Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

You could not pay me enough to invest in Russia as she is situated today. I would need to see irrefutable, verifiable proof that things are changing for the better before I would consider sending even one of my hard earned dollars there.

As far as I'm concerned, when it comes to Russia: The King is dead. Long live the King.

There are better things to invest in than Russia, but where does the "could not pay me enough" attitude come from? There's nothing wrong with Russia right now that hasn't been as wrong or more wrong in the 90s, when there was much less meanness in the West toward Russia.

The full quote is "could not pay me enough to invest in Russia as she is situated today". For what it's worth at no time would I have invested in Russia. Now, a decade ago, 50 years ago or 100 years ago.

It's not about meanness towards Russia. It's about understanding how things function, or don't function, in Russia and actively choosing not to be a part of it. Russia has vast resources both materially and in it's people. I would very much like to invest in Russia but not the Russia that exists today.

I'm not a fan of the "foreign investment will help change Russia for the better" theory. As we've seen so many times this past decade, change comes from within and can not be forced by outsiders.

I can go on about the insanity that is Russia but the article does a good job at that. The bottom line is that profits are not so hard to find that one should be looking towards Russia to find them. Not only is the risk far too great but voluntarily supporting the state of things in Russia is too high a price for me to pay.

See "Drug dealers shouldn't make iPhone apps" from yesterday, http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1408445.

There was more hope back then that Russia would improve, because it then was in transition from USSR, broken economics, low oil prices, budget deficits, you know.

Since then oil price rose from $20 to $150, and... nothing changed. Those who were gangsters in the 90-s are now the government. They do their business accordingly.

Well, quality of life for the average Russian changed, not that anyone cares about that. And those who were gangsters in the the 90s are not just "now" in government. I'll repeat myself: nothing is wrong now that wasn't wrong before. Why all this emphasis on the "now", except that The Economist likes this kind of talk?

You are a flawed individual now. How does that sound? I mean it's technically true that you are flawed in some way, as we all are, in the present moment. But clearly the sentence carries an attitude beyond the literal meaning. I am disappointed to see this kind of insidious rhetoric get support on HN.

> nothing is wrong now that wasn't wrong before

Only technically true, if at all. Ultimate corruption, political monopoly, no security of any kind for 20 years and no signs of improvement give me no hope whatsoever that the next 20 years will be any better.

I'm pretty sure we will be sliding down the Nigeria way sooner or later, and it's really sad.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact