Ukraine War... How much will S&P drop this week?

[CordMcNally]

The goal is suffering for everyone besides america. It’s a financial world war we are waging and asserting our position. Weakening China and Russia, the entire point.

China's domestic policy has likely done more damage to themselves than we could ever do without outright attacking.

[Panscan]

China's domestic policy has likely done more damage to themselves than we could ever do without outright attacking.

Sure I don’t disagree but our involvement in this is basically 100% for geopolitical influence and it has massively gone in our favor.

[jacoavlu]

Sure I don’t disagree but our involvement in this is basically 100% for geopolitical influence and it has massively gone in our favor.

except are you sure that we can afford it?

[CordMcNally]

Sure I don’t disagree but our involvement in this is basically 100% for geopolitical influence and it has massively gone in our favor.

Our government's involvement in a vast majority of things is 100% for our benefit.

[CordMcNally]

except are you sure that we can afford it?

What are you talking about? Costs are down, inflation is transitory, our economy is 'red hot', our economic outlook has never been higher, and we've mitigated most of 'Putin's price hike' from his Ukranian invasion...

[Kamban]

What are you talking about? Costs are down, inflation is transitory, our economy is 'red hot', our economic outlook has never been higher, and we've mitigated most of 'Putin's price hike' from his Ukranian invasion...

And shown the OPEC countries what a mighty power we are when they announced oil production cuts. Yes, out financial outlook is very rosy indeed.

[Panscan]

except are you sure that we can afford it?

Relative to other countries surely. Far greater damage to Europe, China and Russia economically.

[Rando]

For those still following the war,

It’s a surreal thing to read the front page of the NYTimes and see that Russian generals have had high level discussions regarding the use of tactile nuclear weapons.

Recently a letter was released by a group of politicians recommending to President Biden to pursue a diplomatic end to the war. When the letter was met with opposition the politicians quickly distanced themselves from the letter and the leader of the group hilariously claimed that the letter was released without her knowledge by a staffer. It’s never a good thing when debate and voices are stifled.

Yeah I've debated starting a thread about the financial implications if tactical nuclear weapons are used. My guess is bonds and gold up, stocks down, high chance of a market crash on the order of 9/11, defense stocks up. By the time usage of the weapons looks imminent it will probably be too late to do much.

The letter came from the progressive coalition, a group I don't have much in common with but on this I was on their side. Negotiations will invariably mean Ukraine making some concessions they don't want to make but it's much preferable to some of the alternatives.

I doubt anyone wants nuclear war but there's a danger of each side backing itself into a corner where that's the result.

[CordMcNally]

The letter came from the progressive coalition, a group I don't have much in common with but on this I was on their side. Negotiations will invariably mean Ukraine making some concessions they don't want to make but it's much preferable to some of the alternatives.

I doubt anyone wants nuclear war but there's a danger of each side backing itself into a corner where that's the result.

Much preferable to who? I doubt Ukraine wants to give up any part of its country to Russia. Honestly, why should they just because Russia bullied their way into Ukraine? Would you feel differently if Mexico or Canada invaded the US and other foreign countries were urging us to just give up part of our country to them?

[fatlittlepig]

Yeah I've debated starting a thread about the financial implications if tactical nuclear weapons are used. My guess is bonds and gold up, stocks down, high chance of a market crash on the order of 9/11, defense stocks up. By the time usage of the weapons looks imminent it will probably be too late to do much.

The letter came from the progressive coalition, a group I don't have much in common with but on this I was on their side. Negotiations will invariably mean Ukraine making some concessions they don't want to make but it's much preferable to some of the alternatives.

I doubt anyone wants nuclear war but there's a danger of each side backing itself into a corner where that's the result.

I consider myself in the liberal/progressive camp and the letter that was drafted was on point, it was disappointing to see the lack of courage to stand up for what they wrote. Blaming an underling, and claiming the letter was released inappropriately is the height of cowardice, although that was not entirely unexpected given her reputation for mistreatment of her workers. https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article...taff-treatment

[jacoavlu]

Much preferable to who? I doubt Ukraine wants to give up any part of its country to Russia. Honestly, why should they just because Russia bullied their way into Ukraine? Would you feel differently if Mexico or Canada invaded the US and other foreign countries were urging us to just give up part of our country to them?

that's a weak analogy and you know it.

[Kamban]

Much preferable to who? I doubt Ukraine wants to give up any part of its country to Russia. Honestly, why should they just because Russia bullied their way into Ukraine? Would you feel differently if Mexico or Canada invaded the US and other foreign countries were urging us to just give up part of our country to them?

They did, when they invaded Texas after we captured their territory and made them sign a treaty with a captured president forcing it to give it up. And they lost, because we were a superior force.

Similar things have happened in S. Africa and elsewhere.

Might is right, and being right does not give you any victory. To the winner goes the spoils and the winners write history.

[Rando]

Much preferable to who? I doubt Ukraine wants to give up any part of its country to Russia. Honestly, why should they just because Russia bullied their way into Ukraine?

If the alternative is nuclear war, I would rather see Putin get enough to save face and have an exit plan. I understand the decision is ultimately Ukraine's, but we are bankrolling them. As physicians we often ask our patients to choose the least bad option, that's the way I look at this. Is it fair - no but i don't see that expecting Putin to just march back out is realistic.

Before anybody brings up Neville Chamberlain, the difference here is nuclear weapons.

[CordMcNally]

that's a weak analogy and you know it.

I don’t know enough about the geopolitical atmosphere over there to give a better one but I would wager that China is watching what happens very closely.

[CordMcNally]

They did, when they invaded Texas after we captured their territory and made them sign a treaty with a captured president forcing it to give it up. And they lost, because we were a superior force.

Similar things have happened in S. Africa and elsewhere.

Might is right, and being right does not give you any victory. To the winner goes the spoils and the winners write history.

I think fighting with weapons of days gone by and fighting with today’s weaponry is different.