???? ??? ?????
I have written often of “Putin’s Purgatory” and the “hamster wheel from hell”, meaning that under Putin and Putinism, Russia is destined for stasis and stagnation. As the country slouches towards its next presidential election, or the simulacrum thereof, this conclusion is becoming widely accepted. Medvedev warns of stagnation. First Deputy Prime Minister Shuvalov says stability is overrated. The IMF says that Russia is recovering, but its post-crisis economic performance is “unimpressive” (not that Russia is alone in this). The IMF analysis focuses on conventional macro issues like budget deficits, but acknowledges the crippling effects of Russia’s yawning institutional deficits:
Compared with its emerging market peers, Russia experienced a greater degree of economic instability during the past decade and a larger output loss in the recent crisis, owing to its continued dependence on commodities, poor governance, and procyclical economic policies rooted in weak policy frameworks. Unless these weaknesses are addressed forcefully, growth is likely to be modest—less than 4 percent in the medium term. Moreover, the economy will remain highly vulnerable to external shocks. For example, a sharp drop in the oil price would trigger another recession and reduce medium-term growth further.
But as if to prove it still doesn’t really get it, the IMF encourages Russia to use the opportunity given by high oil prices to push institutional reform:
But Russia can do much better, if it leverages the commodity boom to strengthen policies. The challenge is to overcome the complacency that in the past has set in when oil prices are high. The high oil price affords Russia an opportunity to build buffers and introduce growth-enhancing reforms which could lift medium-term growth to 6 percent or more. The focus should be on further scaling back the anti-crisis measures as the economy recovers, reducing fiscal vulnerabilities, reining in inflation, promoting a stronger and more competitive banking system, and creating a better environment for investment. Improvements to policy frameworks and a reinvigoration of long-stalled structural reforms should be central elements of this strategy, and would send a positive signal to investors and boost Russia’s growth potential. This would also generate positive economic spillovers in the region.
But insofar as real and constructive institutional change is concerned, high energy prices are a bug, not a feature. They permit the present system to function and survive: when oil prices are high, the country has the free cash flow problem from hell that enables all sorts of dysfunctional practices to survive. Crisis concentrates the mind: high energy prices encourage complacency. In other words, the IMF is delusional to think that high energy prices provide an opportunity to transition to a more modern economic system: to the contrary, they perpetuate the stint in purgatory.
The ability of the Putin model to produce a vibrant economy is becoming far more widely recognized, as the contrast between the vibrancy of other BRICs and Russia is becoming more and more manifest:
Russia is falling behind other BRIC economies in global competitiveness and growth, according to The Russia Competitiveness Report 2011, released Monday by the World Economic Forum.
The country ranked 63rd out of 139 countries based on the report’s 12 pillars of competitiveness.
The report noted that Russia can improve its poor ranking by reforming its institutions, improving the quality of education, stabilizing financial markets and moving away from a focus on natural resources.
“It is becoming increasingly evident that the current growth model, which is centered on high oil prices and leveraged facilities, is no longer effective,” Sberbank chief executive German Gref wrote in the report. “New drivers of growth are needed for Russia to achieve sustainable development.”
But the WEF commits the same mistake as the IMF:
The report’s authors recommended taking a “three-plus-five” approach to increase Russia’s competitiveness. This approach involves capitalizing on Russia’s three key economic advantages and addressing its five key challenges.
Natural resources, the size of the domestic and foreign markets, and a highly educated population are listed as Russia’s key strengths in the report. Challenges include inefficient and corrupt institutions, quality of education, low market competition, unstable financial markets and unsophisticated business practices.
Again, the problem is that one of the “key economic advantages”–natural resources–is a crucial driver of what the report euphemistically calls “challenges”–most notably “inefficient and corrupt institutions” and “unstable financial markets.”
Meanwhile, dinosaur-like, Putin lumbers on, promoting the status quo. His most recent statements have touted that Russia will recover to pre-crisis levels “by next year.” (Russian Railways head Vladimir Yakunin apparently missed the memo, as he has stated that full recovery will not occur until 2013.)
Even that is not that impressive, as it means that Russia will still be far below trend (again, the country is not alone in this.) Putting it as optimistically as possible, if the country recovers to 3Q 2008 performance by the end of 4Q 2011, given a pre-crisis growth rate of about 6 percent per year, the country will be about 21 percent below trend. (If Yakunin is right, the number is closer to 33 percent.)
Nonetheless, Putin promises the country a rosy future:
“And, as for GDP per capita, to increase this figure from $19,700 to more than $35,000 per capita [in the next decade], per person. But, to do this, we need to increase the productivity two times …and in non-raw material, high-tech sphere three or four fold.”
But he provides absolutely no concrete steps to achieve these lofty visions. He states goals, never means to get there–the classic con man shtick. He yammers about creating 25 million new high tech jobs. Just how, exactly? Especially with an aging and dying workforce, and a hollowed-out education system? Doubling productivity in 10 years requires productivity to grow at 7 percent per year: how do you do that with capital fleeing?
So Medvedev and his minions give speeches about modernization, but the hamster wheel just keeps spinning. And more and more people are noticing.
Actually, raising per capita GDP to $35,000 is something Putin could achieve very readily, and in fact he could do it much quicker than a decade. All he has to do is start killing poor people. Every time he kills one, the per capita GDP figure rises. And he doesn’t have to put a gun to their heads (although he could certainly use Stalin for a model and do just that). He can simply create a corrupt and useless healthcare system and watch as the depraved population continues to smoke, drink and eat itself into earlier and earlier graves (Russia already doesn’t rank in the top 130 nations of the world for life expectancy). Which is, of course, just what he is actually doing.
Comment by La Russophobe — June 17, 2011 @ 10:49 am
Medvedev got the foreign policy memo and atonement is underway. Gotta love the photos of Medvedev practically walking arm in arm with Ahmadinejad and both with big smiles at the Shanghai Cooperation Organization meeting. I felt much better after Lugubrious Lavrov’s relay of Ahmadinejad’s assurances that Iran has not and will not weaponize their atomic energy program. What a cast of characters at that meeting. Apparently Ahmadinejad brought the house down with his lyrical historical analysis of Zionism. I wonder if he conjured any Genies during the closed door sessions.
Comment by pahoben — June 17, 2011 @ 11:54 am
Putin is trying to attract foreign investment not only for the easy pickings financial scams but also so that he can re start the cycle of blaming foreigners for stealing the national wealth of the electorate.
Comment by pahoben — June 17, 2011 @ 12:10 pm
Prior to his meteoric rise Putin had never been in a leadership position of any kind. Camera whoring bravado aside, he is actually very indecisive and uncertain. Hence the clinging on to mates and their mates, and the overall “leave nothing to chance” attitude. ???? ?????? would win a healthy majority regardless, but no they have to steal another 20% “just to make sure”.
Comment by So? — June 17, 2011 @ 6:01 pm
@Pahoben–around here Lavrov’s nickname is “the Tarantula” (though lugubrious Lavrov is pretty good). The story is that I was talking to someone in the State Department who told me “Lavrov is interesting in the same was as a tarantula is interesting.”
Folks, make sure you are seated comfortably. Medvedev has just looked up another word in the “progressive tsar” glossary. And the word is …(drums)… decentralization. He pronounced it with a straight face.
Comment by Ivan — June 18, 2011 @ 1:24 am
I approve of the Lavrov – tarantula comparison.
Both produce useful products (silk; foreign policy strategy), both can defend themselves against aggressive intruders – though they try to live in peace, and both are maligned by nature-hating / Russia-hating Westerners.
Comment by Sublime Oblivion — June 18, 2011 @ 3:08 am
Nature-hating? Just to the contrary, Russia’s natural state is fascinating. Russia is a constant sobering (pun intended) reminder for those who take civilization for granted.
Comment by Ivan — June 18, 2011 @ 3:34 am
Putin’s 2011 report card:
http://larussophobe.wordpress.com/2011/06/16/editorial-russias-2011-report-card/
One D- and twelve Fs. that just about says it all, we feel.
Comment by La Russophobe — June 18, 2011 @ 6:08 am
SUBLIME DRUG ADDICT we are thinking of getting you a tarantula silk sweater for Christmas, but they seem damned hard to find. Any idea where we can pick one up online?
Comment by La Russophobe — June 18, 2011 @ 6:11 am
Why was Russia’s first-quarter growth rate this year half that of China and India?
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-06-15/khodorkovsky-says-corruption-means-russia-economy-needs-200-oil.html
Probably it’s because Vladimir Putin gave up power to a democratically elected replacement who has been vigorously decentralizing. What Russia needs is clearly to bring back Putin as president for life!
Comment by La Russophobe — June 18, 2011 @ 6:46 am
Why was it double that of the US and 8x that of Britain?
