My answer to Chamberlain or the legends and myths of marsh hamsters

I just recently moved to Russia. I returned home after decades of living in another country with a different dominant ethnic group and culture. Country, which was sent at the time of my grandfathers and fathers to build communism, and then conveniently forgot, when the Soviet Union was no more. I was born in the Soviet Union, Russia is a successor of his, so it is for me now the only homeland. All these years, being there, far away from the homeland, I did not miss any news about my country, I am very much worried her moral and economic decline in the ’90s, I was happy as a kid with each germ positive and good and every step of my Russian to recovery and prosperity. I argue themselves hoarse with skeptics and pessimists ponositelyami my Russian and believed. He believed with all his heart in its revival, recovery and a brighter future.  And now, decades later, I am here, at home. The way home was strewn with rose petals. I had to go through months of queues at the embassies, consulates across rudeness and arrogance of some and the holy selfless kindness and spiritual assistance of other officials at various levels. But it’s not at all embittered and did not break me, despite the fact that I’m still a few months I can not take my family here — again red tape and not the desire of local officials to work in Kyrgyzstan Russian Consulate delay the paperwork for the child. I understand that my country has just started to rise from the ruins of that in recent years the stability of the foundation is laid, which is now in the country and not all issues have been resolved, that there is much left to do more work and leadership of the country and we, ordinary citizens. Here, on the ground. Each on its own. To justify the high title of citizen of the Russian Federation. So I do not complain at all, just doing all that I require legislation. The level of my training, produced exclusively by their own sweat and blood, enough to get a specialty in Moscow. Imagine my surprise to discover in the course of communication with my new friends their pessimistic, denying everything and everyone look at the contribution of the current leadership of Russia in that stable, not poor life, that they can afford. I had to again argue themselves hoarse, but their arguments more and they always iron, "Let all the saw cut, yes stolen, never mind traveling, we do not, the country is heading into the abyss." All of these approaches are very much remind me quote "Echo of Moscow", "RBC News", "Kommersant" and others of that ilk. Cries a lot, but no facts. No, there is evidence of iron: "Yes, my friend who knows a friend who works ZNAESHGDE told me!" This elementary check the facts right there on the spot, on the Internet — in the public domain, as a rule, destroys all the "credible opinions "on the vine. It is doubly sad that my friends highly educated people, professionals in their field. Specialists with a capital letter, what to look for. And the people are just wonderful. That no man — a whole life story worthy of a book or film. So I got the idea to, if possible, an impartial study postulates upon which the world of my friends and either confirm them or dispel dope, pumped "swamp hamsters" on the heads of ordinary people. In my work, I will only use open sources, which can reach up to sitting behind a desk and slid a browser over the vast expanses of the Internet.

 Let’s get started.

Argument "swamp hamsters’ first:  

"… The current economic state of Russia, its growth is the result solely of rising energy prices. No merit Putin and his government in this. The same indicators have been achieved under Yeltsin, if in 1996 the price of oil was exactly the same as in the 2007th, for example. And to prove — that you schedule the correlation of Russia’s GDP and the rise in oil prices (taken from here http://surkovvladislav.livejournal.com/1961.html):

     
                  … "

Let’s see in detail with the issue. One of the major economic indicators by which to measure the growth of the economy, is the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). That it is always compared with the increase in energy prices, to show how everything is bad. Without further ado, I will use the material Wikipedia and will analyze whether this is so. So, we have:

All amounts are in billions denominated RR.[*]

 

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Nominal GDP

1 428.5

2007.8

2 342.5

2 629.6

4 823.2

7 305.6

8 943.6

10 830.5

13 243.2

17 048.1

21 609.8

26 917.2

33 247.5

41 428.6

38 808.7

45 166.0

 

Real GDP

 

in 1995 prices

1 428.5

1 377.1

1 396.4

1 322.3

1 407.0

1 547.7

1 626.6

1 703.1

1 827.4

1 959.0

2 084.3

2 238.6

2 419.9

 

 

at 2000 prices

6 748.2

6 505.2

6 596.3

6 246.7

6 646.5

7 305.6

7 677.6

8 041.8

8 632.7

9 249.4

9 846.3

10 574.9

11 431.4

 

at 2007 prices

19 473.7

18 772.7

19 035.5

18 026.6

19 180.3

21 098.3

22 174.4

23 216.6

24 911.4

26 705.0

28 414.1

30 516.7

32 988.6

 

                                                           

 

You and I will be interested in real GDP. Take, for example, the string "In 1995goda prices."

