In addition to the two main troubles of the Russian people a few years ago there was another crisis. It is our government that recognizes, ignores, promises to overcome, declares that he is behind. For a long time, the government could not offer a coherent version of economic transformation. Now in handy come election season. All the political parties. They sociology do not hold, and the problems specifically identified. Give people a coherent program for economic recovery, and the electorate is yours! Did not, so at least promise.
What we offer party economists and political scientists? Of course, it is a party to circumvent the issues of economy will not work, and that they understood perfectly. At the very least all parties in the program have included the development of small and medium-sized businesses. Just forgot, as usual, to answer the question “where to get the money?”.
However, the benefit of the country now can bring the party that most accurately will give answers to some simple questions: how to get rid of dependence on raw materials, what to do with small and medium business, how to pull out of the swamp the social sphere and, most importantly, who all is going to pay?
The need to get off the oil needle is obvious to all. But perspective view on the decision problems at times discouraging. From the point of view of the Communist party, for example, to the development of modern industry is to calm the fluctuations of the ruble exchange rate and peg it to gold. But, to do this, first you have to get rid of oil dependence. While the ruble is not divided with the price of oil, linking it to gold will cause the gap between the official and the real exchange rate. In the end we will get the development of the black market, as it was in Belarus. Gold is not the most stable tool. It is far more exposed to different factors than the same oil. After Breccia gold has risen in price for 8,6% and fixed at a high level and drawdown of oil was 7.8 percent, and in a couple of days the prices have returned to previous levels.
“Fair Russia”, it seems, is trying to take the number. Revolutionaries — leaders in the number of new proposals, which, alas, sin of populism. Before the election was adopted a short version of the program “25 fair laws,” but the economy there remains very little. Spravedlivorossy and do not call to move away from oil dependence, arguing that Russia should be raw power.
In this sense, the contrast is surprisingly advantageous to look suggestions for development of innovative potential from the liberal democratic party. The release of high-tech enterprises from VAT and exemption of profits spent on research and development, tax can contribute to the development of innovative capability and smart high-performance industry. Many developed countries, including the US and Japan, have similar support. And they have established themselves well for more than half a century.
Your approach to the modernization of industry is the Party of growth. Their proposal to select promising projects aimed at increasing productivity, the development of new technologies, and providing them with cheap loans look good at first glance, but in reality will encounter many problems: bureaucracy and corruption that will destroy their ideas in the Bud. This is valid in theory, but the mentality and habits of the people instantly not to eradicate, and it’s worth considering.
“United Russia”, as if gathering all that did during the previous convocation, woke up from sleep and offers logical steps: reducing the key interest rate by reducing inflation, stimulating demand for high-tech products from SMEs, the creation of a single mechanism of administration of customs and tax payments, support of domestic producers on world markets.
But Yabloko and PARNAS, constantly complaining that they are not allowed in the state Duma, and does evade the question round, in the best case, limited to generalities about what we need to change something.
Save or bury the social sphere? In this regard, all parties except the Party of growth, one: the social costs to increase, and multiply. It seems that our budget is a bottomless pit from which money can be taken in unlimited amounts without worrying about its safety. It is clear that the proposals to give all the money will find quick response in the people, but in fact most of them will lead to the complete collapse of the housing sector and the bankruptcy of the state. All promise to increase pensions, the average salary (as if it can be done with a decree), to restrict the payment of utility bills 10% of total family income (the Communist party and “WED”). Radical proposals scored “Fair Russia”. For example: to raise the average salary of 3 times, increasing its share in GDP from 25.3% to 55%. That has meant no increase in income — such, only to a lesser extent, was fed in the 2000s, when revenues grew faster than labour productivity. In the end, to stimulate imports from abroad, and the inhibition of the development of the domestic industry. Strange looks and the idea of lowering prices for agricultural products by increasing production volumes.
“United Russia” in this matter is succinct: it is necessary to create a balanced budget and to make the maneuver in favor of social spending, and the proceeds from the privatization of state-owned companies to direct for socially important projects. At least some specifics with the source of funds.
The easiest way to this issue is the Party of growth, saying that the successful development of the enterprise itself will lead to a decent standard of living. But what to do, for example, pensions before our industry will be transformed? The deficit of the FIU is growing steadily, and without measures in this area now most of us might not make it to better times.
The Treasury is freezing, the people are hungry: who will pay? The answer to this question is the only “United Russia”: the funds will come from the privatization of state companies, reduction of inefficient spending and increase the financial burden on entrepreneurs. All fine and dandy, but it is unclear how the measure increased fees from entrepreneurs in favor of the budgets of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and municipalities will help the development of entrepreneurship?
The Communists propose the nationalization of everything and the oil and gas sector and the electricity, and communications, and railway transport. Income here is clearly not to get — the only new spending in support of state-owned enterprises. The liberal democratic party continues to drastic measures, offering to release the entire Siberia and the far East from all kinds of taxes. This leads to the fact that there will go all big enterprises and the budget will have almost no income. Especially considering the fact that that’s where the extraction of raw materials, which provides about 44% of the revenues of the Federal budget. Without taxes from the area, you can immediately put a cross on our budget and to default.
A hope for our reserves? In vain. From the Reserve Fund remains a little: as of July 1, there are already at least 2.5 trillion rubles, which is 33% less than in the beginning of the year. The Communist party offers to indulge in all the gold and currency reserves of the country, and the Party of growth hopes that the issue of 1.5 trillion rubles a year will not have a negative impact. Rest and not puzzled by this question.
It turns out that a real program for socio-economic development, no one of the parties. The Communists and revolutionaries, as usual, make a win-win (for the party in the elections, but not for country) rate populism, not even caring about the fact that most of the proposals are simply ridiculous. LDPR also in his repertoire: will put forward a couple of practical initiatives that could shamelessly RUB points to the voter. Non-parliamentary parties have been unable to figure out how to implement the slogans and ideas support the same small and medium-sized businesses. The party in power at first glance offers a number of good initiatives. And all anything if these proposals are good in themselves separately, do not create the contradiction in the overall picture.
Politicians at that time chose populism common sense and almost did not listen to the expert community. Disparate ideas that contradict each other, and throwing some of the hot topics to others is what we see in the electoral programmes of parties. It is quite typical for election season, but in the economic situation, which is Russia today, this approach is inappropriate. The country needs a new national economic policy. The new NEP, which will provide a systematic analysis of the current situation and ensure an integrated approach to overcoming the crisis.
First of all, we should see a reduction in inefficient government spending: public procurement and the management of SOEs and state corporations, and in the social sphere (Yes, here too there are hidden resources to improve the quality of social security without increasing costs). Full reduction of inefficient spending will free up funds for social obligations, and to modernise the economy. An integral part of reform should be a medium – and long-term planning. Leaders expect their development to 80-100 years. We also find it difficult to imagine what will happen in a year. And reform cannot be ignored. Because of this, we are always looking to blame and it is not responsible.
None of the above, alas, we are in pre-election programmes of any of the parties is not observed. Why bother with elaborate election programme, while the elections no one goes? So do not expect that the state Duma of the seventh convocation will be able to assist the government in economic matters.Related posts: