Ukraine / Russia
- Thread starter Cheesehead
- Start date
SAJ-99
Well-known member
Just taking local US economies into effect (farm towns is what I assume you mean) the effect would be negligible because the price of the product would remain largely unchanged. New Corn Dec corn is at about $6.70 bu. Input costs are probably close to $4 (just a guess). You see the article you post because farmers want to produce all they can with that spread. The spread has been near zero for 15yrs. Tough to make a living being a farmer without subsidies. This idea is just a change in use- from Ethanol to export.
This is all super complicated stuff. I'm sure there are departments of the US government running "war game" type scenarios for all kinds of stuff, economic and military. None of this on this board have all the info and no one on any podcast has all the info. It's all just a best guess and largely entertainment. Even war-game simulations only tell what might happen.
My guess is Putin escalates in the coming week(s). Someone made a post on Twitter that said "Putin would rather lose a war to NATO than to Ukraine." Frightening but very true. We here are becoming a little numb to news. I don't expect that to last.
Wind Gypsy
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2017
- Messages
- 1,822
What's the impetuous for invasion? Was Ukraine going to invade Russia? Did Ukraine have nukes? OH SHIT AN INDEPENDENT COUNTRY ON OUR BOARDER, send in the tanks...
Like what is worst case scenario all of Europe joins NATO and then.... what? A preemptive attack on Russia? Seriously?
I hate all of the conspiracy theory BS that never leads to an actual conclusion.
So i'm not misunderstood, I think Ukraine is much better off with Zelensky as compared to the Russia friendly leadership that was overthrown in 2014. It's obvious to me why Ukrainians should (and seemingly do) want to be free from Russian influence and aligned with the west. I think Russia #@)(*%* up big time and was unjustified in their invasion, but there is more to it than "imperialistic greed" as the motivation explained by our media.
US and Russia proxy forces have been killing each other in and over Ukraine and elsewhere for a long time. We have been funding literal nazis (the azov battalion) and other questionable groups as they fight proxy (or legitimate) russian forces in eastern Ukraine. That isn't a conspiracy. It's hard to call Ukraine independent when they are constantly meddled with by us and Russia. Russia invaded because Ukraine was aligning more with the west and the more extreme folks that were fighting Russian separatists.
My understanding of NATO is that it is and has been an anti-Russian defense alliance. If Russia was sponsoring proxy attacks on US friendlies in Canada or Mexico to keep their puppets in power, or worse, states that used to be part of the US, we'd probably do something about it.
Disclaimer - I am not an internet expert on Ukraine and I did not stay at a Holiday inn express last night. This is just me spitballing on an internet forum in relation to stuff I've been reading about lately.
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
US troops didn’t land in Cuba after the revolution, we certainly didn’t indiscriminately shell Havana, and we definitely didn’t target civilians/hospitals.
I think Cuba is actually a good proxy for what your alluding to, consider our policy over the last 50 years.
Nick87
Well-known member
Price of wheat, corn, grain etc spikes through the roof. Lots of acres that are used for other farming...produce, beef, forage production etc are then rolled into grain creating a shortage on those commodities. Your not going to pump corn through hogs or steers that are losing money if you can ship it to the elevator for 2x what it was two months earlier.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
Claiming to know why Russia attacked is likely something we'll never know, especially on a hunting forum.
But I tend to think your points are overblown Russian prop more than reality. I tend to think this has much more to do with legacy Russian superiority beliefs than some quasi rational response to EU "aggressions", perceived or otherwise.
Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 8,392
Short term worries over disturbing local job markets created by unsustainable political policies shouldn’t trump putting that cropland to better use for food production.
That ground will get planted with crops regardless of whether those crops are eaten by humans or burned in combustion engines.
I would see a change from bio-fuel production to food production as a positive correction, not a loss.
It’s long past overdue.
Nick87
Well-known member
Agreed, just think you could phase it out instead of pulling the rug out all at once.
Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 8,392
Isn’t that one of the major dangers of being financially dependent on an industry driven by capricious policy instead of market forces?