 

Now, in theory, it would be necessary to compare the GDP growth to oil prices. That’s where the fun began. Many sites provide an interesting graph of GDP correlation with the oil price, but I decided to look
for oil prices on their own and build a graph, such a correlation is by no means received. Here’s what schedule I turned on oil prices (the data are taken from here: http://dilesoft.livejournal.com/1649434.html and http://www.inflationdata.com/inflation/Inflation_Rate/Historical_Oil_Prices_Table.asp)

Schedule this happens is this:

 

You see at least some correlation, except that GDP grew from 1999, the year the same as the price of oil? Where the fall in GDP growth in falls (loss) of oil prices? Once again, set for presentation graphics under each other and are looking for a "clear correlation".

 

 

Found? I — no. The only correlating little segment — this time in the 1998. Default. The glorious reign of Boris Yeltsin and others like them. Maybe I’m doing something wrong? So, as a joke about WINDOWS: «… set, and it does not break and does not hang, I’m doing wrong? …" So, the first part we discussed Khomyakov delirium — no correlation of GDP growth and oil prices have not. There is a general trend — the price of oil increases, and GDP is growing, however, when the oil price falls, the GDP is not sags — unambiguous dependence was found. We can only note, and the same can be seen in the graph that at lower oil prices, GDP does not sags, and is growing more slowly — the difference between the values at each end of the segment changes dots graphics, not as big as in areas where oil prices are rising and do not fall down. In addition, in the end, it would be strange to deny the dependence of our economy on oil and gas sector. Just as strange to deny the dependence of our economy on the aircraft, automotive. Yes, this sector brings on some estimates up to 20% of the population density in the country’s budget, but the other 80% of the budget are filled by other means — this is a real production. We build, we produce. So we fill our budget. That is what this graph shows — an increase in oil prices can accelerate the growth of economic indicators, but the drawdown of oil prices is not affected dramatically by the Russian GDP. As well it does not mean that everything is fine and we do not want anything to change in the economy. It is necessary and change. Examples of positive weight! For all the evidence I refer to the website www.sdelanounas.ru.

So, the first part of delirium hamsters swamp we seem to have sorted out. Now part two. Namely, that no merit of Putin’s government and him personally about it. In order to understand this question, we will have with you, the reader, to take a trip in our not so distant, but as I recall the terrible nightmare of the past — the 90s of the 20th century. Again, turn to public sources: Wikipedia.

 Read the article:

More precisely, we are interested in the section titled: 1992-1999. In addition, you can gather some information here:

Look what happened in our country in those dashing years?

I do not have anything to write and think again — everything is already written and said in this article, I only arranged in order excerpts from it and confirm, where appropriate, comments.

"… Many of the goals and methods of the economic policy of the authorities, held in 1990, formed the basis of the indications of the international financial institutions, particularly the IMF.[26]

Methods for the economic policies applied in 1995-1998, resembled "bad infinity": again and again repeated similar within the meaning of the measures, despite the fact that every time they were negative.[26] Rate constant was done on a very limited set of monetary and fiscal measures.

… "

What is here? The country is virtually lost any sovereignty in the early 90’s. Our ministers virtually ruled by officials from the IMF, no financial decision is not passed by their all-seeing eye, no decision has been taken without their knowledge, consent and the "friendly" advice. What does this lead our country?

