Attempting to Fulfill the Plan MNKh Edition
- Thread starter Blackstar
- Start date
- Alt. History Users' Choice!
Voted best in category in the Users' Choice awards.
- Location
- Alaska
I think we have piped water systems and septic tanks for the majority. We never funded municipal sewage systems, with like pipes / pumping stations moving everything to a treatment plant.
Last edited:
The Phoenixian
The Glacier Witch
- Location
- My own little world
Well, when a genuinely inexperienced and novice actor manages to pull of a master play, what would you imagine happens next? not positive or negative number wise, but how would they react to this development as a person?Does this actually mean that Bala gets better politics dice/bonus in the future?
EDIT: to be more specific, how would they be changed as a person.
- Location
- UTC+0
- Pronouns
- He/Him/They
To quote Balakirev but one update ago!
plotvitalnpc
Once more walking the path of the catgirl.
The sun rises on a soviet union whose three most powerful politicians are all in their forties, and the people who get elevated to replace the semyonovites and fill the deputy slot might be even younger. Practically newborns compared to the previous status quo in soviet politics!
Just think of the possibilities.
Just think of the possibilities.
In OTL alot of countries cancelled big projects during the oil crisis.
We'll see what options we have, but we may end up having to cancel things.
We could be ruled by the same people in the 21st Century!
Just need to keep investing in health care.
Regards,
fasquardon
HanEmpire
Delicious
They can't, we have both an age limit and a term limit. They'll be forced to retire when whichever of those come first.
Bala is the only one who might fit if he is elevated to Chairman or GS in 86.
Laws can be changed.
Though, speaking of disenfranchising the older generation, the way we have been encouraging people to retire plus the political turbulence of the last decade means we have alot of former big players out of politics right now.
I wonder if there's a lecture circuit of disgruntled retirees in this Soviet Union. I know for sure that Glushko must be energetically trying to shape the space program from the sidelines. I always imagined him touring university campuses to preach the virtues of giant rockets and moon bases. Either that or he's left the country to help the Germans or the Chinese...
Regards,
fasquardon
plotvitalnpc
Once more walking the path of the catgirl.
Well, when the oil crisis happens we're kind of one of the people most at risk, because our job is making sure the economy goes brr and oil shock will reduce the brr.
However, our position going into it is a lot better than it could have been.
I mean that if our guy survives and keeps his job or the new deputy the cabbages should give a lot of leeway in cutting through bureaucracy and politics to fix it?
I guess we'll have to see when the oil crisis happens. There's a small chance it won't occur in this 5 year period, right?
This crisis was more of an aftershock of Leninism, with the state striking against a figure trying to rule via control of the party. I am sure we will have aftershocks of Stalinism later as the Stalinists were part of the winning side here.
That is... difficult to imagine. We've got a more prosperous, energy hungry world that has gotten an extra five years of post-war miracle. China has avoided alot of its OTL economic crises, and will be a much bigger consumer. India may be consuming more too. Plus, the US has generally had more enlightened leadership which will have meant somewhat higher growth, our more enlightened leadership means we have basically no oil surplus to export to the world...
We'll be getting close to the point where we could have an oil crisis without even needing a geopolitical crisis to light the tinder! I guess if Ashbrook's policies manage to tank the US economy hard that could provide enough slack in the oil supply for us to avoid a crisis.
So I put our odds at avoiding a crisis this plan at 1 in 100 odds at best. Someone needs to get a crit success or a crit fail out there.
Edit: actually if we can avoid the oil crisis via either a crit success or a crit fail (either things go super well for a major oil producing region, or things go really bad for the US) that's at least a 1 in 50 chance to avoid the oil crisis.
Regards,
fasquardon
Last edited:
Depends on what you mean by stalinism since there's the actual theory Stalin wrote and theres, well, everything he actually did.
For the latter argue our soft destalinization during the malenkov and voz years were already the reckoning. That combined with mikoyans reforms, and if I'm reading this right the further ascendence of the state over the party will probably prevent another period of repression like the stalin years
As for the former, welp that's basically the ministries official philosophy so we'll see if the wheels come off it.
For the latter argue our soft destalinization during the malenkov and voz years were already the reckoning. That combined with mikoyans reforms, and if I'm reading this right the further ascendence of the state over the party will probably prevent another period of repression like the stalin years
As for the former, welp that's basically the ministries official philosophy so we'll see if the wheels come off it.
I don't think we will see a definable crisis without supply shocks of some kind, almost certainly political. The impacts of increasing energy costs will just manifest over time. Arguably this sort of thing has already manifested in terms of Soviet spending to try and hold prices stable. This is actually in many ways the most likely political driver of an energy crisis, decisions by us to slow oil extraction as it becomes uneconomic.
What do you mean? Stalin wrote PILES of theory. The dude was super nerdy about it.
That seems likely. The main reason to take a repressive turn would be to attempt to break from Bonapartism (the co-opting of the Revolution by a ruling class), and do our own Cultural Revolution.
One of the reasons I never tried to push for a pro-Semyonov plan was the fear that he might try to do a Cultural Revolution in the struggle with Ryzhkov and Vorotnikov.
The state (whether the ministries or the SupSov) aren't gonna want to destroy their own power.
Eventually, as consumption rises, the price will reach the point where demand destruction is happening at scale.
It would for sure be a different kind of oil crisis, as people just drop out of the economy 'cuz they can't afford to participate, but it would still be an oil crisis.
Regards,
fasquardon
Last edited:
A crisis is destructive because of its rapidity, industries are stuck with unprofitable investments that results in lots of production being offlined and that spirals into broader impacts. A slow price increase will just result in industries focusing on conserving energy and shifting investment to less energy-intensive sectors. There is practically a lot of runway until energy production starts becoming unable to support economic function.
That assumes that industries can run on ever smaller amounts of energy. The plain fact is that eventually, an industry (or individual consumer) cannot conserve more and still operate, so the industry shuts down or the person stops being able to buy any fuel.
Think of it like loading up a rope with weight. You don't know which strand in the rope will snap first, meaning that the final failure of the rope is chaotic, but you know that the same kind of rope will fail catastrophically at about the same point.
Or think of it like adding grains of sand to a pile the higher the pile grows, the more likely it is to slump, so given sack of sand can never make a pile higher than a certain amount. But sometimes piling the same sand it will randomly slump later, meaning the pile is a little taller, sometimes it will slump a little sooner, and the pile is a little shorter.
Push any physical system to its limits, eventually it fails catastrophically, for no other reason than it has been pushed too far.
Regards,
fasquardon
Indeed, so it will be interesting to see which branch it will go and when exactly it will set in. But if it's a bit on the later side, it will give the Minister more time to get the energy transition ball rolling properly.
Though I do wonder if we'll be able to expand Rosatom further yet, considering just how much power we seem like we'll need across the entire CMEA, current Rosatom seems well short of what will be needed long term. And it would help local transition go faster in the mean time as well, while further drive down costs further yet in mass production scale.
That is why have the feeling that the ministry will be able to be a hatchet man and get stuff done when the crisis hits.
I do not think this scenario will ever happen for oil. There is just too much slack in the market(lots of inefficient industry that isn't changed yet because oil is still relatively cheap, tight oil/gas that isn't yet extracted) and alternative sources of energy that would be able to substitute as oil prices increased.
Further this sort of sudden failure isn't how it would go down. Rather what would happen is that less critical or competitive industries would be priced out of oil consumption over time. Oil has transport costs and industries are not all the same so failure would be gradual.
Strictly speaking Oil has some level of slack until it doesn't really anymore at which point you'll see a massive price spike as everyone competes for the same insufficient amount of oil until some one really can't afford it anymore. This is thus obviously followed by a large demand destruction cycle as those participants who cracked first drop out and then is afterwards followed by a price collapse as demand drops below supply again. At least for awhile that is, it's something that can become cyclical depending on how various players exactly act.
This is something that economists predicted beforehand for it and is arguably what we saw happen in 2012 when a strong temporary oil spike occurred when there was insufficient supply. It hasn't really reoccurred since as the various oil producing countries seem to favor keeping oil prices permanently at a moderately high level now, which has instead caused a more continuous demand destruction rather then a more spiky one.
So in that sense, it might ramp gently for awhile, but eventually if things get to tight you'd probably eventually see a spike. Unless for instance thus you get a supply side cartel that starts squeezing money from the market instead.