home Economy Books History of the world economy - Polyak GB

History of the world economy - Polyak GB

35.2.Reforms in Russia and the transition to a market economy

After the collapse of the USSR in Russia, the stage of radical reforms begins. The newly formed Russian government formed these reforms based on monetarism and the so-called "shock therapy". This was reflected in the accelerated privatization of state property, in the refusal of state regulation of prices and the exchange rate of the ruble, the planned management of the economy and the planned distribution of production of enterprises, budget subsidies to the sectors of the national economy and population, the administrative binding of the producer of the product to the consumer,

The liberalization of prices, which began in January 1992, led to their uncontrollable growth. Already in 1992, the price index grew 26 times, or 31% per month, in 1993 - 9.4 times, or 10% per month, in 1995 - 2.3 times, or 7.3% . At the same time, the rise in prices led to a sharp drop in the purchasing demand of the population. The combination of price increases with the opening of borders, the importation of food and consumer goods from abroad contributed to the saturation of the consumer market, the withdrawal of money from the population and stabilization of the consumer market. However, the low competitiveness of domestic products has become one of the main reasons for the reduction in sales, and therefore the production of Russian enterprises. Already in 1992, industrial production fell by 18%, GDP fell by 19%, and in 1993, GDP declined by 12%, and industrial production - by 16%.

In 1993-1994, privatization of state property was accelerated. According to the plan of the reformers, privatization should improve the efficiency of enterprises, eliminate their subsidies, reduce budget expenditures for these purposes, create a market economy, compete with producers of products and services, form a middle class in society as a social support of the new system.

To carry out privatization, a scheme was developed and approved, according to which the state ownership in the production sphere was corporatized, share packages divided between labor collectives and the state. In order to support privatization, the directors of enterprises allowed them to get a 5% stake. All residents of the country were issued one voucher per person. The cost of one voucher was one hundred and a quarter million of the value of all state property of the Russian Federation. Owners of vouchers could either invest them in the form of their shares in enterprises, specially created funds or sell them.

However, initially this scheme of privatization of state property introduced inequality into society. The advantage was given to members of labor collectives of the enterprises of the production sphere who received shares in privatized enterprises. Employees of the non-production sphere, institutions that are on the budget, received virtually nothing, since the vouchers that they sent mainly to investment funds later disappeared together with the collapsed funds. Injustice in relation to these sections of the population was also in the fact that enterprises of the sphere of material production were created and at the expense of funds that teachers, doctors, scientists, military and other employees of budgetary institutions had not received for decades in the form of their low wages. By these actions in society, the ground for disagreement was created.

Another negative side was the desire of the reformers to artificially force the creation of the middle class in Russia. To this end, the enterprises of trade, public catering, and consumer services have almost completely turned into private property. In addition, industrial enterprises also largely fell into the hands of the leaders of these enterprises, who concentrated large blocks of shares in their hands.

In order to accelerate the creation of initial capital for entrepreneurs, the reformers went to abolish the state monopoly on the production and sale of alcoholic beverages, because it is easier and faster to create capital by selling vodka. At the same time, the budgetary system did not receive about a quarter of budget revenues. This led to a rapid property stratification of society. The difference in the levels of per capita income among the provided layers of the population, whose share did not exceed 10% of the total population of the country, and the rest of the population exceeded 20 times. For comparison: in industrially developed countries this difference does not exceed five to eight times. Naturally, this also had a negative impact on the moral and political climate in the country.

By the beginning of 1993 almost all enterprises of trade, public catering, consumer services, and a third of industrial enterprises had been privatized. In the non-state sector, about half of those employed in the national economy worked. Privatized enterprises produced about 40% of industrial output. The infrastructure of the market developed rapidly. Commodity exchanges, the stock market, financial funds and companies were created.

Simultaneously with these processes, political instability was observed in the country. In political and economic circles there was no unified position. On the one hand, supporters of radical reforms were striving to tighten financial and credit policy, accelerated privatization. Other opinions were representatives of the military-industrial and agro-industrial complexes, who defended the position of strengthening state regulation of the economy, and continued budget subsidies to enterprises.

1994-1996 The government failed to overcome the inertia of the recession in the country's economy. A growing number of enterprises stopped producing products and services. Despite the fact that the Bankruptcy Law was issued, enterprises that did not meet their obligations were not declared bankrupt, their employees did not quit, but they did not receive salaries either.

The budget was deprived of income in the form of income tax, VAT, personal income tax. The budget deficit increased. If at the first stages of the reforms only the federal budget was scarce, then later regional and local budgets became also scarce. Permanent non-payment of salaries in budgetary sectors and pensions for pensioners began.

Reforms were also carried out in the agrarian sector of the economy. They began with the reorganization of collective and state farms. Labor collectives received joint ownership of land and fixed assets, which were divided between workers and pensioners into units. At the same time, the land was divided equally, and the property - at a cost and in accordance with the work experience of workers. The workers were given the opportunity to use three variants of the reorganization of collective and state farms: the organization of farms and agricultural cooperatives, the preservation of the collective farm, the state farm, and the organization of a joint-stock company. In the main, the collective and state farms were transformed into joint-stock companies and production cooperatives.

However, reforms in agriculture were proceeding at a slow pace. The situation in this industry has sharply deteriorated. The reason was a general deterioration in the economic situation in the country, a sharp reduction in state subsidies to agricultural enterprises, a significant amount of food imports, a decrease in the effective demand of the population.

The creation of farms was hampered by the lack of the necessary material and technical base of farmers, difficulties in obtaining a bank loan because of the practical lack of collateral value from farmers, since they had no right to sell land and mortgage in banks.

All this led to the fact that the level of agricultural production in the country began to decline annually.

The implementation of reforms in the economy contributed to the country's transition to the capitalist path of development. Serious obstacles to such a transition was not. Usually, as evidenced by the experience of world history, resistance to the transition to a new socio-economic system was provided by classes and social strata of the population, who lose their property and power. In Russia by this time a classless society was created. Almost no difference existed between the class of workers and the class of peasants. There was also no ruling class - the owner of the means of production losing power, and the ruling party-bureaucratic elite did not doubt that it would remain in power and did not oppose changes.

As for ownership of the means of production, no one lost it, since it was state property. On the contrary, as a result of the changes, representatives of the party bureaucratic elite, business leaders, representatives of the shadow economy and the criminal world, who have the power and money, easily took over it. The population was inspired with the idea that under the conditions of socialism and state ownership it is impossible to organize production effectively and to provide an acceptable standard of living for people. In the conditions of long-standing constant commodity and food deficit, low wages, the population was psychologically prepared for the situation that K. Marx characterized: "It's better to have a terrible end than horror without end" *. All these circumstances contributed to the country's transition to capitalism, a transition without resistance, a bloodless, but not painless for the economy and the population.

* Marx. K. Engels. F. Soch. T. 8.-P.115.

Thus, the militarization of the economy, the excessive arms race, the conduct of military operations in other countries, the provision of military and economic assistance to states marching in the forefront of the ideological and foreign policy of the USSR, inefficient economic management and mismanagement led to the depletion of the state and the economic, And the political crisis, and, finally, the collapse of the USSR.

The consequence of this was the destruction of the common economic space and economic ties, the loss of economic advantages from interregional integration, the decline of the economy, a decline in the standard of living of the population, ideological confusion, an unstable domestic political situation, and psychological discomfort in society. From the geopolitical standpoint, the disintegration of the USSR led to the elimination of the balance of the two superpowers in the world and the hegemony of the United States.