"… The investigation was conducted in 1995-1998, the economic policy are: the economic downturn, a significant outflow of capital from the country, the lack of money in the real sector and in the social sphere, intensified opportunism on the part of companies, a substantial weakening of the bonds between the disadvantaged and advantaged sectors of the economy, strengthening the structural and technological imbalances in the economy, low living standards, etc.[26]

By August 1998 the authorities have lost the resources to finance short-term debt and the retention rate of the ruble.[26] August 17, 1998 was declared a default on domestic liabilities (GKO, OFZ) and actually announced refusal to support the ruble.[26] This meant the collapse of the macroeconomic policies pursued since 1992.[26] In the wake of the financial crisis, the Russian economy has received a severe blow, which resulted in the sharp depreciation of the ruble, the decline in production, a significant increase in inflation, falling living standards.[26  

… "

I do not understand how to forget about that many who are just like I was surviving in the 90 — without electricity, gas, without hot and cold water in a concrete box panel blocks of flats, waking up at 5 th blankets in the morning and finding the kitchen frozen in a kettle of water overnight. Who are the same as I was walking for miles through the city in search of a store, where bread was brought, and where it can be taken strictly on the two rolls together, to stand at this hour-long queue. Who at one time believed that the washing machine and a flat-screen TV — it’s luxury goods, and buy a car you can only delay a couple of decades meager pittance received once a year and a half salary. How it all eroded from the heads of our people and they are now saying that nothing has been done for decades by our leadership of the country? Really bad so quickly forgotten?

"… The economic downturn was short-lived and soon gave way to large-scale economic growth.[26]

Significant role in the transition from recession to growth played a change in macroeconomic policy.[26]

First, the resumption of economic growth was considered more important priority than curbing inflation.[26]

Second, it was found ineffective use of an overvalued exchange rate as a means of curbing inflation.[26]  …

Third, monetary management has become more flexible.[26] Although the policy of restricting the supply of money in order to curb inflation persists, steps were taken to reduce the delay on pensions, benefits and salaries.[26] Thus, in the III quarter of 1998, arrears of salaries to state employees accounted for 20.9 billion rubles by the beginning of 2000 they decreased to 7.1 billion rubles.[26]

Fourth, the decision was made to waive recovery of the financial state obligations, as it was recognized that the deficit of the budget at the expense of large-scale borrowing poses significant risks of economic stability, not providing a sufficient deterrent effect of inflation.[26]

Fifth, at the end of 1998, and in 1999 the authorities have successfully applied the regulation of prices of natural monopolies (railways, electricity and gas industries) as an economic lever, resulting in up to early 2000, the rate of increase in prices for natural mo
nopolies was about 1 , 7 times lower than the average growth rate of prices in the economy.[26] As a result of this measure could slow the rate of inflation and give further impetus to the growth of production in the economy, because at that time, many Russian companies the unit cost of transport and energy actually declined.[26]

… "

Now, let’s remember what political figure appeared suddenly at that moment in the political arena, becoming the de facto receiver Yeltsin? Putin Vladimir Vladimirovich. It was under his leadership and under his responsibility were carried out all these changes. And what they got? Graph of GDP growth, given by me earlier, clearly illustrates what. Stable growth. Again I do not need to re-write and find — everything is already there in the same article on Wikipedia. See "Russia since 2000 ". Let me just note one interesting and tasty fact that immediately cuts to the root of the next argument hamster marsh, namely:

The second argument: "In Russia, the world’s highest taxes! Under Yeltsin, and it was better! "

"…

In the 1990s, the level of taxation in Russia was too high and unacceptable for firms and, despite the constant tightening of tax laws in those years, companies have continued to massively and successfully evade taxes.[26] In the 2000s, Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a series of laws that have been amended tax law: was set a flat income tax of individuals in the 13% reduced tax rate to 24%, introduced regressive unified social tax, turnover taxes and repealed the sales tax, the total number of taxes was reduced 3-fold (from 54 to 15)[28]

… "

Further, the confirmation:

(Http://www.minfin.ru/ru/press/speech/index.php?pg4=36&id4=4229)

"…

Abandon the fiscal functions of taxes does not succeed, said Deputy Finance Minister Shatalov

HV. REV.: Added new statements Shatalov (after the fourth paragraph)

MOSCOW, March 20. RIA Novosti reported. — Abandon the fiscal functions of taxes does not succeed, said Deputy Finance Minister Sergei Shatalov. "I think we will never give up the fiscal component of the tax," — he said at a meeting of the Public Chamber’s competitiveness, economic development and entrepreneurship. Shatalov added that now the main task of the tax system — the formation of the revenue side of the budget. Thus, Deputy Finance Minister said the President of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs, Chairman of the Public Chamber Alexander Shokhin, said that the tax authorities should monitor the implementation of tax laws, and not to perform a fiscal function. According to him, the business feels the pressure of this fiscal. Shatalov also said that if taxes will be collected in full and the tax authorities will monitor the situation, it will be possible to reduce taxes. Deputy Finance Minister believes that a balance between the interests of the state and taxpayers is achievable, and it is the objective work of the tax reform. In general, he said, for the period of tax reform, from about 2001, the tax burden has decreased from 34-35% to 27.5%. "The tax system has changed dramatically since 2000. The number of taxes was reduced from 54 to 15, "- said the deputy minister. … "We need to modernize the system of performance evaluation and incentive tax authorities", — he said.

20.03.2006 12:09

…"

 

And the third argument: "The government works for the benefit of raw oligarchs! Putin together with them! He gives them to rob us, and the common people do not get a penny from the super-profits! "

We read the same, then:

"…[29][30][31]. In 2006, Deputy Finance Minister Sergei Shatalov said that during the period of tax reform tax burden has decreased from 34-35% to 27.5%, as well as the redistribution of the tax burden in the oil sector[31]. Tax reform also contributed to the increase in tax collection[28][32][33][34] and stimulate economic growth[32][34][35][36][37].

… "

Affirm:

(Http://www.minfin.ru/ru/press/speech/index.php?pg4=36&id4=4229)

"…

"Russian oil companies are currently paying taxes in nominal terms by 9.5 times more than in 2001," — Sergey Shatalov

MOSCOW, March 20. / Itar-Tass /. — Russian oil companies currently pay taxes in nominal terms is almost 9.5 times more than in 2001, said today at the enlarged meeting of the Public Chamber of the Russian Federation on issues of competitiveness, economic development and entrepreneurship, Deputy Finance Minister Sergei Shatalov.

He noted that the tax reform in the country "in recent years has largely been completed." According to him, the tax system is fundamentally changed since 2000 Number of taxes, said S. Shatalov, down from 54 to 15. The tax burden has declined sharply by almost all types of businesses, said Deputy Finance Minister.

He said that the tax burden is redistributed in recent years in the direction of the oil sector is largely due to the fact that now "extremely favorable economic conditions and high oil prices." The role of these taxes, said S. Shatalov, significantly increased, which led to this growth. Also increased their share of total taxes paid to the budget of the Russian Federation.

Shatalov also said that the tax reform carried out in the Russian Federation, there is significant progress in terms of reducing the tax burden. According to the Ministry of Finance and independent experts, if we compare the tax burden under comparable conditions at the same price of oil, it is during this time decreased from 34-35 per cent to 27.5 per cent. This year, said S. Shatalov, this trend will continue.

20.03.2006 12:22

… "

So, who is there to serve the interests of oligarchs raw?

 There hamsters are many myths about them and I’ll probably still be going and just write. Of course, if modest attempts of my readers will be evaluated positively. In the meantime, I want to note the following. In our country, it’s not bad and not "all is lost" and not all of you know what all polymers, but all is not well. We have to work, to strive for the future, a better life. And each work in its place, each to be a true citizen of his country, its true patriot. And what is the true patriot? It is he who will not take bribes, who basically will not give them, is the one who will try to become a professional in the workplace in order to give their homeland all that he is capable of, is the one who will not pass his countryman in need of help (but just in the metro council to help), who having the power to make decisions, other things being equal, will take a decision in favor of the person, not in spite of it, as do officials and bureaucrats often. Here is a patriot. But there is a very important addition to this image. Patriot is also the one who is doing all of the above items will be sure and state to him with his hand will be just as patriotic. What do you want? Love — is a process of mutual, two-way, like when the two sides. And love for the motherland no exception to this definition is not.

 

Like this post? Please share to your friends: