Scientists have deduced formulas of sufficient poverty and richesthe Present revelation even for presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences there was a report of the director of Institute socially - economic problems of the population of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Doctor of Economics Alexey Shevjakova.
It has opened for the first time earlier not known communications between an inequality in a society and the major socially - economic indicators of development of the country. About it the correspondent talks to it.
: that in Russia incomes rich almost in 20 times more, than at poor, does not speak only the lazy. But whether it is bad? It is possible, of course, as character Sharikov offered well-known bulgakovsky, to take away and divide, but then the most initiative will lose stimulus well to work. Whether so is better to lift incomes of the poor?
Alexey Shevjakov : this way we also go today, raising salaries and pensions. On the statistican, the number of the poor decreases, but all paradox that it not the most effective way and rupture between rich and poor only increases.
RG : How such it is possible?
Shevjakov : When our officials report about social achievements they operate with so-called absolute poverty. It is a question of people with the income below a living wage. But it is crafty figure. It is established by rather subjectively officials so, poverty basically in general can be brought to naught.
In Europe other indicator of relative poverty. People get to this category with incomes below 60 percent from the average shower income in the country. For Russia it about 6,5 thousand roubles, while a living wage almost twice less. There is a difference? And here if Russia to estimate with this new measure it will appear that abroad poverty gets about half of population.
In general contrast between these two approaches to a question that such poverty, is amazing. For example, has come to light such at first sight a strange picture. At increase of pensions and salaries at us the absolute number of the poor decreases. And should be. But relative poverty all time grows! And the more strongly, than richer region. A vivid example - Moscow. Absolutely poor here about 13 percent, and here in relative poverty live, to the European measures, more than 57!
RG : Perhaps it is purely Russian phenomenon?
Shevjakov : I Think, what yes. We have today such distributive mechanism which considerably differs from accepted in the developed countries. It also leads to such paradoxes when together with economic growth relative poverty grows also. To understand the reasons, we studied on mathematical models dependence between an inequality and the major socially - economic indicators.
And which - that has cleared up. For example, we have seen that absolute poverty is not connected with them almost, but relative - directly. That is it is possible and to add further pensions and salaries, but at invariable growth of level of relative poverty we will not achieve serious successes neither in economy, nor in a demography.
RG : Than such strange arithmetics speaks?
Shevjakov : it is necessary to search for the Answer in an inequality of incomes of different groups of the population. Till now was considered that here all is obvious, and usually operated with absolute figures which showed, in how many time incomes of the richest more than the poorest. We have found out that all is much more difficult. Speaking in images, in this general inequality as in a nested doll, two more kinds of an inequality - normal and superfluous are concluded. The first - moves economy, stimulating the person to realise the potential. It works as the development locomotive. And here the superfluous inequality, on the contrary, as a brake, creates weight of global problems for a society.
RG : Where comes to an end “ norm “ also begins “ surplus “?
Shevjakov : the Answer was given by mathematical models. For Russia “ norm “ if incomes rich more than at poor, in 7 - 9 times, instead of in 20, as now. Europe has groped the same level verbally, to this parity went decades a trial and error method, and we have calculated on models. And it is essentially important. Till now round admissible level of an inequality there were the rough disputes, each party put forward the arguments. But they suffered one lack: Did not lean against the exact science, on statistical calculations. And we have unequivocally proved that in level of an inequality and, the most important thing, in its components is a certain optimum both for intensive development of economy, and for the decision of a demographic problem.
Shift in any party gives negative effect. Estimations show that at a normal inequality Russia already would have today gross national product almost on 35 - 50 percent more present, and the population by 2050 can make about 160 million persons. If the present superfluous inequality the number of inhabitants of the country will be reduced at the best to 124 million remains.
RG : In the USA the inequality factor - nearby 14, and in Brazil even above, than at us, but there in general is observed rough economic growth...
Shevjakov : In - the first who has told, what is an optimum for the given countries? In - the second, here in general it is impossible to draw direct analogies. Let`s tell, the USA are absolutely at other level of development, there in relative poverty there lives very small part of the population. Therefore the country presumes higher level of an inequality. In many respects it is connected and with national features of America, history of its formation, tolerance of the population to an inequality and riches.
As to Brazil here, as well as in the majority of the countries of the South America, huge rupture in incomes between the poor and rich existed throughout all history of the country. Therefore the population while was ready to accept a present situation. At the same time Hugo Chavez`s successes in Venezuela which plays a high inequality, - a serious call for the authorities of all South American countries.
we almost 80 years lived In Russia approximately on an equal footing, at an inequality in 2 - 4 times. Moreover, in our country sense of justice, the special relation to riches always have been aggravated. And suddenly for any some years the society was considerably polarised: one have lost the last, many cannot find work, but others have free of charge received huge fortunes. At the majority of the population the feeling of injustice of an event began to dominate. From here depression, powerlessness, psychological stress, and about 60 percent of the population have today the incomes which are not allowing them to the full to realise the possibilities in economic and reproductive behaviour, to support and keep the health and etc.
RG : But in China too built a socialism, however, judging by responses of our businessmen, one Chinese works, as 15 Russian. And, say, in India at terrible poverty birth rate one of the highest in the world...
Shevjakov : I Repeat, experience of other countries cannot be transferred to Russia, as well as ours on them. At us different mentalities. The analysis of statistics and model shows that in Russia the superfluous inequality constrains economy, promotes decrease in birth rate and high death rate. For China and India it is necessary to analyze their statistics and on this basis to build other mathematical models taking into account features of these countries. And there absolutely other dependences can come to light.
RG : What reasons of so striking rupture in incomes rich and poor in Russia?
Shevjakov : I Will answer with figures of official statistics. During 2000 - 2005 growth of the salary at us considerably advanced gross national product growth. It would Seem, poverty should be reduced. What do we see in practice? On 100 roubles of a gain of gross national product counting on soul of the population at poor the income increases by 5 roubles, and at rich - on 200. The reason of such warp is clear. The mechanism of distribution of money works for us in favour of the rich. And if we say that on the average the inequality makes 20 times, in the richest regions it much more above: in Moscow, for example, incomes of 10 percent of the richest exceed incomes of 10 percent of the least provided, on the official statistics, almost in 50 times. Even if we suddenly now will execute precepts of Sharikova and all we will select and we will divide, very soon the situation will return into place. After all powerful “ the vacuum cleaner “ swings huge means in one party, from poor to the rich.
By the way, it very visually illustrates such example. It is considered that poor and rich identical taxes, but actually the rich pay have a decent privilege. After all at poor the basic source of the income - the salary, and at rich - dividends under actions, incomes of the property and etc. But they are assessed with lower taxes, than the salary.
RG : To reduce rupture in incomes, how many people with hard purses it is necessary to force to pay taxes under the raised rates?
Shevjakov : It nearby 10 - 15 percent of the population of the country. But speech does not go that it is necessary to select something. It is necessary, that their incomes did not grow so promptly and, probably, would be comparable with growth of incomes of lower-income strata. For example, in the USA state regulation increases incomes poor almost in 5 times and reduces an initial indicator of an inequality of incomes in 4,5 times! And at us this mechanism reduces an inequality only on 20 - 25 %. So what state more socially?
RG : In imperious offices know about your researches?
Shevjakov : Yes. We dispatched materials in the Ministry of Finance, minekonomrazvitija, minzdravsotsrazvitija, Presidential Administration, the State Duma and the Federation Council. Now I prepare new materials taking into account last results of calculations and their analysis.