Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Ukraine War

Jump to new
JohnDe said:
Negotiating ploy
Click to expand...
there are a million think-tanks and policy institutes in Washington (and elsewhere)

While the above is interesting, and more grounded than much of the commentary around, the US response will be measured by continuing assistance, or not.

There is fundamental change happening,
 
Dona Ferentes said:
there are a million think-tanks and policy institutes in Washington (and elsewhere)

While the above is interesting, and more grounded than much of the commentary around, the US response will be measured by continuing assistance, or not.

There is fundamental change happening,
Click to expand...

More like, thousands of thinks tanks and millions of personal opinions.

No one knows what any of those involved have planned, or their thinking. My reason for showing the video link is to prove that there is no surety of what will happen, and it is best to calmly wait and observe.
 
JohnDe said:
Shouldn't this go in our Political Satire thread?

www.aussiestockforums.com

Political Satire

Chinese Citizens Told They Must Condemn Australia’s Human Rights Record, Or Risk Imprisonment A directive from the Chinese Communist Party has obligated all citizens of the mighty and glorious nation of China to...
www.aussiestockforums.com www.aussiestockforums.com
Click to expand...
Not if you actually read it John. How about doing so and then commenting on what Jonathan pie has to say.
 
JohnDe said:
More like, thousands of thinks tanks and millions of personal opinions.

No one knows what any of those involved have planned, or their thinking. My reason for showing the video link is to prove that there is no surety of what will happen, and it is best to calmly wait and observe.
Click to expand...
I counted them, and got to seven figures.

.
.


The writer is US Treasury secretary, Scott Bessant

"While much has been reported about the economic partnership that President Donald Trump has proposed to his Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, there is a great deal about it that has been misrepresented or is just plain wrong. So, I welcome this opportunity to make clear how this partnership benefits both our nations.
Without the support of the United States and the American people, Ukraine’s position today would be perilous at best. The support of the US has enabled a historic and valiant defence by the Ukrainian people, and as a result, we are now on the verge of a peace deal for Ukraine and a renewal of stability in Europe.

As has been previously reported, Zelenskyy proposed giving the US a
stake in Ukraine’s rare earths elements and critical minerals on a visit to Trump Tower in September. In other words, it was the Ukrainian president himself who first proposed to President Trump a future, economic partnership with shared benefits to both nations. We know Ukraine’s economic future in a time of peace can be more prosperous than at any other point in the nation’s history, and a partnership with Americans will ensure its prosperity. President Zelenskyy recognises this and so does President Trump. With these facts in mind, I travelled to Kyiv on my first international visit as the secretary of the Treasury with a proposal that demonstrates our longterm commitment to a free and secure Ukraine — an agreement focused on turbocharging the country’s economic growth.

This partnership will support the US’s continued commitment to the people of Ukraine as well as lay the foundation for a robust reconstruction of the Ukrainian economy. While asset prices can be fickle, Ukrainian debt has been trading up on the news, signalling that Ukraine’s creditors and financial markets appreciate the benefits of the economic partnership.
The Ukrainian people have demonstrated incredible bravery and resilience. They deserve to enjoy the benefits of the freedom for which they have fought so heroically. Ukraine is endowed with natural resources and other national assets that can drive its postwar economic growth, but only if its government and people are armed with sufficient capital, expertise and the right incentives.

The terms of our partnership propose that revenue received by the government of Ukraine from natural resources, infrastructure and other assets is allocated to a fund focused on the long-term reconstruction and development of Ukraine where the US will have economic and governance rights in those future investments. This structure and relationship bring the high standards of transparency, accountability, corporate governance and legal frameworks necessary to attract the robust private investment for postwar growth in Ukraine. The US’s involvement would leave no room for corruption and insider deals. When I was in Kyiv, I met with many American companies that have been on the ground in Ukraine for years. And I have spoken with many more who are ready to support the Ukrainian economy through a just and lasting peace. The terms of this partnership will mobilise American talent, capital, and high standards and governance to accelerate Ukraine’s recovery and sends a clear message to Russia that the US is invested in a free and prosperous Ukraine over the long term.

