10% decline in number of births in Russia frightens economists

The grave digger wearing a t-shirt of Russia's ruling party "United Russia." (Image: social media)

The grave digger wearing a t-shirt of Russia's ruling party "United Russia." (Image: social media) 

Analysis & Opinion, Russia

Just before the May holidays, Russia’s state statistical agency released figures on births, deaths and marriages that Moscow may hope no one will notice because they are so bad; but Russian economists have sounded the alarm that the population decline they point to may make impossible for the Russian economy to grow in the future.

The number of children born in Russia during the first quarter of 2017 was 412,000, down from 458,000 in the same period a year earlier for a decline of 10 percent. And although mortality fell by one percent, the number of deaths exceeded the number of births by 76,000 or 19 percent.

This pattern was observed throughout the country. Indeed, in contrast to the past where Muslim regions showed higher numbers of births relative to deaths than elsewhere, in the first quarter just completed, there was only a single federal subject where that was true, Rosstat says, the Chukchi Autonomous District.

Other bad demographic news included an increase in the number of divorces compared to the number of marriages. During the first quarter, there were 84 divorces for every 100 marriages, a pattern that almost guarantees that “in 2017, a loss of population will again be renewed in Russia.”

On Thursday, Maksim Topilin, the labor minister, told Vladimir Putin that the situation reflects declines in the size of the prime child-bearing age cohort among women, a decline that he projects will continue. Now, there are just over 22 million women aged 20 to 39; in 2025, there will be only 15 to 16 million.

But there is even worse news, Topilin continued, Russian women are again deciding to have fewer children. To reproduce the population, they need to have “no fewer than 2.1” per woman. In 2015, the maternal capital program and other incentives succeeded in raising the number to 1.78, but in this year, it has again fallen to 1.65.

That means Russia will have not only fewer children but fewer working age adults to support an aging population. Former finance minister Aleksey Kudrin projects a decline in the number of working-age Russians to be 10 million 15 years from now.

The only way to compensate for these demographic trends, experts say, is to boost fertility rates, extend life expectancy, or accept a massive influx of immigrants from Central Asia. The first has proved very difficult to do, the second is undercut by Putin’s health “optimization” cutbacks, and the third is opposed by a majority of Russians.

Either Moscow will have to change course radically, or Russia’s demographic decline, which Putin has claimed to have stopped, will not only return but accelerate as each succeeding generation has fewer potential mothers and each mother chooses to have fewer and fewer children.


Related:

 

Edited by: A. N.

Tags: , , , ,

  • Mykola Potytorsky

    Good thing fewer russians

    • veth

      In 200 years no more Russians anymore, not even Russia as state anymore.

      • Dagwood Bumstead

        Dwarfstan won’t exist in 25 years, certainly not within its current borders.

        • veth

          Putin: Russia has no borders…………..

          • zorbatheturk

            Putin’s greed has no limits.

          • Dagwood Bumstead

            One could interpret this as meaning that Dwarfstan doesn’t even exist.

    • Ihor Dawydiak

      And Putin the Pederast has added to the Kremlin’s nightmare by molesting little boys (resulting in widespread PTSD and a corresponding decline in the ethnic Russian population). On top of that there will be many more Mongols (the Genghis and Kublai Khan variety), Kazan Tatars, Chechens, Ingush, Tannu Tuvans and Muslims in general. The result: a reincarnation of the Mongol invasions of 1220 and 1240, only this time in Russia proper and for the rest of the world, a potential breath of fresh air.

      • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del%27s_ontological_proof Styx

        And monster raving loony Ihor Dawydiak – the self-confessed “Pederast has added to the Ukraine’s nightmare by molesting little boys (resulting in widespread PTSD and a corresponding decline in the ethnic Ukrainian population). On top of that there will be many more Mongrels (the Thingamabob and Ihor Khan variety), Galician Cafards, Scumbags, Dimwits and various other Ukrainian “ethnic groups” including Hubbabubbas and Satanists in general. The result: a reincarnation of the vintage Dawydiak moonshine invasions of 1220 and 1240, only this time in Ihor’s brain proper and for the rest of the lost the world, a potential breath of fresh air (or maybe not, depending on your personal point of view).”

        Truly remarkable, isn’t it ?

        • Alex George

          LOL – still displaying your ignorance?