As an anecdotal observation, I once had a conversation with a “conservative, free market” grain farmer from Nebraska. He loved the fact that government subsidies for ethanol kept corn prices artificially high in his local market.
My family is involved in commercial poultry production in the eastern US. Ethanol production drove the price of #2 yellow corn (a preferred crop for poultry feed) from @ $4 per bushel to over $8 per bushel. Those increased feed costs cut deeply into the profitability of the companies in my family’s area and many lost money for a few years.
As a consequence, that drove the poultry companies to utilize wheat more frequently. The problem with wheat is that it irritates the turkey’s gut and isn’t as easily digestible. However, necessity driven research allowed the companies to develop feed rations with added enzymes that allowed for better digestion and increased feed conversion ratios that make wheat preferred over #2 yellow corn as the main ingredient for feed.
That preference continues to this day. It will be interesting to see if increased demand for wheat will lead to high enough prices that wheat is no longer the most cost effective crop for poultry production.
BigHornRam
Well-known member
This is the real problem with the soaring wheat and other grain prices. This article is from last fall. It was $8 back then. It's $11 today.
Soaring wheat prices are raising bread costs
Wheat prices are surging from the U.S. to Russia, hitting a record in Europe and raising bread costs all over the world. And there may not be much relief soon.
www.seattletimes.com
"Protectionist measures: Russia — last season’s top shipper — started taxing exports this year to safeguard supplies and keep domestic costs in check, and signaled an overseas sales quota is likely. That’s helped to slow shipments and support prices elsewhere, while giving rival suppliers the chance to grab more market share.
— Import needs: Although top wheat buyer Egypt temporarily balked at high prices last month, appetite from importers remains strong, with Saudi Arabia booking more than double the expected amount in its latest tender. Countries typically stockpile several months of supply, but governments can’t risk running out before the next major harvests."
BigHornRam
Well-known member
World economic considerations are pushing countries like Russia, China, and Saudia Arabia into cooperative packs in order to protect their own countries best interests. This headline will add fuel to the fire, would you agree?
The U.S. must bust up the new China-Russia-Saudi Axis of Oil
The world’s economy still runs on oil. It provides a third of all global energy and fuels over 90% of transportation. Cheap energy drives economic growth...
www.dallasnews.com
RobertD
Well-known member
Writing off criticism of US diplomatic actions that may or may not have helped exacerbate this situation as Russian propaganda or conspiracy theories indirectly encourages our government to continue doing those things.
It doesn't justify Putin's actions to be honest about what we in the west have done to help create this problem... nothing really does. So we should make room for honest conversations about both 1.) America's past actions and 2.) Putin's motivations, as they're both relevant and inseparable parts of the equation.
It doesn't justify Putin's actions to be honest about what we in the west have done to help create this problem... nothing really does. So we should make room for honest conversations about both 1.) America's past actions and 2.) Putin's motivations, as they're both relevant and inseparable parts of the equation.
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
@Wind Gypsy rereading some of your points I will add this... both the US and Russia (USSR) have vied for hegemony around the globe for decades.
We both have gotten our hands dirty in foreign politics, and I guess here is the point I feel is important as Americans. We have to support democracy and other countries and peoples rights to sovereignty even if they aren't our allies.
It may not be in the best interest of a country agree with us... or with Russia, countries/people should be allowed to act in their own best interest.
A good example of this IMHO is the DRC, Patrice Lumumba lead the country after it won freedom from Belgium, all things considered he was a good leader though African nationalist. He tried to thread the gap between the US and Russia and we saw that as siding with the soviets so we had him assissignated. We helped Mobutu come to power and well that didn't go great for central Africa. IMHO epically bad foreign policy/intervention on the part of the United States. (If your curious about these events Lumumba is a great movie)
Anyway I kinda see Ukraine as a similar situation with Ukrainians trying to figure out how to exist independent between Russia and the US and Europe.
Seems to me Russia is using it's PR machine to justify their actions, and for whatever reason some US pundits are buying into it.
We both have gotten our hands dirty in foreign politics, and I guess here is the point I feel is important as Americans. We have to support democracy and other countries and peoples rights to sovereignty even if they aren't our allies.
It may not be in the best interest of a country agree with us... or with Russia, countries/people should be allowed to act in their own best interest.
A good example of this IMHO is the DRC, Patrice Lumumba lead the country after it won freedom from Belgium, all things considered he was a good leader though African nationalist. He tried to thread the gap between the US and Russia and we saw that as siding with the soviets so we had him assissignated. We helped Mobutu come to power and well that didn't go great for central Africa. IMHO epically bad foreign policy/intervention on the part of the United States. (If your curious about these events Lumumba is a great movie)
Anyway I kinda see Ukraine as a similar situation with Ukrainians trying to figure out how to exist independent between Russia and the US and Europe.
Seems to me Russia is using it's PR machine to justify their actions, and for whatever reason some US pundits are buying into it.
L
longbow51
Guest
Seems like there has been a lot of Russian disinformation floating around for a long time.
I never liked the ethanol idea. Just something wrong about taking grain than could be used for human or beast food, and putting it in my gas tank. Even worse is the damage the stuff can do to our small engines. And then there is the government subsidy issue with the production of ethanol…
L
longbow51
Guest
Given the energy required to plant, fertilize, harvest, ship, and process corn into gasahol, how much is the net energy? Engineers?
Gerald Martin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2009
- Messages
- 8,392
It’s a loss by a considerable margin.
CycleFishHunt
Well-known member
This promise has been discussed a lot, like a whole lot, in diplomatic and foreign affairs circles, not just the US mainstream press so if you dig around you can find a lot of super detailed accounts from people who where in the room, and the scores of folks who've analyzed it. I do not claim to be an expert, but I've read up a bit on these claims.
The origin of this so-called promise are comments Jim Baker made to Mikhail Gorbachev, during negotiations about the reunification of Germany, when Baker was SoS, under Bush #41. No one disputes that the comments were made, but there is huge on disagreement (even within the US) about the exact scope and meaning of Baker's statements. At the time Baker, even revised his initial statements as not to seem overly broad.
But what remains an indisputable fact, is that this promise was never put into writing in the form of a treaty, or other agreement. So as far as promises go between countries, and alliances, there is no promise.
So for anyone to say we agreed not to expand NATO is a severe overstatement.
My understanding of the Maidan Revolution was that it started as an outpouring of anger primarily by Ukraine's younger population when the president, Viktor Yanukovych, reneged on a promise to sign trade and association agreements with the EU, and instead signed one with Russia. In response to these protests Yanukovych sent riot police (and hired mercenaries) to violently repress them. Eventually, larger segments of the population joined the protests in outrage at the initial crackdown. Things eventually spun out of control into a full blown political crisis, and early elections we called. Yanukovych didn't wait around and fled to Russia, and was then removed from office by the parliament. That does not sound like coup, to me anyway.
That the US, and other Western allies wanted friendlier leaders in Ukraine was no secret. I have seen nothing however that leads me to believe that the US played large hand in putting these events into motion. Supporting a change in government is one thing, but sponsoring a coup is another. If there is some concrete evidence of this, I'd surely love to see it.
I also heard an interview with some Ukrainian journalists who are baffled by the neo-Nazi claims. They acknowledge the existence in neo-Nazis in the Ukraine, in the military, and elsewhere, but said the are very few in number, and hold no real power.
Why NATO and Ukraine are a flash point with Russia 30 years after the end of the Cold War
Russian leaders have watched with mounting resentment as the transatlantic alliance has nearly doubled its membership since the end of the Cold War. President Vladimir Putin has drawn a red line in Ukraine.
www.pbs.org
U.S. / NATO - Russia... It's been brewing.
RobertD
Well-known member
The Azov batallion is a formalized unit in the Ukrainian National Guard and if they aren't neo-Nazi they're damn close. They most certainly hold real (military) power in the Mariupol area.
That said, they aren't very large in number and don't seem to imply a significant presence of neo-Nazis in the broader Ukrainian government or whatever. But their significance to the conflict around Mariupol makes them pretty visible, so I can see where some of the takes about neo-Nazis could start with them.
Similar threads
