Academician Viktor Ivanter: Now the society has an interest to live decently

Great article, but for starters pair of quotes, which prompted me to put stuff on the Song:

You have to understand: we have a very good structure of exports. … But now our problem is different: we have a bad structure of imports, we have a very high proportion of critical import, we are dependent. So we do not need to diversify exports and imports replaced diversify the economy.

Everything that made the liberals — is the 98th year. That was a normal consequence of their policies. … Prosperous economy, by definition, a liberal: Why intervene if all is well? But that liberalism has created a prosperous economy — is nonsense.

And a lot of interesting thoughts about the development of our economy



Where to spend at least $ 200 billion

Russian Academy of Sciences is preparing a report "On the set of measures to ensure the sustainable development of Russia in the face of global instability." Instructed her that the president through his adviser Sergei Glazyev, and leads a group of economists, vice-president of Russian Academy of Sciences Alexander Nekipelov. Putin is not the first time turns to academics. In July 2011, four o'clock he spoke with several economists. One of the participants in that meeting — Academician Viktor Ivanter says Russian Academy of Sciences will offer a new economic policy.

Victor Ivanter — Director of the Institute of Economic Forecasting. The first thing he said about the president — "he definitely listens to different points of view. Another question — how it works out solutions. To say that listens — it is not true. But he listens. "

— A collective report of academics — something quite difficult, because if you collect two academicians, the five of opinion is guaranteed. And we are now, in my opinion, about twelve — fifteen. And we must understand that I represent not only his personal opinion. In our institute, more than 150 employees are engaged in the problems of economic growth, for this report, we deal with the problems of economic growth.

If we talk quite a globally: we need to change in the economy?

We believe that now we need a new economic policy. And why is it necessary? Because we have received the result of the previous policy: we were in a different way to live. Let us take as its starting point in 1998. After the crisis. And compare, say, with the situation in 2008. Purchasing power parity per capita we have had from the United States about 18%, and in the ten years we have grown to 43%.

And why is it not so strongly felt in the country?

No, no, that's not true. I travel a lot around the country … Let's say I was in Komsomolsk-on-Amur aircraft plant KnAAPO in '97: from the airport to nothing took off, the plant polustoyaschy, was repairing "dry." And in 2009, I was there all uploaded build "Superjet" build fifth-generation fighter, has a design office, working on the figure. The average salary in 2001 was five thousand, now — twenty-four. Such a lot of the country, life was dramatically different.

I remember, when shock therapy began, people in Moscow were digging in the trash and rats running around the city, because the garbage is not removed. I do not want to say that now we are fine. We did not eliminate the poor, we are begging eliminated. Well, in order to cope with poverty, we need a new policy. The richer a country is, the more difficult to manage it. With the poor — very simple. Feed and clothe — all, nothing more is not necessary. But we have basic needs are met and to live it should be better!

And then we say here, have a new policy. And our answer is no, guys, you can not, you need to prepare for a crisis.

Infrastructure — it's a useful thing

You and the report as follows: "in the face of global instability." It seems like now continuous crises around the world.

I'll explain what's going on in the crisis. Look: we evolved and came out — the sixth, seventh, eighth year — an average of more than 7% GDP growth, almost eight. We are told that the high prices of oil. But it is now-that prices are higher than they were then! However, the rates below. What we do with the proceeds from oil? In the early 2000s, we paid off the debts. Free from debt. And then you and I saved money. And accumulated before the crisis of 2008, a colossal sum — $ 600 billion.

What do we spend it? In fact, to retain the banking system. Banks have large external debt and could not pay them. They were given loans by the banks which paid off its debts. In '98 we did not save anything, and the population is lost. At the time, about the crisis of the TV people do not know they came into the store and realized that the crisis. In 2008, a completely different situation. And while we spent $ 200 billion. I must say, not all was well. Why? Because we do it all "at sight", we have reserves, and plan to use them was not.

None at all?

There was not. And you could do it all for less. But at least we saved the banks. But for the economy, it has fallen by 8%! So it turned out that the money not protect against the economic downturn. Here is the output is the most important thing for today.

I have read several articles on the subject of your magazine "Problems of forecasting." In one of them claimed that the money in the crisis of 2008, spent a little. What should have been a couple of trillion to bolster the economy.

Yes, it's true. This article by Professor Panfilov … But it is quite difficult details. Because the principle of assignment was incorrect. They gave money to the banks so that they lend to the real economy. And they were doing that? Driven money into foreign currency. Properly done? Right. I'll give credit to whom? Businesses that are, or what?

It would be possible to give money to businesses themselves. But they, too, would drive them into the currency because there was a sales crisis: do not buy metal, cement, pulp and paper products, chemicals, fertilizers … Therefore, in such cases, it is necessary not to give money, and open lines of credit. That is, we say, you, the bank, you can get the money when comes to you for a loan deal. It is a complex system, it is not we were ready.

Another problem — how to manage money? I want to give to those who have little: doctors, teachers, poor. But if we do that, then, unfortunately, we get instead of output growth rising prices and increased imports.

And what is the recipe?

Organize domestic demand. Need to invest in infrastructure. This is a very useful thing. For example, roads. We train to Kazan travel day. It's humiliating. Now Siberia. Siberia without aircraft can not live, and it's airfields, airports and aviation systems. Highways. The absence of normal highway from Moscow to the West humiliating. Similarly, the absence of a full humiliating road between Moscow and St. Petersburg. And you have to understand that the road — it's not sand and asphalt, it's metal, this high-quality equipment, that is, it is a colossal industry.

And then just about domestic demand. During the crisis, we have stopped buying metal. And sell it to build our own roads we could n
ot. Do you know why? Very simple: because we were driven to the West slabs — these primitive blanks, and for roads need another metal. What was needed was restructuring, but at the time it was not.

But why infrastructure, of which you speak, a locomotive to the rest of the economy, why it will stimulate domestic demand? Well, once we construct the road — that's all. A materials abroad buy.

In my opinion, Stolypin was said: "The road is not for commerce, but for life." Is there a commercial result? Of course. When you built the road, the business enterprise begins to plant around it. But he will not build the road. Infrastructure, of course, is not just a road. This power plant, transmission lines, access roads. In addition, there are social infrastructure, hospitals, schools and housing.

There is other logistics. What is the problem in Moscow? We all were brought to Moscow, and then from there take out everything — that's a logistics uchudili, so now we suffer.

You have to understand that with this construction money can be public, and the building is surely not a government organization and private. There is a demand for material resources for high-quality workforce. Demand for research. Because it is necessary to have a project.

You can, of course, bring everything to the point of absurdity. You can bring the Turks, who are built. This, of course, a complete disgrace. But under normal conditions, infrastructure — and the manufacturing and non-manufacturing, social — working on domestic demand and pull the economy along. Because these areas minimum import.

You offer to invest in the construction of such accumulated reserves?

Of course. They need to be and can be used for investment. What are the specifics of our situation? If in 30 years we have done at the expense of the population, by reducing consumption, we now have a level of savings that we can do it without touching the population.

Where did the hump

  • The year 2001.  Victor Ivanter (right) together with the head of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs Arkady Volsky
  • The year 2001. Victor Ivanter (right) together with the head of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs Arkady Volsky

— The economy in general is a very simple thing: we will invest in the economy — will move. In addition, there is another problem that forces us to have a high rate — is our debt. Non-financial debts. Imagine that you have an apartment and you its 20 years renovating. Can you imagine what it will be in the form of? You are forced out of their wages now take out good money for repairs. And what do you get? The same apartment. Not the second, and this most that live in it can be had. We now have a large debt for utility operations: dilapidated housing, public communication. And we will have to spend about 2% of GDP per year — about a trillion rubles — to maintain the normal state of the worn portion of our infrastructure. But if we spend the money, then we take out of the consumer and can not increase the income of the population.

So we can not have a low growth rate. At low rates we get on these restrictions.

I have seen in the works of your institute assessment — 6-7% per year.

Yes, it is our assessment. We can say there is such an optimistic scenario. It is not unique, among the latter scenario the Ministry of Economic Development has also forced it coincides with our growth.

You got a hump in the graph is obtained: first, a very high rate, and after 2020 they fall. Why?

Hump, yes, absolutely correct. But physically gains will be greater, and the rate will be less.

We are told that the cash proceeds from the sale of hydrocarbons are changing and you need to consider that they are opportunistic. A metal prices do not change, or what? And the price of bread? All prices are changing … We believe that, of course, irregular income can not be the basis for regular expenses. That is, if you need to pay military pay, you must have a steady income. But that does not mean that all irregular income can not be spent. As it is impossible? You can and should spend, you just have to know how to handle them.

And if you still a serious crisis?