          He is referring to the incident where Putin was caught on film kissing a little boy’s stomach in quite revolting fashion, and then ran for cover after he was caught.

          You just can’t face the truth that your dear fuehrer turned out to be perverted as well as incompetent – he is shaping up as one of Russia’s least successful leaders ever.

      • Strod

        The Ukrainians are Mongol mongrels.

        • MichaelA

          The Mongols destroyed Moscow
          They didn’t destroy Kiev

          • Strod

            Yep they did destroy Kiev. They actually razed it to ground.

          • Alex George

            Really – so how come there are a number of buildings in Kyiv that predate the Mongol invasion? St Sophia’s cathedral, the Lavra Monastery, the Saviour church. Many other buildings are known to have survived the Mongol attack.

            Kyiv was quickly back in operation. Moscow by contrast was a small Rus town which was completely destroyed by the Mongols. Later the Mongols themselves built on the site and the new Moscow was largely a Tatar town, the local enforcer for the Golden Horde.

            The earliest building in Moscow dates to the 15th century. The earliest building in Kyiv dates to the 10th century. The Mongols attacked in the 13th century. You work it out.

          • Dagwood Bumstead

            Don’t forget the foundations of the Church of the Tithes, and the Golden Gate, which survive to this day. They also predate the Mongol attack of 1241.
            Kyiv was already a world city when Moscow was nothing but a collection of mud huts, if that.

          • Alex George

            Good point – I had forgotten about the Golden Gate.

          • NATOcracy

            That territory called the Ukraine was Deserta loca aka ‘Dikoye polye’ for many centuries during and after the Mongol invasion.

          • MichaelA

            You are an ignorant moron
            Go back to school and this time take history as a subject

          • Alex George

            Really? Okay, if you want to humiliate yourself, why should I stand in the way…

            Prince Michael returned to Kyiv in the year following the Mongol attack – why would he do that for a “deserta loca”? Archaeologists tell us that the walls of Kyiv were rebuilt in wood soon after the invasion. Less than a century after the Mongol attacks, the Lithuanians had to besiege Kyiv for a month, and they didn’t capture it, they negotiated a surrender – clearly the city walls were major obstacles again. Also less than a century after the invasion, the first catholic bishop of Kiev was appointed – why do this to a “deserta loca”? And just over a century after the Mongol invasion, coins were being minted in Kyiv again.

            Historians give the population of Kyiv in the century following the Mongol invasion as ranging from 6,000 to 10,000. and that is just Kyiv.

            No, the term dikoe pole was not used then. you have got both the time and the location wrong.

          • NATOcracy

            First, all of those Princes were Russian Princes, you can find it in every historical document. They came from the North, Novgorod.

            Second it’s Kiev, it was always written like that in every historical document after the Russian Princes established their capitol there.
            Before that it was a Khazar city at the periphery of the Khazar Empire.

          • Alex George

            First, all princes at that time were Rus, not Russian. the two are quite different. Russia and Russians did not exist, and would not exist for centuries. Russia (Muscovy) was a later Tatar state which destroyed the remaining centres of Rus civilisation, particularly Novgorod, on behalf of its master, the Golden Horde.

            Second its Kyiv in Uklrainian, which is the older and more authentic language, and no it was never a Khazar city. It probably paid tribute to the Khazars in the 7th century (everyone did) but it was founded by Slavs in the 5th century, who later merged with Vikings.

          • NATOcracy

            The Lay of the Ruin of the Russian Land is a historical text document from these times that was written by an author of South-Russian origin not later than 1246.

            “Oh, fairest of fair and finely adorned Russian land! You are renowned for many beauties: you are famed for your many lakes, rivers and sacred springs, your mountains and steep hills … your wondrous and diverse birds and beasts…”

            Note, not Rus but Ruskaya zemlya.

            Could you provide some historical documents written in that ‘Ukrainian’ language please?
            Or could you point me to some ‘Ukrainian’ coins, I’m a collector.

          • Alex George

            Why should I since you have failed to provide any historical document.

            You appear to be referring to Remizov’s paraphrase of the “The Lay of the Russian Land” written in the 1920s.

            The concept of Rossiya did not exist in the 13th century. just as Moscow did not exist. Only Rus, which is a different thing.

          • NATOcracy
          • Alex George

            Which do not support your absurd claim that Kyiv was completely destroyed. So yes, you are an ignoramus, quite a pathetic one.

            Nor do historical documents deny my point that Moscow WAS completely razed. It was a small northern Rus town, it was destroyed, and what arose later on that site was a Tatar outpost designed to keep the Rus under the Tatar yoke.

          • EmilyEnso

            Poor old ‘Rus’ have had a rotten time if it.
            They haven’t long freed themselves from another yoke largely imposed on them by non Rus.

          • Kapricorn4

            So where did the present day Ukrainians come from ?

          • NATOcracy

            From the Rusins (Rusyns, I’m deliberately writing it with ‘i’ because I can’t hear any soft sound there and they’re writing it with a clear vowel). That was an ancient term how the Russians were calling themselves, Rusini and that is recorded in many historical documents form the start of their written history. Together with Rusichi or simply Ruskie. All of their neighbors were calling them similar, Ruskie by the Poles, Russen by the Germans, Orosz by the Hungarians.
            The Ukrainians started as a political movement in Galicia at the end of the 19th century but their first organisations were called Rusin, like The Young Rusins ( not because they were really young but to distance themselves from the old Rusin organizations).
            That territory, Galicia was under the foreign rule for centuries, first under Poland, then under the Austrians and under Poland again after the WWI.
            Even if the cities, like Lvov, were predominantly populated by the Poles, Germans and Jews (and other) the countryside was Rusin.

            So at the beginning of the 20th century you had two movements there, the Ukrainophile and Russophile. With the approaching of the WWI the repressions of the Russophile Rusins started and culminated during the war when many of them were put in the first concentration camps in Europe, like Talerhof and Terezin. Even some whole villages were deported there all together, women, children. They were not resisting the Austrian government or rule in any way and even the Emperor publicly stated that they were not deported because they were guilty but because they might become.
            Many died there, many run, mostly to Russia but that changed demographics there significantly.
            There was a ‘soft power’ influence also, the Ukrainians got appointed to local government, they got loans, the Austrians founded first Ukrainian schools, they picked up Grushevsky to write a history of Ukraine and gave him a villa in Lvov for that, etc…
            But all of that was not successful. After the revolution those Ukrainian parties couldn’t get any votes in Ukraine. They only got their representatives when they formed a bloc with the all-Russian parties (SRs and the Social-democrats) and that is not from some Kremlin spy but from a separatist Ukrainian politician and historian Dmytro Doroshenko that was actively participating in those events and almost formed the government.
            Then came the Soviets and imposed the official Ukrainization through their political and educational system. People were losing their jobs if they didn’t learn Ukrainian. All official documents are available together with the newspaper articles…

            Today, the Ukrainians don’t recognize the Rusin minority, they don’t exist for them.

          • EmilyEnso

            Wasn’t Kiev the original Russ homeland?.
            And the Vikings were very much in that part of the world.
            Moscow was a viking City – I think!!!!

          • Doctor Who?

            When Russia was founded some 1000 years ago it was originally called Kiev Rus and its capitol was in Kiev.
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kievan_Rus%27
            https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4e/Kievan-rus-1015-1113-%28en%29.png
            The Rus were a Nordic tribe of Vikings who traded with Byzantium using the rivers of Russia to portage back and forth.
            Over time they settled in Russia and intermarried with the Slavic tribes.
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rus%27_people
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rus%27_(name)

            The Russian capitol through the centuries moved to Novgorod, Moscow, Saint Petersburg and back to Moscow.

          • NATOcracy

            Wrong. The term ‘Kievan Rus’ was invented in the 19th century simply to describe a period. It was Rus’.

            The ethnics of the Rus or Varyags ( Varangians) is not clear to historical science. There are only theories. Keep in mind that that the sources clearly distinct those two, the same as they distinct Urmani ( the Normans, Norwegians) and Svei ( the Swedes) from all of them.

          • Doctor Who?

            I used the word Byzantine to refer to the
            Eastern Roman Empire.
            The word Byzantine or the term Byzantine Empire is also modern and was not used by contemporaries.

          • NATOcracy

            it was originally called Kiev Rus

            Maybe that confused me.

            And just to add something about ethnicity of the Rus, they worshiped Perun, that’s clear from the Russo-Byzantine agreements from the 10th century. I have yet to see ‘the Vikings’ that were worshiping Perun.

          • Doctor Who?

            Northern Europeans of that era were still Pagan and worshiped Pagan Gods. That’s true of the Nordics of Scandinavia and the Slavs of Eastern Europe.
            The Eastern Slavs were converted to Christianity by missionaries from the
            Orthodox church of Byzantium while the Nordic Vikings were converted by the Roman church.

          • NATOcracy

            That’s correct but please, show me just one real scientific archaeological finding that is showing that the Scandinavian tribes worshiped Perun. Just one.
            They worshiped Odin (wōđanaz, Óðinn, Wōden, Wōdan)

          • Kapricorn4

            Hence we get Wednesday as a corruption of Woden’s Day. Same with Thursday from the God Thor, and Friday from Freya.

          • Kapricorn4

            You might find the historical novel “Eaters of the Dead” by the late Michael Crichton of interest. The novel is set in the 10th century. The Caliph of Baghdad, Al-Muqtadir, sends his ambassador, Ahmad ibn Fadlan, to the king of the Volga Bulgars. He never arrives, but is instead conscripted by a group of Vikings to take part in a hero’s quest to the north.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eaters_of_the_Dead

          • EmilyEnso

            I thought that too.
            These Khazars certainly get around
            They were all in Georgia too when it launched the attack on South Ossetia.

          • Doctor Who?

            There was a writer named Arthur Koestler who wrote a book about the Khazars titled “The 13th Tribe.”
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Thirteenth_Tribe

            Arthur Koestler was a non-religious Jew.
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Koestler

            Koestler’s most famous book was the novel “Darkness at Noon” a fictionalized version of the trial and execution of the Bolshevik Nikolai Bukharin at the hands of Stalin.
            A book I read long ago.
            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darkness_at_Noon

          • NATOcracy

            No, they came from Novgorod and Ladoga and just translated their capitol South. Nothing unusual. Kiev was a Khazar city, called Kuyab at the outskirts of The Khazar Empire.

          • EmilyEnso

            Very interesting.
            Then why are they occupying the western part of Palestine.
            I find it a little hard to understand.
            Seems they are a long way out of their territory.

          • NATOcracy

            What do you mean about Palestine? The Khazars or the Varyags?

          • EmilyEnso

            Well virtually all Israelis are of Khazar descent.
            I often wonder why they are in the Western coast of Palestine.
            It would be interesting if you could explain why if their capital was Kiev they now claim Jerusalem.
            I have never been able to make ot tail of it all.

          • NATOcracy

            I don’t think so, the Khazars have accepted the Judaism relatively late. Kiev was not their capitol, Kiev was at the outskirts of their empire.

          • EmilyEnso

            But you miss the point why are the Khazars over in Palestine.
            Why can you just claim Jerusalem?
            You haven’t explained.
            please do.

          • NATOcracy

            Look Emily, while I’m well aware of many fallacies in historical science and strong political influences I really don’t want to go into some wild speculations and conspiracy theories. If you have some reliable sources for your claims I would be glad to read them.
            I bumped on some guy here on disqus, writing something in this regard and was presenting himself as a historian. I asked him for some sources and even shared my email here what I really, really rarely do because he claimed that his posts are censored.
            The only thing I got were some links to conspiracy theory sites.

            While the Khazars are interesting, especially their conversion to Judaism, many things about them are well established. They were of Turkic origin and their language was Turkic. Their empire was crushed by the Russians in the 10th century and was dissolved. But the Russians have borrowed some things from them, their tamgas for example, that you can see even today as the coat of arms of Ukraine.
            These tamgas was used by the Russian princes to show that their power is equal to that of the Khazar kagans. They even borrowed the title kagan also and were using it for some time.

            http://i.imgur.com/5CTOpz9.jpg

          • EmilyEnso

            Sorry I don’t understand all your waffling about conspiracy theories.
            Khazars are caucasian – no conspiracy there.
            They make up most of the israeli population.
            Why are they there and why claim Jerusalem when you say Kiev belongs to them.
            I really don’t undertsand the whole thing.
            Be so kind as to explain it all – without reference to conspiracies which I know nothing about.
            All I want is a straight answer.
            Be so kind?

          • NATOcracy

            “They make up most of the israeli population.”

