I’m not sure this is useful information since Russia is mostly unpopulated with a few metropolitan areas? They have the money to keep the war machine going for a while longer.
Yeah, it's comparing apples to oranges to say there's lots of apples. Sure there's lots of apples.
Then there's the thumbnail chart hinting something is crashing when that's not happening. So far they've demonstrated significant resilience against the sanctions we've imposed and their economy has remained stable and returned to growth. If they don't run out of labor and natural resources, they can keep this going for a very long time. I'm not saying this because I want them to be able to. I'm saying it because I'm disappointed at the propaganda in our politics and media that lead us to believe we can crash Russia's economy. This created unrealistic expectations and it probably contributed to the lesser support ro weapons delivery which has led us to the status quo we face today.
These processes are slow and they put their heads on the table to make sure some gray alternative channel still works. If something, these measures would take effect somewhere in 2030s for the big players. Yet, Gazprom reported negative balance recently, and other resource-oriented conpanies too, so some effect already took place.
This doesn't really seem all that bad to me. The US spent roughly 2.7 billion per week on the Iraq war based on some estimates (2.4 trillion over 17 years), which is the annual budget of Indiana. While Indiana isn't a powerhouse in the US economy, it is still ranked 15th. So for the Iraq war, only 14 of US's 50 regions had budgets that exceeded the country's weekly spending.