We are told that 7% of GDP, we have to save. This is the order of 150-170 billion dollars. This amount is more than the critical import of the country. What are we prepared? That Russia will not be any money, and we all have to buy? But this is not a crisis, guys, this is a disaster! And during a disaster quite different problems from which the money will not close. These $ 170 billion immediately worthless. This reserve — such monetary Maginot Line. And you have to remember that the Germans Maginot Line through Belgium bypassed.

Catch the crooks have to police, not economists

— Again, no one disputes the fact that reserves are needed, but you need to understand what it is. In the last crisis we spent inefficiently and spent only one-third. And if we are out of what's left, even $ 200 billion spent effectively on the domestic economy, maybe the problems would not exist.

There is another objection, as you do not ask, but I constantly hear, in Russia you can not do anything because everything is stolen. They say corruption. Like, take the traffic cops, doctors and teachers. What serious problem is that we have taken all the traffic cops? I have a recipe: do not give bribes — and there will be corruption.

They say, rather, about the kickbacks.

It's not corruption, it is called embezzlement. I talk about the fact that the bad officials are robbing our wonderful furry business, especially large. And in fact, embezzlement — this joint action. The officer himself can not steal, he needs a financial infrastructure to steal. And this has to fight the law enforcement system.

Now say you were checking on the corruption of economic laws? Stupidity is. Economic laws tested for effectiveness. A corruption of — a legal challenge. Everyone has to do their job. The economist must engage effectively, and the law enforcement system — to catch the crooks.

Against the infusion of reserves into the economy is even more serious objections. First, we acceleration of inflation. And second, no roads, we still do not have time to build for the next crisis, and the money will be gone. This Kudrin said.

Indeed, just spreading money — something ineffective. Need more organizational action. I was recently in Vladivostok, saw what was built for the APEC summit. Yes, of course, is not completely finished campus, there are unfinished things. But it was a desert. And now there are awesome bridges, is a sitting area and so on. Yeah, I guess there were irregularities and embezzlement of public funds, but in fact built! And they built quickly. There can be no doubt that the Olympic Games in Sochi will do everything.

What is the advantage of this type of project? We can not postpone, and when we can not, we're doing at the time.

And the question is still how to solve inflation?

I'll tell you things almost sacrilegious. Inflation — a remarkable process of automatically achieve a balance between income, goods and money. Imagine that there would be this balance — then there are queues, shortages, and so on. But the question is that inflation works well when you have these gaps between money supply and trade are small in one way or another, — the prices are going up, and they balance. An
d when you have a gross discrepancy, then we have a massive inflation or hyperinflation. We've been through a 92-95-m, respectively.

How to withdraw money

— But you have to consider that? There is a rise in prices, coupled with an excess of money. And here the danger — the increase in imports. That is, we give the money, and the domestic economy is not responding. There is a way out, we call it "sewage", that is, the money goes through certain channels — on infrastructure, production of what there is a demand for domestic supply. This is the art of control.

How could this mechanism work? Here is the Central Bank of 500-600 billion dollars in the West — as they pick up and invest in the economy here?

There are various ways. Suppose you invest the money in the road project. There are two components: the local and foreign currency. Since the currency is clear: you buy some equipment. A ruble part … We do not really know how to draw dollars, rubles, but we know how to draw — draw rubles. They are issued as a credit. It's all converted.

Just imagine: you have a ruble account in Sberbank, and you want to go to the Czech Republic on holiday. What are you doing? You withdraw cash, then go to the exchanger, giving rubles, get the euro. Alternatively, you take the card, come to Prague, poke into the ATM and take out the crown there, and you want to — the euro, and the like — Tug. The same bank does. He has a bill in the United States, in the Bank of America, where the money is, and they are used. All will make the central bank, and your bank will issue rubles on the road project.

How so you need to pour into the economy to get your 6-7% growth?

According to our estimates, with no external threats to the stability of the Russian ruble is possible for the next three years to drive about 4.5 trillion in base money to finance the whole thing. This is the annual rate of growth of the monetary base of the order of 17-18%.

You do all the calculations come from a very high oil price: $ 100 per barrel or higher. What if they fall?

Well, fall. It is they who will be nervous. We will not replenish the reserve funds and will, on the contrary, to take out their money. And then, what does "fall"? They say such a horror — $ 40 a barrel! We costs per barrel of oil in Russia on average, about $ 15. The "Rosneft" is less — about $ 12. Where else have you seen such a margin? Maybe we can adapt it to the point in the end?

"The oil needle" — in the matter?

