Hacker News Reader

Comment by paganel | Hacker News Reader

> and Iran is losing its grip on Hormuz.

That is just hope-believe, i.e. it ain't happening.

> It's easy to be a pessimist, but there's a bright future ahead of us.

I lived through the 1990s here in Romania, the future does not look bright in the slightest. Yes, materially speaking we do have more stuff compared to the 1990s, a lot more stuff, but the opportunities in front of us are as slim as ever (which wasn't the case back in the 1990s). But maybe things look different for the Polish.

View on HN

> I lived through the 1990s here in Romania, the future does not look bright in the slightest.

Why? Inflation was much higher then. There were almost no highways. Very little foreign tourism. Towns were ugly. Industry was barely functioning. Etc. Things are way better now. Just because Romania has high debt is no reason to be pessimistic. Everybody has high debt.

I was talking about the perspective on the future, we had that back in the 1990s, it is sorely missing now. No-one even dares mentioning about any “light at the end of the tunnel”, it’s everybody for himself (and for his/her family/clan) right now.

I don't live in Romania so I don't know the details but that probably makes me more objective. I think the situation is better for the future than it was in the 90s. In hindsight, back then it took many years for things to get better. Whereas now with so much upheaval in the world Romania is well-positioned to keep growing.

I would wager Iran is barely hanging on. The question is which side can hang on longer. Its like their both dangling off a cliff with their fingers on the edge - one due to politics, the other because they weren’t as strong as they projected from the start. I suspect Iran might hang on to after midterms.

Worth noting mid east is all looking for other routes now 3-5 years from now Iran will be in a weaker economic situation on reduced flow. Hopefully Theocracy has been ended.

> I would wager Iran is barely hanging on. The question is which side can hang on longer.

I think this applies to both sides, and the issue is that the people in power are not affected by the crises that cause hardship to ordinary people. " Iran is..." does not distinguish between the two, they are different. Fanatical leadership can live by "Some of you may die, but it's a sacrifice I am willing to make" .

The problem though is that people in the USA do have one lever to pull on their government, in the form of approaching midterm elections, that the people of Iran do not. And the leadership of Iran knows it. They may be fanatical and awful but they're not stupid - causing fuel shortages causes economic pain to ordinary people causes political pain to the USA. They have this weapon and are using it heavily.

Notwithstanding that, this assessment of blame is correct ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49907371 ), the missteps that put us in this mess with no clear way out all come from stupid leadership in the USA.

You realize you mostly just agreed with everything I said but added more language?

Yes, I knew all along that I agreed with what you said, I was not trying to dispute what you said. Apologies if that wasn't clear to you, I should have started it with "yes, and" so that you would not take mistaken offence.

I don't agree that the consequential points are just "more language". I said things that you did not.

No offense taken - I always find most people try and take an opposing view for debate sakes. I was merely hoping you didn't think that was the case. Glad to see we agree.

>> and Iran is losing its grip on Hormuz.

> That is just hope-believe, i.e. it ain't happening.

Best estimates are that 80% of the pre-war levels of oil are flowing through Hormuz right now. It's happening.

What are you hoping for?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com