes for the money, hrematistiki. It all depends on the goal setting.

                The same Benvenuto Cellini created for many reasons - he expressed himself in his creations, hoped that his work would bring him fame and money :)))
                THAT and divide it into economics / chrematiki.
                And yes, do not forget - your beloved Aristotle included in the minimum vital needs of a citizen such a necessary thing as slaves :)))
  • akudr48
    akudr48 3 September 2015 12: 12 New
    +4
    It follows from the article that Comrade Lavrov states that "the era of political and financial dominance of the West is coming to an end", which means, in other words, that the adversary is over.

    But comrade Lavrov, as a career diplomat, does not indicate the specific dates of the long-awaited end, leaving much to the will of a changeable case. Maybe tomorrow will end, or maybe in 100 years. Anything can happen.

    I also recall that Comrade Lavrov heads the diplomatic department, the main structure for the implementation of the concept of "soft" power. And sometimes it shows a really high class and the wonders of diplomatic work. Which is very difficult in the created diplomatic loneliness of Russia.

    But the “soft power” is inseparable from the country's economic, technological, industrial, financial, and military power, as well as the standard of living of its citizens, which now, thanks to our Medvedev liberal government, has encountered some difficulties.

    Roughly speaking, no comrade. Lavrov will not be able to cope with his foreign policy tasks if they not only do not help him, but do their best to harm pests within the country.

    I hope comrade Lavrov understands this well. And he brings this point of view to Comrade. Putin.
  • Geser
    Geser 3 September 2015 13: 01 New
    0
    After the era of Kozyrev, who was called "Mr. YES" all over the world, our Foreign Ministry is finally headed by a real minister, whose embodiment Gromyko was called "Mr. NO." Lavrov skillfully corrects all the consequences of the traitorous policy of Kozyrev and raises the prestige of Russia in the international arena. The proof of his successful work is the fact that the Americans from time to time ask our president to replace Lavrov with another minister, this one is painfully intractable. Good health to you Sergey Viktorovich and more success to you in your post in hard work!
  • IAlex
    IAlex 3 September 2015 13: 14 New
    +1
    Lavrov just then and the market - the work is ...
    1. scorpiosys
      scorpiosys 4 September 2015 23: 53 New
      -3
      Sometimes he also smokes his head ....
      Work, such ...
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. scorpiosys
          scorpiosys 5 September 2015 00: 10 New
          0
          I don’t like “modern words”, you’re trolling (I wrote off a word while reading your comment, believe your right.)
          How can I justify the fact that I was born in 1961 ... The year I flew into space the FIRST PEOPLE in the WORLD, Yuri Gagarin, when they just started building the first nuclear submarines, when the country was waiting for its take-off and received it (though not thanks " I’m killing, "and his resistance ... when the dreams of all people came off the earth and went up into space). When it seemed, here is just a little bit and will be for all people - happiness !!! Communism.
          You didn’t live in those happy years when in the morning you wake up with a feeling of "absolute calm and confidence in tomorrow's life, dear you and my unlucky ...
          You have lost the best feelings in your life ...
          I'm sorry.
          1. Nikoha.2010
            Nikoha.2010 5 September 2015 00: 27 New
            0
            Quote: scorpiosys
            You didn’t live in those happy years when in the morning you wake up with a feeling of "absolute calm and confidence in tomorrow's life, dear you and my unlucky ...
            You have lost the best feelings in your life ...
            I'm sorry.