The US is a durable and long-term partner in this relationship. The proceeds from future revenue streams would be reinvested back into key sectors focused on unlocking more of Ukraine’s growth assets. The terms of this agreement would also ensure that countries that did not contribute to the defence of Ukraine’s sovereignty will not be able to benefit from its reconstruction or these investments.

The US has always been creative in finding ways to best support its partners. In 1942, the US and the UK agreed to “promote mutually advantageous economic relations between them and the betterment of worldwide economic relations”, on the basis of the exchange of destroyers for basing rights in the Caribbean. This forward-thinking provision helped to lay the financial foundation for the unprecedented economic growth experienced over the last 80 years.

In a similar vein, President Trump’s innovative approach represents a
new model for productive international partnership. Let’s also be clear as to what this is not. The US would not be taking ownership of physical assets in Ukraine. Nor would it be saddling Ukraine with more debt. This type of economic pressure, while deployed by other global actors, would advance neither American nor Ukrainian interests. In order to create more value over the long term, the US must be invested alongside the people of Ukraine, so that both sides are incentivised to gain as much as possible.

Ukraine’s close neighbour, Poland, has shown what is possible. Through sound economic policies and a diversified economy, Poland has been an attractive trade and investment partner for the US. Since 1992, Poland’s economy in real GDP terms has more than tripled in size while the per capita income of its citizens is more than seven times higher today than it was then. The success that Poland has seen from structural reforms, infrastructure investment, attracting foreign investment, and developing a skilled workforce provides a clear preview of what Ukraine can achieve. Its strategic
location, industrious population, and natural resources are a strong foundation for the aspirations of the Ukrainian people.

President Trump’s proposed partnership aligns the interest of the American people with those of the people of Ukraine. The president recognises that national security is built alongside economic security, and the more successful and secure postwar Ukraine is, the more that both the Ukrainian people and the people of the US will benefit. This economic partnership would lay the foundations for a durable peace by sending a clear signal to the American people, the people of Ukraine, and the government of Russia about the importance of Ukraine’s future sovereignty and success to the US.

hat tip, the fedora'd one
 
Dona Ferentes said:
I counted them, and got to seven figures.

.
.


The writer is US Treasury secretary, Scott Bessant

"While much has been reported about the economic partnership that President Donald Trump has proposed to his Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, there is a great deal about it that has been misrepresented or is just plain wrong. So, I welcome this opportunity to make clear how this partnership benefits both our nations.
Without the support of the United States and the American people, Ukraine’s position today would be perilous at best. The support of the US has enabled a historic and valiant defence by the Ukrainian people, and as a result, we are now on the verge of a peace deal for Ukraine and a renewal of stability in Europe.

As has been previously reported, Zelenskyy proposed giving the US a
stake in Ukraine’s rare earths elements and critical minerals on a visit to Trump Tower in September. In other words, it was the Ukrainian president himself who first proposed to President Trump a future, economic partnership with shared benefits to both nations. We know Ukraine’s economic future in a time of peace can be more prosperous than at any other point in the nation’s history, and a partnership with Americans will ensure its prosperity. President Zelenskyy recognises this and so does President Trump. With these facts in mind, I travelled to Kyiv on my first international visit as the secretary of the Treasury with a proposal that demonstrates our longterm commitment to a free and secure Ukraine — an agreement focused on turbocharging the country’s economic growth.

This partnership will support the US’s continued commitment to the people of Ukraine as well as lay the foundation for a robust reconstruction of the Ukrainian economy. While asset prices can be fickle, Ukrainian debt has been trading up on the news, signalling that Ukraine’s creditors and financial markets appreciate the benefits of the economic partnership.
The Ukrainian people have demonstrated incredible bravery and resilience. They deserve to enjoy the benefits of the freedom for which they have fought so heroically. Ukraine is endowed with natural resources and other national assets that can drive its postwar economic growth, but only if its government and people are armed with sufficient capital, expertise and the right incentives.

The terms of our partnership propose that revenue received by the government of Ukraine from natural resources, infrastructure and other assets is allocated to a fund focused on the long-term reconstruction and development of Ukraine where the US will have economic and governance rights in those future investments. This structure and relationship bring the high standards of transparency, accountability, corporate governance and legal frameworks necessary to attract the robust private investment for postwar growth in Ukraine. The US’s involvement would leave no room for corruption and insider deals. When I was in Kyiv, I met with many American companies that have been on the ground in Ukraine for years. And I have spoken with many more who are ready to support the Ukrainian economy through a just and lasting peace. The terms of this partnership will mobilise American talent, capital, and high standards and governance to accelerate Ukraine’s recovery and sends a clear message to Russia that the US is invested in a free and prosperous Ukraine over the long term.

The US is a durable and long-term partner in this relationship. The proceeds from future revenue streams would be reinvested back into key sectors focused on unlocking more of Ukraine’s growth assets. The terms of this agreement would also ensure that countries that did not contribute to the defence of Ukraine’s sovereignty will not be able to benefit from its reconstruction or these investments.

The US has always been creative in finding ways to best support its partners. In 1942, the US and the UK agreed to “promote mutually advantageous economic relations between them and the betterment of worldwide economic relations”, on the basis of the exchange of destroyers for basing rights in the Caribbean. This forward-thinking provision helped to lay the financial foundation for the unprecedented economic growth experienced over the last 80 years.

In a similar vein, President Trump’s innovative approach represents a
new model for productive international partnership. Let’s also be clear as to what this is not. The US would not be taking ownership of physical assets in Ukraine. Nor would it be saddling Ukraine with more debt. This type of economic pressure, while deployed by other global actors, would advance neither American nor Ukrainian interests. In order to create more value over the long term, the US must be invested alongside the people of Ukraine, so that both sides are incentivised to gain as much as possible.

Ukraine’s close neighbour, Poland, has shown what is possible. Through sound economic policies and a diversified economy, Poland has been an attractive trade and investment partner for the US. Since 1992, Poland’s economy in real GDP terms has more than tripled in size while the per capita income of its citizens is more than seven times higher today than it was then. The success that Poland has seen from structural reforms, infrastructure investment, attracting foreign investment, and developing a skilled workforce provides a clear preview of what Ukraine can achieve. Its strategic
location, industrious population, and natural resources are a strong foundation for the aspirations of the Ukrainian people.

President Trump’s proposed partnership aligns the interest of the American people with those of the people of Ukraine. The president recognises that national security is built alongside economic security, and the more successful and secure postwar Ukraine is, the more that both the Ukrainian people and the people of the US will benefit. This economic partnership would lay the foundations for a durable peace by sending a clear signal to the American people, the people of Ukraine, and the government of Russia about the importance of Ukraine’s future sovereignty and success to the US.

hat tip, the fedora'd one
Click to expand...


Very interesting, and still well short of a million.

While you have that list, can you post it?
 
basilio said:
Not if you actually read it John. How about doing so and then commenting on what Jonathan pie has to say.
Click to expand...

I have to admit that I did not read it, but that's because it is a video. I did watch the video, and I have watched his stuff before, he used to be funny but as I get older, I cringe at the vulgar and abuse. But he is a satirist.

Jonathan Pie is a fictional character portrayed by British comedian Tom Walker. Pie is a political correspondent who rants angrily about British, American,
 
JohnDe said:
I have to admit that I did not read it, but that's because it is a video. I did watch the video, and I have watched his stuff before, he used to be funny but as I get older, I cringe at the vulgar and abuse. But he is a satirist.

Jonathan Pie is a fictional character portrayed by British comedian Tom Walker. Pie is a political correspondent who rants angrily about British, American,
Click to expand...
and as boring /tedious the poster.
 
.
Screenshot_20250225_190602_Chrome~2.jpg
 

Ukraine has officially reached an agreement with the United States on a minerals deal, ending weeks of tense negotiations that saw sharp public exchanges between U.S. President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

The breakthrough was confirmed by Ukraine’s Deputy Prime Minister and Justice Minister Olha Stefanishyna in an interview with the Financial Times on February 25.

The agreement, which Kyiv’s Cabinet of Ministers is set to approve on February 26, establishes a joint investment fund into which Ukraine will contribute 50% of proceeds from the monetization of state-owned mineral resources, including oil, gas, and related infrastructure.

This fund will finance projects within Ukraine, aiming to strengthen economic ties with Washington.

However, the deal does not include resources that already contribute to Ukraine’s state budget—meaning operations by Naftogaz and Ukrnafta, Ukraine’s largest oil and gas producers, are exempt.
 
From Mensa FB website

In the Constitution of Mensa, it says that Mensa is not allowed to take any political action and cannot hold political affiliations (though Members or groups of members may express opinions as members of Mensa, provided their opinions or actions are not expressed as being those of Mensa as an organization). So while I do have personal opinions on what happened between Trump, Vance, and Zelensky (Володимир Зеленський) during the session with the press at the White House today, I am keeping those to myself. I wanted to provide some fact checking on the numbers being thrown around though, as these numbers are not politics but verifiable numbers.

The USA has not spent $350 billion in Ukraine, nor even $300 billion. I have seen figures ranging anywhere from $119.7 billion (Kiel Institute for the World Economy) to $182.8 billion (U.S. Department of Defense), but the most consistent figure that I have seen is around $175 billion, and only $105.1 billion of that is to the Ukrainian government directly:
- $2 billion in humanitarian aid
- $33.3 billion in budget support
- $69.8 billion in weapons, equipment, and other military support
(Council on Foreign Relations, BBC News, Euronews, US Special Inspector General for Operation Atlantic Resolve)

Most of the remainder is funding various U.S. activities associated with the war in Ukraine, and a small portion supports other affected countries in the region (the $182.8 billion figure includes US military training and replenishing US defence stocks, so it includes all spending on the response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine). (Council on Foreign Relations, BBC News)

Of the $182.8 billion from the USA, only $83.4 billion has been sent, with the remaining $99.4 billion either not yet committed or not yest approved for payment. This is why Ukraine has received only $76 billion from the USA. (Euronews, Українська правда)

By comparison, the Kiel Institute calculates that, including military, financial, and humanitarian aid to Ukraine, the EU has spent $138.7 billion (compared to their calculation of $119.7 billion from the USA). Their calculations include only support directly given to Ukraine and exclude things like money used to replenish U.S. weapon stocks following donations to Kyiv, funds spent to help neighbouring countries welcome Ukrainian refugees, etc. However, using a broader definition, the European Union has committed $198 billion so far. (BBC News, Washington Post, Fox News)

Of all the funding Ukraine as received, NATO estimates that nearly 60% of the funding for Ukraine has come from across Europe and Canada. (ABC News and BBC News)

In total, Ukraine has spent $120 billion of it's own money, and Ukraine estimates that that total they have spent on the war is about $320 billion. (Voice of America)

If you're wondering, 35% of the funds going to Ukraine from Europe have been loans, and some of the repayment of those loans are coming from revenues from frozen and seized Russian assets and Ukraine isn't having to pay those portions of the loans, and the rest are really generous terms where Ukraine will be repaying less interest over lengthy repayment periods. The remaining 65% is grants an in-kind support. (Washington Post and BBC News)
 
Knobby22 said:
From Mensa FB website

In the Constitution of Mensa, it says that Mensa is not allowed to take any political action and cannot hold political affiliations (though Members or groups of members may express opinions as members of Mensa, provided their opinions or actions are not expressed as being those of Mensa as an organization). So while I do have personal opinions on what happened between Trump, Vance, and Zelensky (Володимир Зеленський) during the session with the press at the White House today, I am keeping those to myself. I wanted to provide some fact checking on the numbers being thrown around though, as these numbers are not politics but verifiable numbers.

The USA has not spent $350 billion in Ukraine, nor even $300 billion. I have seen figures ranging anywhere from $119.7 billion (Kiel Institute for the World Economy) to $182.8 billion (U.S. Department of Defense), but the most consistent figure that I have seen is around $175 billion, and only $105.1 billion of that is to the Ukrainian government directly:
- $2 billion in humanitarian aid
- $33.3 billion in budget support
- $69.8 billion in weapons, equipment, and other military support
(Council on Foreign Relations, BBC News, Euronews, US Special Inspector General for Operation Atlantic Resolve)

Most of the remainder is funding various U.S. activities associated with the war in Ukraine, and a small portion supports other affected countries in the region (the $182.8 billion figure includes US military training and replenishing US defence stocks, so it includes all spending on the response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine). (Council on Foreign Relations, BBC News)

Of the $182.8 billion from the USA, only $83.4 billion has been sent, with the remaining $99.4 billion either not yet committed or not yest approved for payment. This is why Ukraine has received only $76 billion from the USA. (Euronews, Українська правда)

By comparison, the Kiel Institute calculates that, including military, financial, and humanitarian aid to Ukraine, the EU has spent $138.7 billion (compared to their calculation of $119.7 billion from the USA). Their calculations include only support directly given to Ukraine and exclude things like money used to replenish U.S. weapon stocks following donations to Kyiv, funds spent to help neighbouring countries welcome Ukrainian refugees, etc. However, using a broader definition, the European Union has committed $198 billion so far. (BBC News, Washington Post, Fox News)

Of all the funding Ukraine as received, NATO estimates that nearly 60% of the funding for Ukraine has come from across Europe and Canada. (ABC News and BBC News)

In total, Ukraine has spent $120 billion of it's own money, and Ukraine estimates that that total they have spent on the war is about $320 billion. (Voice of America)

If you're wondering, 35% of the funds going to Ukraine from Europe have been loans, and some of the repayment of those loans are coming from revenues from frozen and seized Russian assets and Ukraine isn't having to pay those portions of the loans, and the rest are really generous terms where Ukraine will be repaying less interest over lengthy repayment periods. The remaining 65% is grants an in-kind support. (Washington Post and BBC News)
Click to expand...
Dona Ferentes said:
what a sorry outcome, for the Trump Zelenskyy meeting.
Click to expand...
Just read an interesting article by a former Republican calling for the dumping of The trumpet under the 25th Amendment.
Not sure what this Amendment consists of but might be interesting.
Now the rest of the Red Necks need to wake up to themselves and see what The trumpet is and has become, a puppet to Putrid.
 
I guess one thing to come out of Trump's display, is that Europe needs to have a longer term plan than relying on the U.S to sort things out and no doubt it is a good heads up for most other countries including Australia.

Pre the World wars, the U.S had a very isolationist policy and it looks like history could repeat, so the West obviously needs to get its house in order. starting with Europe.

Interesting times.
 

Similar threads

R
Popular Business Models
Replies
2
Views
2K
galumay
galumay
R
Portfolio Balance
2
Replies
21
Views
4K
Dona Ferentes
Dona Ferentes
R
HSBC FTSE All-World Index Fund
Replies
2
Views
1K
Belli
B
R
Small & Medium Cap Stocks
Replies
0
Views
1K
robertbanking
R
R
Predicting Stock Bottom & Reversal
Replies
0
Views
2K
robertbanking
R
Top