Comment by Sublime Oblivion — June 18, 2011 @ 3:11 pm
SWP, Yakunin is one of the people making sure our guys get their bullets and MREs in Afghanistan, and get them around the two-faced Pakistanis. You can thank him sometime on our troops behalf. What, nothing from Phobie? I guess she would agree with that Chairman Mao quote, by way of Tom Clancy, “Gratitude is a disease of dogs”.
Comment by Mr. X — June 18, 2011 @ 5:41 pm
Russia is falling behind other BRIC economies in global competitiveness and growth, according to The Russia Competitiveness Report 2011, released Monday by the World Economic Forum.
Don’t worry! Sublime Oblivion will be along shortly with the Karlin Competitivenes Index which will be based on, erm, what he thinks the ranking should really look like when Western prejudices are taken into account.
Anyway…
But insofar as real and constructive institutional change is concerned, high energy prices are a bug, not a feature. They permit the present system to function and survive: when oil prices are high, the country has the free cash flow problem from hell that enables all sorts of dysfunctional practices to survive.
I recently read this, which is a cracking read. One of the things which struck me is how much of that which has condemned Africa to poverty, slow growth, inefficiency, corruption, etc. could be applied to Russia (which is hardly surprising given much of Africa imported idiotic Soviet policies wholesale for decades). Russia is no Africa by a long shot, but their problems share far too many root causes for comfort (at least, for anyone interested in Russia’s development). For example, the awarding of positions, favours, and contracts in return for political loyalty. Sound familiar?
Comment by Tim Newman — June 19, 2011 @ 1:11 am
Why was it double that of the US and 8x that of Britain?
For the same reason the growth rate of most of the emerging economies is always multiples higher than that of the developed economies: it is far harder to achieve growth in a developed economy than in an undeveloped one. Russia shouldn’t be content to match the growth rate of the US or UK, it needs to match that of the other BRICs.
Comment by Tim Newman — June 19, 2011 @ 1:14 am
Quoth St Brin, “Russians – the Niggers of Europe”.
Comment by So? — June 19, 2011 @ 4:06 am
SUBLIME DRUG ADDICT:
Why are you trying to change the subject? Is it because you can’t handle the one we raised? Don’t you have any answer AT ALL for why Russia, with all its vast resources, is doing so very much worse than India and China?
Do you really think Russia should be compared to the USA, not the BRIC countries? Then why have you, SO MANY TIMES, claimed exactly the opposite, that Russia is doing well for a country of its station?
The US GDP is worth $14.5 trillion, sweetie, while Russia’s is worth TEN TIMES LESS. This means that just to stay even and add the same amount of value Russia’s growth rate has to be TEN TIMES that of the USA. If it’s only double, that means every year the USA is putting FIVE TIMES more actual money into the pockets of its citizens than Russia is doing.
Did you get your economics degree from a box of cracker jacks?
Comment by La Russophobe — June 19, 2011 @ 4:56 am
SUBLIME DRUG ADDICT doesn’t want to talk about comparative economic performance. So then, let’s talk internal matters. Last year, Russia experienced nearly $40 billion in capital flight. Money flowed out of Putin’s Russia in a tsunami at a rate of $3.2 billion per month. So far this year, despite a crude oil prices above $100/barrel, money is leaving Russia at a rate more than double that of last year. Already, in just the first four months of this year, Russia has hemorrhaged a stunning $26.3 billion. What do Russian investors know that SUMBLIME DRUG ADDICT does not?
Comment by La Russophobe — June 19, 2011 @ 5:53 am
Some Russians get it (mostly). Alexei Perevozchikov, 21, on the sham economic forum being staged by so-called “president” Dima Medvedev in St. Petersburg:
“This is my second time working at the forum; I’ll be giving out briefcases to participants. Working at the forum is good language practice. Are such events important? The government certainly thinks so… Maybe it would be better to spend the money — 200 million rubles ($7 million), if I’m not mistaken, plus the money spent on decorating the city — on increasing pensions… Other bad things can be said about it, for example, the forum contributes to the deterioration of the global environmental situation, as it directly or indirectly encourages endless economic growth. But who cares about that? Rich guys get together, eat gourmet food and discuss business. The city is stuck in traffic and listens to Sting, but hey, it boosts the city’s prestige. And the waiting lists for kindergartens drag on for several years. It’s just funny.”
http://www.times.spb.ru/index.php?action_id=2&story_id=34170
Comment by La Russophobe — June 19, 2011 @ 9:58 am
For the same reason the growth rate of most of the emerging economies is always multiples higher than that of the developed economies: it is far harder to achieve growth in a developed economy than in an undeveloped one.
Which was, in fact, exactly my point. A pity you didn’t get it.
Russia’s PPP-adjusted GDP / capita is $16,000-$20,000 (according to various estimates). China’s is $7,000-$10,000. India’s is $3,5000. All else equal it can be expected to grow more slowly than China or India.
What about Brazil? It has a GDP / capita of about $12,000 and it projected by the IMF to grow at 4.1% in 2011 and 3.6% in 2012. In other words, almost exactly the same as Russia’s rate (despite still being substantially poorer than Russia).
Comment by Sublime Oblivion — June 19, 2011 @ 12:10 pm
Which was, in fact, exactly my point. A pity you didn’t get it.
I didn’t get it because you didn’t make it. And let’s not pretend that by asking why Russia grew more than the USA or the UK you were attempting to explain why China grew more than Russia, eh?
Comment by Tim Newman — June 19, 2011 @ 2:40 pm
I made it quite clearly by analogy.
The likely reason you didn’t get it is that you consider me a Russian propagandist who hates the West and has no inkling of economics (in this case of convergence theory). That, or you always need to have things spelled out for you. In either case – your problem, not mine.
Finally, it would be well to point out one area in which Russia has a decisive advantage over the other BRICs – it is already a much more developed economy and society. As of 2009, and despite the economic crisis, Russia’s real GDP per capita was 14,900$, far higher than Brazil’s 10,500$, China’s 6,600$, and India’s 2,900$ … Really, the most convincing reason to leave Russia out of the BRICs is not that it doesn’t belong there, but that it won’t grow as fast as the others simply because it is already substantially richer than them and as such no longer has as much space to catch up! – me, one year ago.
Comment by Sublime Oblivion — June 19, 2011 @ 3:25 pm
Bravo S/O for some common sense. Of course Russia cannot be expected to grow as fast from the floor as China. 20k a year almost qualifies one as middle class in Moscow, granted that an apartment is inherited from parents or paid for. I wouldn’t pretend otherwise without that last caveat as rent at the end of the Metro lines is still running in the $1,000 a month range. On the other hand, there are plenty of dumps all over SWP’s second sweet home Chicago going for that much. Food in Russia remains cheaper when in season, but when the tomatoes aren’t in season they’re comparable to in the U.S.
And as for Brazil being so glorious in comparison to the dark heart of Muscovy which should be banished from the respectable BRICs forever, may I ask how The Economist lads would respond if truckloads of Russian troops with AKs were rolling into the Moscow slums to maintain order, ala Rio? Yeah, that’s what I thought.
Russia certainly isn’t more corrupt than Mexico either, and the body count in Juarez alone dwarfs that in the Caucases. I’m not playing the whataboutism game here, just urging folks to put Russia’s severe problems in perspective.
Lastly, I noticed the Putvedev split talk is dying with a whimper. It seemed like it was always more a product of Western correspondents in Moscow having to make something up pleasing to D.C. or London rather than real Kremlinology, to the extent that the latter is anything more than which oligarch is trying to avoid getting gored or get a quiet/tariff bailout this month. Which come to think of it, is pretty damn similar to SWP’s White House ‘rule by waiver’ corporatism. Russia seems to be a bit more open about it though. In the U.S., by contrast, we pretend we don’t protect the hell out of our Big Pharma and Health Care industries, for example, and this protectionism (i.e. the Embargo against medico turismo centro Havana) has nothing to do with our health care being the most expensive in the world.
So yes SWP, you can talk all you want about Russia not being ready to join the WTO. But the Pat Buchanan sympathizer in me says who the hell needs them?
Comment by Mr. X — June 19, 2011 @ 5:46 pm
Apparently though, to knock Medvedev a bit here, he thinks the old fart Cold Warriors will inevitably run amuck, start planting more military bases all over Eurasia, etc if the GOP wins back the White House in 2012. I guess he didn’t hear about RT favorite Ron Paul winning the GOP straw poll in New Orleans. The GOP Establishment will blackmail Rick Perry into running before they let Brother Ron embarass Romney, Pawlenty and all the other boring Repub retreads.
It’s hard to argue with Medvedev’s logic, unfortunately, given all the pro-establishment softballs lobbed at the resident forever-war promoting RINOs (‘Are you concerned about isolationist candidates taking over your party Senators McCain and Graham?’) on the Sunday talk shows. As Putin said, Comrade Wolf (U.S. MIC) is always hungry, despite fiscal and monetary reality smashing it in the face.
Comment by Mr. X — June 19, 2011 @ 5:50 pm
MR. X, your definition of “common sense” is classically Russian — that is, deranged.
SUBLIME DRUG ADDICT says it doesn’t matter that Russia’s growth rate is half that of INDIA AND CHINA because it is bigger than that of the United States and Great Britain.
But both the US and UK see it as a serious problem that their growth rate is relatively small, and right now the Obama government is coming under intense failure with talk of the failure of its economic policies. Yet, Putin comes in for no such criticism and indeed DOES NOT EVEN FACE A CREDIBLE OPPOSITION PARTY. That is utterly insane behavior on the part of Russians.
More important, SUBLIME DRUG ADDICT totally ignores THE POINT: Russia is part of the BRIC group, a whole host of folks with fancy letters after their names have decided that Russia bears comparison to them. Russia is failing MISERABLY in that comparison, and there is LOTS MORE EVIDENCE besides:
http://larussophobe.wordpress.com/2011/06/09/editorial-non-competitive-russia/
So frankly, we don’t think you’d know common sense if it fell on you.
Comment by La Russophobe — June 19, 2011 @ 6:16 pm
“But both the US and UK see it as a serious problem that their growth rate is relatively small, and right now the Obama government is coming under intense failure with talk of the failure of its economic policies.” Which won’t stop you from insisting the U.S. and UK keep pissing money away on useless foreign adventures, or from backing politicians like John McCain who insist that we do.
Besides Phobie, how do I even know that you are an American? I am. And AK has the right to criticize Britain — he holds a British passport.
Comment by Mr. X — June 19, 2011 @ 7:59 pm
Nice exchanging with you, crazy Katya Fitzpatrickeva!
Comment by Mr. X — June 19, 2011 @ 7:59 pm
I made it quite clearly by analogy.
No you didn’t! You merely asked why the Russian economy grew more than that of the USA or UK. How is this a clear analogy?
Comment by Tim Newman — June 20, 2011 @ 12:31 am
LR wrote: “SUBLIME DRUG ADDICT…”
LR, you are a foul-mouthed idiot even for a 5-year old.
Comment by Ostap Bender — June 20, 2011 @ 12:37 am
Time Newman wrote: “I didn’t get it because you didn’t make it.”
And I got it, because it’s obvious. There is a saying that a word to the wise suffices. For you, ten thousand words and a picture wouldn’t be enough.
Comment by Ostap Bender — June 20, 2011 @ 12:41 am
@Mr. X:
LR is no Cathy Fitzpatrick. CF has an IQ of at least 100, which is at least 30% larger than that of LR. As I wrote before, LR would be retarded even by the standards of 7 yo children. Even her specialty – swearing – is primitive.
Comment by Ostap Bender — June 20, 2011 @ 12:54 am
For you, ten thousand words and a picture wouldn’t be enough.
Erm, SO asked a question and I answered it. What’s more, I answered it so correctly that he felt compelled to state that was exactly his point. Apparently this constitutes my missing the point.
Comment by Tim Newman — June 20, 2011 @ 4:35 am
“CF has an IQ of at least 100, which is at least 30% larger than that of LR. As I wrote before, LR would be retarded even by the standards of 7 yo children.”
OB you are foul-mouthed idiot even for 5-year-old.
Comment by La Russophobe — June 20, 2011 @ 4:46 am
How funny. Ostap Bender’s enduring and consuming dream was to live in Brazil in Rio.
Comment by pahoben — June 20, 2011 @ 6:39 am
I wrote:
“LR, you are a foul-mouthed idiot even for a 5-year old.”
LR gave it a long thought and came up with a brilliant retort:
“OB you are foul-mouthed idiot even for 5-year-old”
Brilliant!
Comment by Ostap Bender — June 20, 2011 @ 2:46 pm
@Tim Newman:
Since Russia’s GDP per capita is much-much higher than that of China and India and since less developed countries have an opportunity to grow faster, it was obvious to any normal person that you can’t blame Russia for growing slower than China and India. It wasn’t to you, and you kept arguing until S/O spelled this out for you in the full gory detail.
But what is amazing here is that, if my calculations are correct, Russian GDP PPP per capita has been growing faster than China:
In 2004, the ratio was 1.8 in favor of Russia. In 2010 it was 2.1 in Russia’s favor.
Comment by Ostap Bender — June 20, 2011 @ 3:17 pm
OSTAP PSYCHOPATH:
You are completely deranged, dear. Neither China nor India benefit at all from the soaring price of oil as Russia does. To the contrary, the rising price seriously undermines their growth by making it more expensive. Yet, they both grow much faster than Russia.
By your “logic” Russia cannot take any pride in having its growth rate exceed that of the United States or Western Europe. But when you then take Russia’s natural resources out of the equation and look only at the efforts of the Russian people, you find Russia is an abject loser in regard to all the other countries as well.
You really ought to think at least a little before you scribble down your “thoughts” in public sweetie. And maybe rest from the crack pipe a bit too.
Comment by La Russophobe — June 20, 2011 @ 4:39 pm
It wasn’t to you, and you kept arguing until S/O spelled this out for you in the full gory detail.
Look, I don’t know if you realise this, but the entire transcript is there for everyone to read. Your version of it does not correspond with what is actually written. Nor does SO’s, for that matter.
Comment by Tim Newman — June 20, 2011 @ 11:37 pm
“You are completely deranged, dear. Neither China nor India benefit at all from the soaring price of oil as Russia does.” No LR, they just benefit wildly from the ma, pa and apple pie American corporations that worked damned hard to ship as many U.S. jobs to those countries as humanly possible and an American tax code that rewards leveraging to the hilt while punishing savings and investment here with the highest corporate income tax in the world — which GE doesn’t pay. There are privileges to being part of the Amerikansky nomenklatura, after all.
Obviously they didn’t do that in Russia, and you don’t see Wal-Mart stocked to the gills with stuff made in Russia. Russian labor isn’t quite cheap enough for that.
When are folks like you going to realize America has a PR problem and is losing the international media wars because we really, truly are in decline this time? And we really are fighting an insane number of wars, printing astronomical amounts of money, and generally fulfilling the fondest dreams of the late Soviet hacks by doing ourselves in for them?
No amount of spin on behalf of whoever sends a crumb from their table now and then to you Phobie will change that.
Comment by Mr. X — June 21, 2011 @ 12:46 am
I mostly agree Mr. X but not only fulfilling the dream of late Soviet hacks but also present day Globalists like Soros and his superior ilkists (my word).
Comment by pahoben — June 21, 2011 @ 6:40 am
Mr.X, another reason you don’t see Wallmart stocked with Russian goods, is that the Russians produce products inferior to those produced by China.
Russian made = Junk.
Comment by Andrew — June 21, 2011 @ 11:55 pm
Russia’s leading opposition party denied permission to collect votes on election day.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hwq3UPbYKtctP1o_h-D4u8pIa2ig?docId=4297aa95f8a84c84bfde40e161ac5102
Dima Medvedev proven a lice-ridden liar. Welcome back to the USSR!
Comment by La Russophobe — June 22, 2011 @ 6:00 am
@ La Russophobe who blared: “OSTAP PSYCHOPATH” and “SUBLIME DRUG ADDICT” and bleeted: “Dima Medvedev proven a lice-ridden liar” and “And maybe rest from the crack pipe a bit too.” and “You are completely deranged”
Not only are your IQ and LQ (logic quotient) that of a 5 year old child, so is your EIQ (emotional intelligence quotient), sweetheart. You seriously think that you can win arguments by insulting your opponents / childish ad hominem attacks. You also believe that you can increase the validity of your arguments by CAPITALIZING you insults.
However, if you can’t formulate an argument without childish insults, you should ask your mommy or your nanny enlarge your vocabulary. For example, at your own blog, the most commonly used word is “baboon”. The google search for “baboon” returns a mind-numbing 1420 posts with this word, including:
EDITORIAL: The Mutterings of a Russian baboon
you illiterate baboon ‘boba’
you are such an illiterate baboon
you illiterate Russian baboon
you illiterate baboon
It’s sad that you are such an illiterate baboon
your being an illiterate baboon
look at the real facts of the case, baboon
that russian baboon
he might look like ridiculous baboon impugning
you brain damaged baboon!
like the baboon he is
you retarded baboon
a sexist baboon
Hey, russian baboon
ignorant baboon
you butt-scratching baboon
ass-scratching ape
Wow. A new epithet. You must be improving, you anus-sniffing macaque. Try to learn more ape species names, you rectum-cleaning gorilla.
Comment by Ostap Bender — June 22, 2011 @ 1:58 pm