Indeed whether the Belarusian economic policy delineated turn towards liberalization? What background, borders and threats of this change? Which social groups interested in maintaining and changing the old policy?
Drakakhrust: "Signals that the Belarusian economic policy changes occur, began to arrive from the middle of last year: quite remember privatization" Velcom "and velyazavodu, constantly going debate on the privatization of several other companies, including the so to say" generic silver " .
Today sensation was the abolition of the "golden share", one of the major obstacles to foreign investment. On this week Alexander Lukashenko met twice with the delegations of British businessmen and politicians, promising the most favorable conditions for overseas, namely, the British investment.
There are facts, there are words — is there a trend? Can you say that mades significant steps towards liberalization of the state economy, and more directly, the liberalization of foreign capital criterion? In 2001, before and after the presidential elections was also said much about liberalization. Elections were held, the words vanished into thin air and all remains as before. "
Rakov: "I just wanted to remember the 2001 — 2002 years, and the words that seemed then. Compared with meanwhile at the moment a lot of really really made and declared to do even more. Can obviously argue that not much or many, but I believe it is — start a trend.
How long this trend will act as we go too far in this liberalization — there may be different views. But the question of whether there is a trend change, I say — yes, there is. "
Drakakhrust: "What are the motives of this shift in economic policies Increased prices for Russian energoelementy certainly was a test for the Belarusian economy, but if you look at the macro-economic characteristics, the situation does not look tragic: not very highest inflation, GDP grows, won the first two months of the year increased by almost 10%. So why change a policy that, as seems to give effect, gives the fruit?
Thus, liberal economists have long offered to change it, but over the years in response to sound, that Belarus invented miraculous economic model that thrives without all the privatization, liberalization and other foreign "abomination." And then it turns out that it’s not disgusting, and almost the only means of salvation. And what did happen, from what saved? Economics as flourished and flourishes, which then skaromitstsa these liberalization-privatization? "
Rakov: "In fact, I believe that there is valid set of reasons. And changes occur at different levels. Privatization" Beltransgaz "- a forced move, I would not count against the manifestations of liberalization. Same velyazavodu privatization was very exciting because factory is located in the center of Minsk with a pretty huge piece of land. And vkladyvatelnom agreement can be written that we continue there is something to get up, and some shops put out of production and there engage in the construction of commercial real estate.
In my opinion, some changes vkladyvatelnogo legislation related to the fact that the Belarusian capital he wants to meet somewhere. It’s no secret that a significant portion of foreign direct investment — is also its Belarusian funds that time were bred in Cyprus or Swiss offshore. It’s time to invest in their country. It was not so hard to do, but needed something easier.
On the other hand, really need a flow of currency, because some transactions will bolshennymi sales from a purely fiscal goals, because the country needs money.
As for business, it hard to distinguish any one cause. But nuts twisted so that everyone started to complain. At the same time complained not only private entrepreneurs, many of these criteria relate to and municipal companies. And they are concerned by the regulation of prices, to them as well, though not as often, come check penalties. And the number of these complaints at some point had to grow in quality.
In my opinion, there is an important role was played by the National Bank. We were so low credit ratings that at some point people in the government began to read: "Well, where are we? According to the rating of the Global Bank, we — 178 place at the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development we are worse than Uzbekistan. Well all- the same is it? Let’s change something. "
There was a range of different reasons and the players: the National Bank, the government, business associations, the council on foreign investment, international financial organizations — each made their own contribution. Here it gradually and start falling apart. It further also go slowly, do not think that tomorrow we prachnemsya with 2 taxes and without price regulation. Such drastic reforms occur when the country is really bad. In the case of Georgia for the year occurred katigorichnye configuration because adkatvatstsa was already nowhere. In our case, we can only read about the evolutionary, incremental configuration. "
Drakakhrust: "There is the usual notion that at least some increase in economic freedom leads to higher welfare. Liberty, including financial, better freedom. Belarusian economy is obviously not enough freedom. According to the Global Bank, shred personal sector in the development of Poland’s GDP, Ukraine , Lithuania, Russia — more than 70%, in Belarus — only a quarter. But there is also the experience of Gorbachev’s perestroika, when close to Russian state economies have allowed cooperatives, removed the barrier between the Exchange and "nalichkoj." In the end, new forms of economic circumstances become not strengthen Russian economy and its destruction.
In today’s Belarusian economy — excellent or bad, all somehow fit together. Enter into it some elements of economic freedom, the entire structure will not fall, it became clear that all need to change? "
Rakov: "Kind of you are right. We live in modern Belarus, we have what we have. But at least some such country like ours — it means a non-free, non-free, economically and politically — there are two options. Such a system is inefficient, with that over time, this inefficiency is incremented and at some point need to make a decision. And there are only two: either to tighten the screws, and we move in the direction of Cuba or North Korea, or we unscrew them. Both options are bad.
I can only rejoice that we have decided to unscrew the nut. I do not exclude that there affects the experience of the Russian Federation and Ukraine, it does not provide the ability to tighten the screws, there is a market, and we need to keep the interaction with them. Zakruchvavanne nuts at some point lead to dissatisfaction. And it will have to fight with him ways rigid military dictatorship.
Behold the power that companies now can not withstand such amount of employed people need to lay off. What is needed to do? Many obviously leave, but not all, and what to do with them? Please — a decree of unprecedented benefits for small businesses in small towns.
Obviously, there is horror, and because no one makes any sudden movements towards liberalization. Their no need, because the system is still stable, something she gets up, taxes are paid, every once acclimated. But of course, that in the long run in this system there are limits survivability. And the more this will be enforced liberalization even
more so, as you rightly saw changes will be different. "
Drakakhrust: "To my untrained eye, the Russian debate about the advantages and shortcomings of different types of economic policy lacks soil group, if you like — class interests. Necessary to do wrong, as well, and will be better — they say economists. And who better? Everyone better? peasants or better or work better, or better bureaucracy, either by economists better? Either one is better and worse than others? What vested interests are behind one or another candidate of economic policy?
Obviously, in a country with an authoritarian form of government, these interests can not be seen, it seems, the latest manifestation of their exact protests began small businessmen. But look how these different economic policy options, including brand new segodnyaschy liberalization policies on the basis of belief specifically vested interests? "
Rakov, "Well, there are many who profitably. Decision caused by a variety of reasons, and interest groups that stand behind them, too different. Clear that the nomenclature itself will not forget. In today’s Belarus, unfortunately, we can only read about the nomenklatura privatization .
Any privatization of what is better than none, although it is clear that it will be transparent and we will choose the deal: one sold, he resold to someone else. We will see more than one fascinating deal. Power their interests will not forget.
On the other hand, there are certain interests or those of other officials. National Bank sees the danger — a negative trade balance, which is necessary to make up for something. He has a clean Prof. enthusiasm to ensure a flow of capital into the country.
At the level of companies and government awareness comes the most terrible that can be with Belarus — I call it "maldavizatsyyay." When people just leave. Leave as the youngest, most educated. Already at this point sound complaints — no teachers, no doctors, no builders. 5 more years of such policy, and will remain there some elderly people, everything will be expensive, and we will live on those payments that went to Moscow and from there helps parents.
Our situation allows read that many will benefit from liberalization. While I realize that no matter what cause liberalization bundle become richer, and the poorer. "
Tags: investment, privatization, liberalization