Russia needs what economic policy

If to formulate a problem-minimum of the governmental policy it should consist in state preservation. Concerning an opinion problem-maximum can disperse depending on ambitions of a mode, its potential, representations of experts. Probably, someone will challenge the offered minimum and will count as its too low lath, but here we will apply a principle "do not do much harm". In due time such problem-minimum has appeared not on a shoulder to the Soviet management which has admitted disorder of the USSR, and a management of some the socialist countries – GDR, Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia which also have ceased to exist.

Russia needs what economic policy

Kinds of errors

At all variety of wrong decisions they give in to some classification.

World outlook errors, that is choice of a strategic course and means of its realisation concern the first group, so to say. Incorrect there was the choice which made Bolsheviks in 1917 and has led the country up a blind alley. With self-liquidation of a planned economy owing to its own inefficiency the capitalist alternative – private property and market legalisation has prevailed. From this point of view Russia has entered nowadays on way of development historically checked up by another countries and can reach successes only on this direction. Turn would mean oblivion of lessons of 1917-1991, with the most negative consequences back.

On a boundary XX and the XXI-st centuries in the Russian literature discussion about has taken place, whether it is possible to consider lost for Russia the last century. The different points of view have been stated. Here it is necessary to consider two circumstances. First, if this question to consider in a context of one country, that is Russia it will not be possible to create a fair picture. The international comparisons are necessary. And they not in favour of those who considers successful the last century. Secondly, many present problems before which we stand, conduct the origin not from today, and since 1917. This date should be taken not literally, and as the beginning of a celebration of Marxist-Leninist ideology and its introduction in practical life.

Here can object: difficulties endured by the country lie completely on conscience of a Yeltsin management. Yes, lie. But not completely. The general conclusion will be that: the communistic doctrine has brought to the country system degradation at separate achievements whereas a management of new Russia, having directed the country in historically right direction, has made in the concrete plan a number of large-scale miscalculations. Who and for what here can be condemned? Anybody and for what. It is a question of fulfilments, unique in character. At first we dealt with transition of the country from capitalism by a socialism, and then back from a socialism by capitalism. Such experience at anybody was not, but on our experience many in the world can learn.

The second group of errors is formed by the defects connected with insuperable objective complexities. It is possible to name these cases inevitable – or pardonable. For example, poor quality of forecasts. In economy exists a lot of invisible on a surface and so a lot of not clear. Experts not always find common language even in an estimation of last development and current state of the economy, its motive forces. Difficulties immeasurably increase, when speech comes about the future time. Good luck in forecasts is casual. Individual qualification and the computer – weak assistants at forecasting.

The collective reason in the form of scientific research institutes and other organisations too guarantees nothing. The forecast is the programmed failure owing to unpredictability of economy. Here it is necessary to add radical defect of the most look-ahead practice: in all scenarios the method of extrapolation with amendments on assumptions of authors therefore there is a quantitative strengthening or easing of already known processes – dynamics and national produce structure, return of the live and substantiated work, power consumption of manufacture etc. Certainly is applied, all these indicators are important for the different purposes and they need to be counted. But forecasting «on a shaft» cannot replace with itself forecasting on the dangers, waiting the state and a society in the long term, and it just and remains behind a shot. Nobody can be charged for under what scheme the economy will particularly develop.

As unreliability of forecasting общепризнанна nobody bears responsibility for it, and it is quite logical. Looking at never-ending updatings, specifications and revisions of forecasts, it is possible to fix over and over again only weakness of human reason in future knowledge.

So widespread miscalculations are predictions of rates of exchange, for example, in an euro-dollar-rouble triangle. Here is not present and there can not be a constant hit in the purpose. It is possible to result and other facts from economic life when development of the separate commodity markets pretty often does not coincide with concrete expert estimations: the prices for oil, gas, metals …

Thus, the errors concerning this category, at all their undesirability can be though are somehow justified or explained by circumstances, on which operating subjects cannot render influence.

Interesting episode. In November, 2008 when crisis has already captured world economy, English queen Elizabeth II has visited the well-known London school of economy. During conversation she has asked scientists why they could not expect the come crisis. After a while the queen has received the answer printed on three pages in which it was told, in particular, that the main reason – «shortage of collective imagination at the brightest minds as in Great Britain, and all over the world which would help to understand risks of existing system as a whole».

It is necessary to note and one more – the third group of errors. They are entirely defined by the human factor and testify first of all to nonprofessionalism. About them speech also will go further.

Nonprofessionalism is not anonymous, it has the authors. However, often happens so that about authors forget, they fade into the background, and their defective affairs remain and correct ball. If not to resist to the incorrect policy and resignedly to suffer it it is possible to become its slaves. At the same time hardly it is possible to win this defect up to the end. It is so prolific and hardy that we are doomed to live in such environment. Goes – with variable success – eternal fight of prudence and absurd, and on the party of last there are, apparently, quite decent and dear persons.
The concept is offered

So, we build capitalism, but to do it it is necessary correctly. It should provide to us the best well-being, than it was at a former system. Otherwise what for successful counterrevolution of the beginning of 90th years was necessary? It is possible to tell that concerning the purpose the consensus in a society basically has developed. Is, of course, and opponents, but their minority to what testify parliamentary and presidential election. And here is how to build
– In this respect there is no accurate representation. Meanwhile from what way will be selected, rates of increase and its quality, labour productivity, competition of manufacture and other macroindicators depend.

We already repeatedly had to state in the press the point of view on this question. It was actively supported, in particular, by the academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences Nikolay Petrakov. In a short form we will result it once again.

In real Russian conditions the centre of gravity should be transferred on prime development of a consumer complex. It is starting point of improvement of economy. If it is not in due time considered, to it it is necessary to come back at later stage, but already with much bigger material and time costs.

In a situation when the general solvent demand is low, and on some kinds of production almost is absent, means logically need to be put in those divisions where this demand continues to exist constantly and never will disappear. The answer contains in a scale of prime requirements of the population – a food, clothes and footwear, medicines, habitation, transport (car). This set should become a state policy priority. Economy improvements can be reached through food and light industry, examples to that is available enough in a world history (in Russia capitalism has originally arisen as print, in England – as woollen), plus the medical industry, housing construction and the transport (motor industry), reflecting shift of requirements in comparison with last periods. Development of these branches is in many respects interfaced to support of small and average business. Here we will apply the term «catching up development» from the point of view both missed time, and branch economic policy. XXI-st century novelties will not get accustomed in economy which has not solved a XIX-th century problem.

The temptation is great to gather all «beautiful things» in world production and to declare this list the actual program of actions for Russia. Often and becomes. Certainly, it is impossible to be against such necessary directions of progress for our state as development of the software, carrier rockets for start of commercial companions, nuclear power, superhigh-frequency electronics, laser technologies etc. However will be useless to build high technologies without "ground floor" of economy which the consumer complex is. It will give necessary accumulation for прорывных technologies. Not scientific and technical progress will bring structural reorganisation, and structural reorganisation will provide base for scientific and technical progress. A fast turn of the capital and mass production – irreplaceable preconditions for introduction of innovations.

The structure of gross national product and personal consumption of the population prompts, what way it is necessary to go in a phase of market transformations: to support those manufactures, volume demand for which production is considerable and where the capital turn is short. These links of an economic chain – the most economical on expenses and the most productive by efficiency. Simultaneously they represent adequate natural base for lifting of national productive forces.

The neglect manufacture of the goods of the daily demand, making fast profit, has led to that the domestic market is in many respects given the foreign goods. Advantage of this business is underlined also by that circumstance that it live both trade (including челночники), and foreign manufacturers. Here the basic part of shadow economy is concentrated. Considerable commodity and financial streams can and should be won from foreign firms and are moved to domestic channels.

Prime development of a consumer complex has crucial importance not only for economy lifting, but also for improvement of a social status of people. Such course will allow to eliminate an insufficient food of a considerable part of the population in our country, to provide other vital needs and positively to affect catastrophically developing demographic situation from the point of view as population, and a genofund condition. The success of reforms in China has been predetermined by that there the paramount attention was given to a domestic production of consumer goods. It has allowed to satisfy the first requirements of people and by that simultaneously to create sources of accumulation of the capital for development of high technologies.

Government position

Let's look now that do our authorities for lifting of a consumer complex. In April, 2012 Strategy of development food and process industry of the Russian Federation for the period till 2020 has been confirmed by the government directive. The document fixes high import dependence of the country by separate kinds of production (25 % on import of meat and meat products, 24,6 % – fish and fish products, 19,2 % – milk and dairy products). As it is marked, there is below recommended medical norms a consumption of the major foodstuff, and it should cause anxieties. In 2010 среднедушевое consumption has made:

– Meat and meat products –

68 kg at norm of 70-75 kg;

– Milk and молокопродуктов – 247 kg at norm of 320-340 kg;

– Fishes and рыбопродукции – 21,2 kg at norm of 22-28 kg;

– Vegetables and бахчевых cultures – 105 kg at norm of 120-140 kg;

– Fruit and berries – 57 kg at norm of 90-100 kg.

Considering administrative standards in our country, it is necessary to tell thanks composers of the document at least that they this data does not hide. Here we recognise that statistics reflect existing realities.

The backward technical base of branches impresses. In крупяном manufacture of 30 % of capacities have started to be maintained after 1917 and about 14 % – pre-war construction. In the baking industry physical deterioration of the basic production assets makes 50–80 %. Made duly бумаготворчества Strategy paints on tens pages that it is necessary to make, create and construct, what risks should be considered at its realisation. However, except words, real efforts on position correction it is not looked through. The section about the financing sources, occupying is less pages, gives the most general information on current support of branches and comes to an end with following two lines: financial resources for realisation of positions of Strategy will develop of means of private investors and credits of banks. That is the government withdraws from the duties on a reorganisation of an economy or (at the best) intends to be limited to councils. Having noticed in the beginning that in food and process industry privatisation process is completely complete, it, probably, has decided to count that the complex will survive at the expense of own forces. This strange circumstance – budget nonparticipation in a food chain – has been noted in a Russian press ("Kommersant" see from 03.05.12). Further we will pay attention to following figures. The index of manufacture of foodstuff in 2000-2007 on the average made 106–107 % (for 2010 – 105,4 %). In 2020 manufacture of foodstuff should increase in 1,4 times at mid-annual rate of a gain of 3,5-5 % to level of 2010. If this data is comparable, there is a question: how the authorities plan to solve the listed problems (updating of capacities, competitiveness increase, импортозамещение, etc.) at decrease in branch dynamics, so far as they have not solved them under more favorable conditions?

All (all!) measures on lifting of economy bypassing priority development of a consumer sector by and large are useless. It is the sad fact of our economic history after 1917. No policy can rise over objective laws. Shifted on economy, they demand initial satisfaction of basic needs of the main productive force, labour. It is the base and while the given property of economy will not be understood, deciding shift in population life will not be.

The policy recommended by us would be favourable also to the government. It can and make further capital mistakes in other directions, suppose any expenditure for rather disputable projects, undersign for powerlessness in fight against corruption. But progress of national well-being on the basis of own manufacture will create powerful safety factor in an economy and a society.

Nikolay Petrovich Shmelev - the academician, the director of Institute of Europe of the Russian Academy of Sciences; Valentine Petrovich Fedorov - the corresponding member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the deputy director of Institute of Europe of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the ex-governor of Sakhalin.