Of course. You have to understand: we have a very good structure of exports. The demand for energy is very stable. Bad or good conditions, but must be heated, cooled it is necessary, it is necessary to travel. Of course, this will not last forever. Perhaps, in the end will make thermonuclear. But now our problem is different: we have a bad structure of imports, we have a very high proportion of critical import, we are dependent. So we do not need to diversify exports and imports replaced diversify the economy.

I have already heard about the import substitution fifteen years.

Do you know what a powerful import substitution was in 2009? There are things that we should do. For example, we have to return the aircraft. We have virtually no civil aviation industry today, but we have the aircraft-industry that can turn into a real aircraft. Cars and agriculture. All of this is dragging the rest. Roads — construction materials, aviation — titanium and aluminum, and so on.

And who will do it? Private capital?

Yes. Right now we do the calculation for the Far East, it turns out that for every 100 billion of public money is $ 500 billion of private investment. Public money is working as a decoy as an incentive. Well, look, now we say, "I do not spend public money, I have them on the shore of a crisis, I'm saving them. And you're a private investor. You and the system. " Private investor says, "I told you why, stupid, or what? He keeps them and does nothing, and I happen to be build, risk — how is that? "And it is a different situation when I say," Man, look here, I'll build a road, build a city, and there is a deposit You can sit on it. "

Let's talk about mechanisms. It all looks nice, but how to lend the money? We now have loans at 20%, it's just a killer. What to do?

Twenty percent — are two options: either it is trafficking of girls and drugs, or entrepreneur does not pay taxes. Other options can not be, if you take a 20% per annum. The reason for these rates is simple: the very high risks. The Bank's inside? It does not deal with assessment of the quality of the borrower. He knows that two of the three borrowers will be given, and no one, that's two and actually get paid for those who do not give.

Our people are qualitative. You just need to pay him

— What you need to do in order to lend to the economy? You must be able to distinguish from the excavation pit. And in order to distinguish it, we need people who know how to do it. That is, the banks that lend to the economy, there should be people who understand the economy. There is a second option: consulting firms that will make this work for the bank.

And for the regional banks is important to know the clientele. In small companies business plan is not worth two cents. You've got to look in the eyes of a particular person and to know it.

The refinancing rate of the Central Bank influences the interest for the economy?

Of course. Now she is — 8.25%. This is a fantastically high rate. In the United States, Europe, Japan — less than percent. Here, for example, VTB reported to Putin that he lends to defense contracts. Where did the calculation? He gets under 8.25%, adds his own interest, and 10% per annum. As a result of the 20 trillion two trillion go to banks. Why do we do it? I told the head — there it was a mechanical engineering: it can not develop even at 10% per annum. Perhaps most 5%. The maximum level of investment loans — is 5.7%. And this is not some mysterious problem — how to cope with the level of rates, everyone knows that. Elementary restoring order.

A housing loans?

Six — eight percent. The fact that now, that is 14% — wacky fantasy. Housing — a powerful engine for the economy. But it is not only the rate of the loan is important, but the salary. With the price per square meter of 1200-1400 dollars you need income of 40-50 thousand. And if the meter is $ 5,000 — then, sorry, you need 250,000 monthly income.

We got to the salaries. Where are we high wages, if labor productivity — 30% of the U.S.?

So she will be such as will not pay. I've been telling everyone about Henry Ford. In the 20s many of his published works, and one was, the main factor of the high productivity — a high salary. And when I have meetings, it is necessary to pay the money, I say, "No, we have people of such poor quality." And that means, at this same assembly line at Ford's intellectuals worked! High wages determines the very high requirements to the owner, he should be able to organize work. Otherwise burned.

There is a difference between the "stop doing" and "unlearn to do"

— Why is the performance of the Americans is higher than that of the French and the British? Because very high quality of work organization — a man "squeeze." If you say, "You know, I have problems at home, and I'm off from work" — there simply will not understand what you said.

You see, the performance gap — is primarily a gap in incentives. This can
be seen in Moscow. That is what is called an office plankton: pay very much, and people are interested in the work. What do they do? They trade or service trade. It's a big job, and we are now in the shops are all the same as in the West.

In one of the works of your institute said that there is production, which is almost impossible to upgrade. Because of the old equipment. And there, as I understand it, no matter how much pay, nothing will not grow. Why should we give them money? Here, for example, Uralmash. If you go to the Urals and ask around people will tell you that this plant is not good for nothing.

This is not entirely true. There are products that are in demand in the domestic market. URALMASH produces, including drilling equipment. And when they went to Bogdanov from "Surgut", he took out a piece of paper with the names: "Here the names of designers that I know. If they work for you, I'll buy your drills. " Constructors have found the money paid.

I want to say that there is a difference between the "stop doing" and "unlearn to do." So far we have not forgotten. There are still people who can train engineer. And by the way, cost engineers do not need anyone, we need only expensive.

Mechanical engineering — one of the industries where they can pour money. Where else? The defense? We are there like 20 trillion are going to roll. And it is seriously criticized.

Allocated 20 trillion plus 3 trillion if needed. I think it should have been done before, and more. Military finance a huge amount of research. An example of the simplest: we all use the Internet. But imagine how the Internet could be on a commercial basis? And in any way.

But the question is, is not whether, as in the Soviet Union, half or even up to two-thirds of the economy work for the defense?

Well, that you're lying, of course. In fact, we have tested all the new items on the defense, and then they fall into civil industry. But the truth is that they do not want to deal with conversion. One supervisor told me: "Look, if we did that by shit — refrigerators, we would have filled up all the country." They do not want to do, they wanted over the fence, standing dead, kept parity with the U.S.. And normally, when they produce around sixty percent of civilian products. Yes, that's the same aircraft. We did not have the actual civil aircraft. What is TU-104? A converted bomber.

I want to say that these 23000000000000 dragged behind a 60% civil proceedings.

But it's all state-owned firms will?

No, not so long ago. The only foreigners there can not be. The rest — what's the difference? Private company — well, private. Got into this business, you get admission and stay. Of course, we must see to it that did not sell out the secrets. But experience shows that not a lot of secrets. I had a friend, a fairly well-known theoretical physicist Vladimir Gribov, he explained about the secret of the atomic bomb: "The secret is in how you can do it or not. At the moment when it exploded, leaving only the engineering problem. "

There is a second area that works as a military — is medicine. What has led the development of high medicine? To ensure that the old live longer. The economy is not needed, the Spartans their elders dropped off a cliff — and everything. But physicians, as well as the military, always bought something. They need some heart valves, and for them, it turns out, the new materials are needed, and so on.

Need more expensive and less fools

-Once again, I want to tell you, yes, you need to spend money on the road. But if the president decides not to 100 billion rubles, and give a trillion on the road right tomorrow, it may not lead to anything. Simply stolen. Because there is no project, no construction companies and so on. This means that in one place it is necessary to give the money to the construction loan, elsewhere — credit for the creation of the project, and in third place — for something.

When there is a chance that the offer will be accepted? When the bulk of the independent and non-ideological experts more or less the same tune blow. I think this is exactly such a situation. This is not a problem for a miracle. It is a problem of interest. Now the company as a whole has an interest to live decently. Second, this society now understands that a freebie does not work, we must work hard. The third factor: we actually took the market economy.

They say that it is in our ultra-liberal past 20 years …

Not likely. Everything that made the liberals — is the 98th year. That was a normal consequence of their policies. And after that, we had to collect all of this in reverse. I want to say that I was a man of liberal plan. Prosperous economy, by definition, a liberal: Why intervene if all is well? But that liberalism has created a prosperous economy — is nonsense.

So: we have a free economy, the consumer market — hence, a number of benefits already there, plus experience. And there are people of success on which we rely. Not all of our businesses have the money because stolen. There are people who have earned themselves.

And who will take the decision to whom to give the money? The government?

No, no. Traditionally, the world does Institute for Development — the development of the relevant banks.

Maybe there any cheats?

This is a complicated matter. Need consulting. Well, there PricewaterhouseCoopers, the story behind it. And we have experts. Here was such a firm "Promstroyproyekt." Where did he go? He died in the 90s. And it was created in the 30s by the Americans. On the other hand, the Moscow design companies survived because Luzhkov built housing. There is nothing that would be quite lost.

A Academy of Sciences could take part in the examinations?

Yes. In this form, as we have, Academy — a unique institution. The advantage of this strange organization is that it has the experts on all issues.

Help PP

Ivanter Victor

Russian economist, Doctor of Economic Sciences, Academician of Russian Academy of Sciences (elected on 26.05.2000). Director of the Institute of Economic Forecasting, Russian Academy of Sciences (since 1997), headed by the Dissertation Council of the Institute, a member of a number of expert and scientific advisory boards for various government agencies, the chief editor of the journal "Problems of Forecasting."

A specialist in the analysis and forecasting of the national economy, finance and banking, financial and cost proportions, monetary and fiscal policies.

Like this post? Please share to your friends: