11. To the Ministry of Economics at realisation of actions of the Mechanism of realisation to provide vzaimouvjazannoe the integrated influence of all economic regulators so that regulation was purposeful and stimulated realisation of problems...
from the governmental order project (edition recommends to read slowly aloud)
last week the government has made for what from it long waited: at session of Sovmina the project of the budget and prospect of development of economy for 1994 has been considered. Experts believe that the documents approved by the government were developed taking into account the presidential message - and have to the full reproduced internal contradictions containing in the message and certain is pure balmontovskuju nedovyskazannost.
the Basic question - as should look not mortally inflationary mechanism of revival of heavy depressive economy - remains opened.
the government has a plan. The plan is good
On materials about a condition and prospects of development of the Russian economy, Sovmina discussed at session, it is visible that obligations for 1994 are taken severe. The data resulted in table 1, shows that government plans include resolute delay of economic recession, double reduction of rates of inflation, the further increase of deficiency of money in economy.
also budget sketches (see table 2) not less strictly look. Looking at them, nobody can reproach the government that it is going to weaken the monetary policy. We will remind that essentially softer project of the budget for 1993 was accepted under many-voiced singing of reformers about extremely rigid monetary policy in the spirit of the Chicago school. The present variant, according to the possibility granted by the presidential message not to play apologetics, is named only moderately by rigid.
most likely the similar name has been given the monetary policy of 1994 because by preparation of the project of the budget the government has refused budgetary financing of several tens actions for the sum more than 90 trln the roubles promised for 1994 by presidential decrees, decisions of the office and old decisions of the Supreme body of the Russian Federation. At the same time the approach which was realised by the government by preparation of the project of the budget, shows: It quite realises that manufacture needs to be supported money - budget items of expenditure are divided on flowing and investment.
by program and budget consideration in a complex the impression, as rigidity, and the moderation, reflected in documents, an essence no more than observance of formalities is made: the government has been obliged to try to consider inconsistent theses of the presidential message about struggle against inflation with simultaneous support of manufacture, about state regulation strengthening at preservation of fidelity to market ideals.
so on the one hand, the government recognises that in any degree manufacture still can meet crisis of demand by means of a monetary rating (through investments, through sanitation of crisis of non-payments). Then the further reduction on third of real monetary weight (see table 1) is represented is superfluous rigid, after all the same document provides that manufacture should fall no more than to 8 %.
On the other hand, is inexpedient to throw out on the markets most dependent on a gain of monetary weight (financial, consumer), superfluous quantity of money. But then the advancing rates of increase of cash put in the program in comparison with cumulative monetary weight it is represented it is superfluous soft and infljatsionno the dangerous. Besides, to any economist it is clear that cashing in monetary weight in itself reduces controllability of economy and the finance and at all stimulates realisation of problems (the epigraph) see.
By the way, increase of a share of the resources redistributed through the state budget (see table 2) really corresponds to the thesis about strengthening of the government by economy. We will notice that in the basic way of the state influence on economy there is a regulation of financial streams (to the investment, a subvention, credits etc.) Instead of strengthening of tax pressure. But then why the share of an account part of the budget in gross national product grows much more slowly, than profitable? Clearly why: it would not be desirable, that the budgeted deficit in the relation to gross national product was more than in 1993. But after all if to carry out it a wish possibilities of investment regulation will be reduced also.
basically all these contradictions could be resolved within the limits of the program for 1994 - but for this purpose in it there is no one malosti: the sketch (at least) the mechanism of management of inflation, creations of the animator of investments and financial streams directed to manufacture or at least the list of those principles on which industrial and financial interests of economy should be co-ordinated.
Structurally - the investment policy government eyes
Long supervision over evolution of the point of view of the government on structurally - the investment policy allow experts to sum up. By our estimations, development of a sight at a state role in realisation of this policy has undergone a number of metamorphoses. Here they.
a sight the first, radiant. Structural reorganisation of economy is regulated by the market, a state role - tax regulators, the interest rate, duties. This sight kept long - approximately to the middle of last year. The apologist of this point of view - who is known.
a sight of the second, hardly the guarded. The investment policy assumes not only indirect regulators, but also direct selective support of the necessary enterprises from which it is necessary to keep up till the moment of approach at them a bankruptcy condition . This point of view has ripened in Ministry of Economics in the summer of 1993, but has in the pure state existed not for long, having added in an early autumn with the idea which has made a basis -
the Third sight seeing a way to rescue in creation financially - industrial groups and strengthening of controllability of the state enterprises. This position was proved in Goskomprom material (so-called Soskovets`s program ) . More close by the winter promfingrupp the president who has let out about it the special decree has like idea also.
in the end of the last year the sight of Ministry of Economics was enriched with idea of federal target programs. At once narazrabatyvali it is a lot of these programs, and then suffered (and till now are tormented) with a question - that with them to do?
a creation wreath - in the governmental order About position of the Russian economy and prospects of its development for 1994 approved at presidium Sovmina last Thursday. The decision has incorporated:
- and federal programs;
- and promfingruppy;
- and competitive distribution of state investments;
- and attraction of private capitals.
only selective support is not mentioned, but it means nothing: it on - former cherishes Ministry of Economics, without connecting, however, now the beginning of such support with the moment directly previous approach bankruptcy conditions .
And all in a present sight of the government is correct and good, except one: is in offered system of state regulation trudnoulavlivaemyj logic failure which obviously and certainly multiplies all regulation on a zero. The approach to regulation in government interpretation is put upside down so state intervention in an economy in a reality will lead to a boomerang effect: not to recession overcoming, and to its stimulation, not to structural reorganisation, and to economy degradation.
the matter is that in the Soviet administrative mentality the principle of a primacy of the state is tightly built in. How thinks (and the official writes in official documents)? He is honesty assured that it is necessary to involve the private capital, instead of to support its undertakings by the state investments. It knows well that financially - industrial groups should be created, instead of to facilitate life to already operating groups. He very much wants to distribute investments on the purpose of selective support - and with voluptuous delight makes, co-ordinates and confirms lists of the enterprises.
our official - the demiurge, god Savaof, and on smaller do not agree. Therefore it is alien to a reflexion on a theme that for it it is possible to involve the private capital in objectively unprofitable project only with prospect to heat up a hand in the dishonest way; to favourable and it is not necessary to involve - the capital and itself there will direct.
the manager drives from itself thought that financially - industrial groups with participation of private investments already exist and effectively operate. It is not perceived by it as a reality given to it in sensations as sensations such force to suspect own uselessness. And here to create group - irrespective of, it will work, or not - business honourable.
and where how nicely selectively to support. Here the result affects instantly: Only whistle about money, and direktory, having constructed by a phalanx, storm selectors - michurintsev .
the Morals of all told are simple. Between the government and a national economy the link adequately perceiving both interests of the state, and the capital should be indispensable. Financial agents of the state, on a profitable basis investing governmental capital investments can become such link. And after all this idea in itself is not original: something similar - the Russian financial corporation - already exists. Badly only that real return from its activity is not looked through yet.
the state should be able to lose money
the strangenesses Specified by us in the governmental understanding of state regulation of economy have at all only the academic interest. Certainly, the Russian economy be more healthy, it it would be possible without an extra risk poregulirovat and in the official ways, smearing on it budgetary funds in any, most whimsical image; but in present conditions of total crisis similar ekzersisy are unsafe.
it is pleasant, of course, that necessity of the active monetary help of the industry is written down in black and white; disturbs that the question of efficiency of this help is simply removed from the agenda. We will be explained: about efficiency of the state investments (and also subventions, grants and so forth) We speak here in not so standard sense. It is a question not so much of times of recovery of outlay of the state investments or profitability dotiruemyh from the budget of production programs, how many about efficiency of all these actions for the decision most acute problems of today`s economy of Russia. And first of all - life-support problems.
just efficiency of state investments literally words to provide easier - by means of such financial agents of the state about whom just there was a speech. Efficiency in sense portable even gives in to calculation where worse.
we will tell, what efficiency of investments in creation trudopogloshchajushchih manufactures in Ivanovo or Vladimir region? Either in the Volga region, or in Ural Mountains - in places of mass destruction of the defensive enterprises? What efficiency of investments in a growing decrepit power supply system - for example, in increase of safety of nuclear stations? In worn out to a limit - and beyond the limit - a railway transportation? It would be natural to measure it by scale of losses which will be incurred by the same budget if with similar investments to be late - and the corresponding trouble will befall: mass unemployment, a collapse of transport and etc. But will not do private business of such investments at any weather, with whatever national losses in the future refusal threatened. Hence, to lose money on these investments the state - any is obliged: though market, though the communistic.
unfortunately, in the documents accepted by Sovminom is not present not only estimations of that inflationary damage, which government considers necessary to incur for the decision of urgent problems of life-support of the country, but is not present systems of criteria of a substantiation of similar budgetary expenses, even a hint on desire such system to develop.
the Basic macroindicators of development of economy of Russia in 1992 - 1993 and the forecast of the government for 1994
Budgetary indicators of 1993 and the forecast of the budget for 1994
NIKITA - KIRICHENKO, ALEXANDER - HALTS, ANDREY - SHMAROV