Hacker News Reader

Comment by ajsnigrutin | Hacker News Reader

CocaCola will be replaced by local drinks, netflix etc. by piracy, facebook etc. with VK.com, and china will replace the hardware (eg xiaomi/huawei instead of iphones). The disruption will probably be lower than in it was during the peak of supply chain issues during the first covid waves, just with enough toilet paper and yeast, and less of the stuff that isn't really that mandatory for normal day-to-day life.

On the other hand, europe will freeze without russian gas, and oil prices will make everything even more expensive worldwide.

The winner of all of this? China, with cheap russian gas (that russia will be forced to sell them, because they have noone else to sell it to) and more products/gardgets/stuff sold, with eu/usa imports stopped.

And the loser? Average joe, again.

View on HN

I'd say the Ukrainians are losing far more than the 'average joe'.

Those are the average joes. They’re just in another country.

Not to mention potential famine in Africa/SE Asia. Russia/Ukraine combined wheat exports are 25% of total.

Now look at how much fertilizer Russia produces (~23% global supply of ammonia, 14% of urea and 21% of potash). That affects a lot more than just wheat. Food costs are going to soar way beyond what they currently are, world-wide.

> Natural gas is a commonly used as a feedstock to produce two nitrogen-based fertilizers – ammonia and urea – in large quantities.

> In the production of ammonia or urea, natural gas is processed at an upgrading plant together with nitrogen (taken from the air). During the process, 80% of the gas is used as feed¬stock for fertilizer, while the remaining 20% is used for heat and electricity production. The two main end products, ammonium nitrate and urea, are then mixed with other ingredients—mainly phosphorus and potassium—to manufacture a range of synthetic fertilizers for use on farms.

https://context.capp.ca/articles/2020/pirl-fertilizers/

Easy fix is for the west to forbid anyone to sell food to China. China can drink Russia's cheap oil and eat Russia's scarse, expensive food while the rest of the world has stomachs full of the food that would have gone to China.

and eat Russia's scarse, expensive food

Now that Russia is the world's biggest wheat producer, it seems that Russian food will be neither scarce nor expensive. And also seeing that it produces a good proportion of the world's fertiliser, it seems that food grown elsewhere will be scarce and expensive.

Sounds like a great time to promote contraception, abortion, education for women as global values. Africa and West Asia's exponential population growth had to end at some point.

>population growth had to end at some point.

They'll be fine, I expect no prolonged famine, if any. Population growth will continue as expected. Ignoring western sanctions in exchange for food is a good idea if it comes to that.

Even before the war, in Romania where I'm from, gas prices became so high, that resistive heating became cheaper, when you opt for the national hydroelectric supplier (which anyone can do, they provide more than a third of electricity).

If you used heat pumps, you'd get 5x cheaper (or whatever CoP you get).

> The winner of all of this? China, with cheap russian gas (that russia will be forced to sell them, because they have noone else to sell it to) and more products/gardgets/stuff sold, with eu/usa imports stopped.

This is true, and it's why sanctions are dumb. Another example is Belarus. My understanding is for years they played the West against Russia, and their authoritarian government retained some independence as a result. Then the West slapped sanctions on them, which pushed them into the suffocating arms of Putin, and it became a staging area and accomplice to Putin's invasion of Ukraine.

The West probably needs some more realpolitik. Not the fuck your friends and bow down to your enemies kind that seems to be a bit in vogue, but the kind where you admit distasteful allies into your alliances against your stronger adversaries.

> And the loser? Average joe, again.

The real losers are the Ukrainians who are getting their country conquered by invaders.

"Another example is Belarus. My understanding is for years the played Europe against Russia, but their autocratic government retained some independence as a result. Then the West slapped sanctions on them, which pushed them into the suffocating arms of Putin, and it became a staging area and accomplice to Putin's invasion of Ukraine."

Contrast that with Finland and Sweden seriously considering joining NATO, NATO putting more weapons and soldiers in to the Baltic and Eastern European states, Germany and other NATO states increasing military spending, and moving much faster towards energy independence.

These consequences are evidence of a major miscalculation on Putin's part, who certainly would never want to see any of that happen.

Not to mention the world edging ever closer to WW3, in which everyone would be the loser.

Meh, they'll be forgotten soon...

If this was some middle eastern country, destroyed by the americans, this would be a "peacekeeping" occupation.. i mean operation.

The prices and the financial losses of individuals around the world would be remembered more.

Sad, but true.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com