            “why are the Khazars over in Palestine”

            Do you have any sources for this claims?

          • EmilyEnso

            You appear completely ignorant.
            Why are you posting?.
            Israeli scientists have proven it so.
            http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/leaked-report-israel-acknowledges-jews-in-fact-khazars-secret-plan-for-reverse-migration-to-ukraine/
            A classic example is Netanyahu – and assumed name of course.
            Here is his background
            Benjamin Netanyahu is an Israeli politician. He is the
            Prime Minister of Israel (having served from 1996 to 1999, and again
            from 2009 to the present). His mother, Tzila (Segal), was born in Petah
            Tikva, Israel, of Lithuanian Jewish and Polish Jewish descent.
            What is he doing in Palestine and claiming Jerusalem.
            I ask again.
            Will you explain the situation.
            I do not understand what is going on.

          • NATOcracy

            Well, at least that is something, thanks. I mean that work “The Missing Link of Jewish European Ancestry: Contrasting the Rhineland and the Khazarian Hypotheses” that is one scientist claiming something that is completely rejected by the scientific establishment as that’s clearly seen form that article you linked.
            What doesn’t mean that he is wrong, simply the established scientists reject his hypothesis. I don’t have time right now to read his work and I’m not a molecular geneticist, of course, but I’ll come back soon when I read the paper.

          • NATOcracy

            I’m back as I promised after I have read that work and some other scientific papers that rebutted completely the Elhaik’s hypthesis

            “One recent study (Elhaik, 2013), making use of part of our data set (Behar and others, 2010), focused specifically on the Khazar hypothesis, arguing that it has strong genetic support. This claim was built on a series of analyses similar to those performed in our original study that initially reported the data. However, the reanalysis relied on the provocative assumption that the Armenians and Georgians of the South Caucasus region could serve as appropriate proxies for Khazar descendants (Elhaik, 2013). This assumption is problematic for a number of reasons.
            First, because of the great variety of populations in the Caucasus region and the fact that no specific population in the region is known to represent Khazar descendants, evidence for ancestry among Caucasus populations need not reflect Khazar ancestry.

            Second, even if it were allowed that Caucasus affinities could represent Khazar ancestry, the use of the Armenians and
            Georgians as Khazar proxies is particularly poor, as they represent the southern part of the Caucasus region
            , while the Khazar Khaganate was centered in the North Caucasus and further to the north. Furthermore, among populations of the Caucasus, Armenians and Georgians are geographically the closest to the Middle East, and are therefore expected a priori to show the greatest genetic similarity to Middle Eastern populations. Indeed, a rather high similarity of South Caucasus populations to Middle Eastern groups was observed at the level of the whole genome in a recent study (Yunusbayev and others, 2012). Thus, any genetic similarity between Ashkenazi Jews and Armenians and Georgians might merely reflect a common shared Middle Eastern ancestry component, actually providing further support to a Middle Eastern origin of Ashkenazi Jews, rather than a hint for a Khazar origin.”
            http://digitalcommons.wayne.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1040&context=humbiol_preprints

            While I’m not certain if could you understand the methodology and statistics that were used by Elhaik in his work and in that paper I linked I’ll try to simplify it a bit.

            What Elhaik did?
            His first premise is that the Khazars lived in the Caucasus, so it means they are Caucasians. The second premise: they were divided into two parts – one left in the Caucasus, the second left for Europe. The third premise: if so, the genomes of Caucasians will show similarities between modern Caucasians (among whom are the descendants of the Khazars ) and modern European Jews.
            The fourth premise: if European Jews are descendants of modern Palestinians, then their genomes will be less similar to each other.

            Those who understand even a little about Caucasians and in genetic genealogy would immediately see that all these premises are completely wrong. The first two are barely an opinion, there science is powerless. But the fact that the third is completely primitive shows the following. European Jews are carriers of a whole set of haplogroups, in particular E1b, G2a, J1, J2, R1a, R1b. The same haplogroups also exist among Caucasians. But not because they came from the Khazars or any other Jews. The ancestors of these DNA lines, these haplogroups came to the Caucasus when Jews were not yet in the project. Haplogroup J2, for example, in the Caucasus is approximately 7,000 years old. Haplogroup J1 (mountain Jews, for example) came to the Caucasus not from the Khazars, but millenniums ago, much earlier than the Khazars existed. Haplogroup G2a in the Caucasus has an age of more than 4000 years, and came partly from Afghanistan and partly from Europe. Haplogroup R1a is not from the Khazars and not from Jews at all but also came there over 4000 years ago.

            Here you have the graph from the scientific paper I linked which is showing Average IBD (Identity by descent) sharing of Ashkhenazi.

            http://i.imgur.com/D1AYL1V.jpg

            “Thus, Armenians, used by Elhaik (Elhaik, 2013) as a potential proxy for a Khazar source population, could equally well have been employed as a misleading proxy for many populations across the Middle East with similar cluster memberships, thereby producing the same problematic interpretation that each such population is ancestral to Ashkenazi Jews.
            The mere finding of shared cluster membership does not unambiguously attest to a demographic event responsible for the cluster and, therefore, cannot be further interpreted to suggest that one population is ancestral to another population simply because it is found within the same cluster. Thus, for example, it would be misleading to conclude from the ADMIXTURE analysis that
            Ashkenazi Jews are actually the primary source population giving rise to the Sicilians, Druze, or North African Jews with whom they share similar membership coefficients.

            In summary, in this most comprehensive study to date, we have examined the three potential sources for contemporary Ashkenazi Jews, using a new sample set that covers the full extent of the Khazar realm of the 6th to 10th centuries. Analysis of this large data set does not change and in fact reinforces the conclusions of multiple past studies, including ours and those of
            other groups
            (Atzmon and others, 2010; Bauchet and others, 2007; Behar and others, 2010; Campbell and others, 2012; Guha and others, 2012; Haber and others, 2013; Henn and others, 2012; Kopelman and others, 2009; Seldin and others, 2006; Tian and others, 2008). We confirm the notion that the Ashkenazi, North African, and Sephardi Jews share substantial genetic ancestry and that they derive it from Middle Eastern and European populations, with no indication of a detectable Khazar contribution to their genetic origins.

          • EmilyEnso

            So most Israeli are not semites.
            Not least their leader.
            So we get back to the basic point.
            What are they dong in the western part of Palestine and claiming Jerusalem as a capital.
            It doesn’t seem right to me.

          • Alex George

            And thank you for the admission that the Mongols left thousands alive in Kyiv (and many more in nearby cities). This contrasts with the small Rus town of Moscow which was completely obliterated. The “small island nearby” which Mikhail resided on was part of Kyiv and there were thousands of people and many stone buildings in the area when he returned – after all, why else would he come back?

            Your “several centuries” is ignorant rubbish. Rebuilding of Kyiv started immediately, including the wooden walls as I noted above. In the ensuing century Kyiv was able to withstand a month-long siege by the Lithuanians, it was chosen as seat of the new Catholic diocese, and coins were being minted there as it was a major trade-centre. There was probably nowhere else minting coins between Constantinople and the Golden Horde.

          • NATOcracy

            Rebuilding of Kyiv started immediately, including the wooden walls as I noted above…

            What feckin immediately, those that the Mongols left alive were enslaved.
            You have a Western source for that. The city was destroyed and brutally plundered. Soon afterward, in 1245 the Italian monk Giovanni da Pian del Carpine passed through the area and wrote:

            “They marched against Rus and committed a great massacre, destroyed cities and fortresses and killed people, besieged Kiev, which was the capital of Rus, and after a lengthy siege they captured it and killed the residents of the city; from here, when we traveled through their land, we found countless heads and bones of the dead lying in.
            For this city was very large and very crowded, and now it is reduced almost to nothing. there exists just two hundred houses and people they keep in the most cruel slavery. “

          • Alex George

            Nice try. del Carpine was talking about the area immediately around Saint Sophia. This is well known. You yourself have admitted that there were at least 2,000 people in the city area immediately after the invasion, and in fact historians say there were 6,000 – 10,000 there during the ensuing century. People came back very quickly.

            And no the people were not all “enslaved”. The mongols withdrew, defences were rebuilt. as I have already noted, Kyiv withstood a siege by a strong Lithuanian army for month only a few decades later.

            You just can’t cope with the reality that Kyiv wasn’t razed, whereas Moscow was.

            And when a new Moscow did arise it was predominantly a Tatar state, the local enforcer for the Golden Horde.

          • NATOcracy

            You’re really something. You’re just repeating your useless BS, what siege, when?

            The Mongol tactics are very well known, they wiped out everything, every city and village around before they started the siege of Kiev.
            Every horseman had to take at least 10 slaves and then they pushed them in front of them during the siege.
            There are detailed historical sources describing what they did when they ravished Chernigov just before Kiev but I won’t be answering you anymore.

            Still waiting for those historical documents written in Ukrainian.

          • Alex George

            I agree, you are just repeating your useless BS. If you follow Kremlin media, you will just end up looking a fool.

            “what siege, when?”

            An excellent example of your ignorance – thank you. You have no idea that Kyiv was besieged within a century of the Mongol invasion, nor that it held out for more than a month – yet you claim to know your history? I will give you a hint – the besieger’s name was Gediminas and he sent the last member of the house of Rurik to rule Kyiv into exile. But the important point to note is that Kyiv was worth besieging and worth imposing rulers on.

            Your knowledge of Mongol tactics is obviously gained from picture books – they actually used many different tactics depending on the situation . But that hardly matters next to your ignorance of what took place.

            And no you aren’t waiting for any historical documents written in Ukrainian – that question alone shows your ignorance. The fact is that Ukirainian is an older language than Russian and you don’t even understand how to check that.

          • NATOcracy

            HaHaHa
            Is that another Ukrainian ‘peremoga’? Or ‘zrada’?

            Gedeminas took Kiev, there was a battle on the Irpin River supposedly (the sources are unreliable, some say in 1321, some in 1324) some 15 km West of Kiev.
            Stanislav, that supposedly stood up against the Lithuanians run to Ryzan after terrible defeat.
            But what is important, Kiev was under The Golden Horde like all Russian lands except Novgorod and Pskov.
            They were all paying tribute, there were no Mongol troops stationed there but there was a Mongol administration incorporated to ensure collecting taxes.

            https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/43/Kingdom_of_Galicia_Volhynia_Rus'_Ukraine_1245_1349.jpg

            Was that good for Kiev? Well, no.
            Just a few years after that a very serious Mongol Khan Uzbek intimidated the Lithuanians and Kiev was paying tribute to both, the Mongols and Lithuanians.

            No, I’m not waiting actually, because there are no historical documents written in Ukrainian. There was no Ukrainians or Ukraine before the 20th century.

          • Strod

            LOL :)

          • Alex George

            See my facts Strod. Refute them if you can.

          • MichaelA

            You realise there are about 20 buildings in and around Kyiv that date from before the mongol invasion ?

  • Murf

    My my my.
    Theses things happen when you collapse the economy and reduce health care spending to the level of a African warlord.
    So much for the Russian Mir.

  • Alex George

    That’s what widespread poverty does for a country.

    So no, the fertility rate won’t increase, nor will life expectancy.

    So that just leaves migration, and not just from Central Asia – in the Far East, many Chinese are quietly moving in.

    • veth

      At last Putler does something good. He let the Russian population dy out!

      • Oknemfrod

        You can credit him for doing it from the moment he seized power. In fact, letting Russians die was what he did to seize power in the first place by blowing those buildings up – and has sustained this MO ever since by making them cannon fodder in his militaristic adventures starting with the war in Chechnya. Too bad a lot of people other than his cannon fodder have died in the process, too.

    • veth

      The picture is fantastic. No doubt an grave for an Russian soldier killed on holiday in Donbass!

    • Dagwood Bumstead

      They’ve been infiltrating for years, legally and otherwise. Dwarfstanians are moving to the territory west of the Urals, emptying the east and Chinese are replacing them. Donbas refugees have been given a one-way ticket to the Far East in a futile effort to counter the demographic shift, but one suspects that they too will move westwards eventually.

      http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/ausland/europa/fluechtlinge-aus-der-ostukraine-kostenlos-nach-sibirien-13144521.html

  • Dagwood Bumstead

    It may not be “mothers CHOOSING to have fewer and fewer children” but mothers not being able to AFFORD children. With the economy slowly but surely declining, not least due to the demented dwarf’s insane policies, families are finding it increasingly difficult to make ends meet. The obvious “choice” is to not have any more children. For single mothers and single-income families it’s even more difficult.

  • zorbatheturk

    So much good news in one day!