            Evgeny. Don’t be angry that way. I am 10 years younger than you, but I also lived in the USSR and felt like the happiest child. When Dad was transferred to WESTERN Ukraine, we rented a room in the private sector, I fought with the local punks and proved that we and my Dad are not an occupier. You don’t just need to say that, we have survived so much ... My mother was called a curvy on the bus just because she spoke Russian, but I was SORRY not around. Do not judge for God's sake! I grew up in a military family, grew up with soldiers on their knees. He was both a pioneer and a Komsomol member; he served as an urgent in the CA. Now retired with the rank of captain and continue to work. I have the honor!
  • Azovian
    Azovian 3 September 2015 15: 01 New
    0
    LAVROFF ... Why are you singing diframbs to him? Children all their lives over the hill, barely working in Russian ..., in the round dance, he drives around Charlie, the whole scum \ sorry, moderator, how do you like me? \ Amero-European is his partner ... next? Yes, it would be better if he came with round dances to the Donbass. He looked and told the world how Russian people stand for themselves. Like tanks, guns, monuments are removed from pedestals and put into battle. Like at checkpoints with hunting rifles loaded with a shot at a duck against tanks ... Ah, yes! He is not Russian ...
  • Karabin
    Karabin 3 September 2015 19: 12 New
    +1
    Yes, charisma, a zombie man and other media can make a good diplomat, or an average city hall official, something like an outstanding figure. The keyword is like. Open the eyes of the gentlemen. What international problem has our diplomacy decided in favor of Russia under the leadership of Lavrov? There is no Kozyrev’s “what you please”, but there is no firm position worthy of a Great Power, possessing nuclear weapons and veto power at the UN. Coexistence, concerns, lamentation of violated rights, appeals to partners, the eternal search for compromises, where it is necessary to show firmness, is the lot of second-tier countries, but not Russia. Putin-Laurel foreign policy - trade, trade and trade again. Merchants are not fighters. Therefore, the rollback in all directions, and in the Ukrainian and completely crackling failure. The crackle from this failure was muffled by the Crimea, but one topic cannot be exploited endlessly. I don’t even want to mention the disgusting attitude towards the Russians of Donbass. For the Russian Foreign Ministry, they do not exist.
  • GYGOLA
    GYGOLA 4 September 2015 01: 39 New
    +1
    3 things that are obvious, “why?”, I want to ask: 1 Children of officials do not receive a Russian education. 2 Kobzon and others do not receive treatment in Russia. 3 The presidential motorcade consists of non-domestic car brands. Obviously, the government has a lot of work to do. , for the good of the state, I want to reassure myself ...
  • samarin1969
    samarin1969 4 September 2015 03: 35 New
    0
    "Comrade Lavrov does not throw words into the wind" ... ?? ... Sergey Viktorovich, like the entire Foreign Ministry, is perfectly trained and useless.
  • Vladimir Vasilich
    Vladimir Vasilich 4 September 2015 12: 06 New
    +1
    Will his words be heard all over the world?
  • The comment was deleted.
  • yuriy55
    yuriy55 4 September 2015 15: 55 New
    +1
    I will believe in the sincerity of S. Lavrov’s statements, when the West will tremble in anticipation of “sanctions” from the Russian Federation ...
    I will believe in the truthfulness of the words of D. Rogozin, when American astronauts break their legs when trying to jump to the ISS on a trampoline ...
    I do not perceive S. Ivanov in any capacity, as a state figure in connection with the lack of significant public affairs and legally dubious episodes of personal life ...
    I’ll kiss S. Shoigu on the top of my head when I return the benefits abolished by the EBN to military pensioners and make their pension worthy in comparison with the pension of state employees ...
    yes
    1. Iman al-musawi
      Iman al-musawi 5 September 2015 14: 50 New
      0
      Quote: yuriy55
      I will believe in the sincerity of S. Lavrov’s statements, when the West will tremble in anticipation of “sanctions” from the Russian Federation ...

      Why then believe something? This will be a fait accompli. And all these "believe / not believe" are strange in the discussion of certain statements, because they are either logical and consistent with the facts, or bullshit.
      Fact 1. The world is no longer unquestioningly subordinated to the United States. Evidence: ongoing contacts with Russia, despite sanctions.
      Fact 2. The role of Russia in the world has increased dramatically. Evidence: the emergence of many new allies. Including those playing key roles in their regions: BRICS, SCO, EAEU. The emergence of a new axis Moscow-Beijing-Tagrane-Cairo.
      Conclusion: Sergey Viktorovich Lavrov objectively provided the correct information.
      Does anyone like her or not.
  • scorpiosys
    scorpiosys 4 September 2015 22: 55 New
    -1
    But, the truth also does not take them out of the "wind".
    If you recall all the "his" words for the last 2-3 years ...
    That, you can safely FORGET with "health benefits" about all his previous words.
    And pay attention to the last words addressed to "democratic humanity" ...
    And, to be prepared for .... that we will recall these "words" in 2-3 years later, as the next "word-catch" that has passed.
    "... words, words ... how much in this sense, for the heart of Russian - merged ...."
  • scorpiosys
    scorpiosys 4 September 2015 23: 48 New
    0
    "... I love politics, but a strange love ...
    the "people's path" will not grow to it ....
    Not by OUR line, not by the Orthodox, it will strike me more than once, sometimes ... "
  • Alexart
    Alexart 5 September 2015 15: 11 New
    0
    About Lavrov Sergei Viktorovich, one of my friends said with pride:
    - Our minister!
    I have never heard anything like this about anyone in this post.
  • nozdrevat58
    nozdrevat58 5 September 2015 15: 39 New
    0
    Tell me, this is the majority of Russians, they can say WHY DO THERE TRUST THE LAVROV? Or are they just looking a lot at zombies? :) With all due respect. He says things seem to be right, and the Foreign Ministry has been trashing one event after another for many years.
    And what craps? Tell me. Remember Kozyrev - that’s "crap."
  • polkovnik manuch
    polkovnik manuch 5 September 2015 20: 30 New
    0
    “To make nails out of these people, there wouldn’t be stronger in the world of nails!” - V. Mayakovsky, just about people like Lavrov. It is a pity that there are only a few of them in the Medvedev government, the rest are overwhelmingly “effective managers” and “shift workers”.