Michael Delyagin: Ruling Gang Could Pay for Appointment of Deputies of "United Russia" with Deficiency of the Budget

Source: World of News

- The prime-minister Vladimir Putin supported idea of the Ministry of Finance about rapid reduction of budget deficiency next year from 3.7% to 1.5% and also proposed to continue reducing that indicator further. Vladimir Putin hopes that "positive macro economic dynamics will allow to correct these positions to the positive direction". If this dynamic is really positive?

- At the oil price exceeding more than on third the price put in the budget "dynamics" of the last is really "positive". Moreover: throughout this year the federal budget is surplus and it's simply not clear what decrease in deficiency official propagandists talk about.

Certainly, if before elections in the State Duma the state expenditure for payoff of voters and elite will be "out of the blue" increased by 700 billion roubles, deficiency can appear. But it will be not economic but political action - consequence of efforts of a ruling party to maintain next triumphal "victory" of "United Russia".

- Putin presented calculations on which oil cost grows. Under forecasts of the head of the government, "the Russian economy to the beginning of the next year will completely overcome consequences of crisis recession and will continue its growth forming steady incomes in the state treasury". Whether you agree with such forecast?

- World oil price will remain high till global speculative bubble will burst. Its puncture is inevitable but next year it can not occur - and then Putin's words will turn out to be true.

However, not accepted budget is already unrealistic - due to absolutely inadequate forecast on which it's based. For example, it is supposed that the mid-annual dollar exchange rate will make 27,9 roubles next year that is obviously excessive for domestic economy. After all it's not for nothing has already exceeded 29 roubles.

As to the crisis - industry as a whole has already exceeded pre-crisis level. After recession by 7,9% in 2009 economy grew by 4% last year and will approximately grow by 3,9% in current having lagged behind the level of 2008 by 0.5%, so purely statistically Putin is right.

It's different case that crisis consequences are not quantitative but qualitative: already for two years official clan of crows "steals as last day", ultrahigh prices for oil don't stimulate economic growth and besides are accompanied by falling of standard of living (for first 7 months - by 1%) and growth of a number of beggars (in I quarter - 2,3 million people).

Though, on the other hand, if life of 140 million "dear Russians" means anything to the ruling gang?

- Minister of Finance Alexey Kudrin declared reduction of the program of loans in 2011 for the sum of 300 billion rbl. He declared that we wouldn't need to come into the foreign market with loans. What do think, if we really are already capable to get along with own means and resources?

- More than 5.7 trillion rbl. in not used means lie in the federal budget down without movement - more than half of annual expenses, more than 40 thousand rbl. per each inhabitant of Russia including babies, illegal migrants, inhabitants of mental hospitals and Rublevsky federal district.

So yes, "we really are already capable to get along" without loans. The fact that these loans inside the country continue to be carried out at full speed - this year they have already exceeded trillion roubles - is alike crime. After all percent for them is being paid at our account.

- It's been decided to limit growth of tariffs rigidly. Tariffs for gas will be indexed by 15% and prices for electric power and heat will grow together with inflation. Terms of indexation of tariffs are deferred to the term of half a year - from January, 1st, 2012 to July, 1st, 2012. What's your opinion, if it will help the Russian economy? Whether it will constrain inflation? Whether it will constrain rise in prices? What else could be done but hasn't been? Why was it decided to allow tariffs to grow since July? Or the decision about tariffs - is simply pre-election step?

- It's, certainly, pre-election step which of course will constrain inflation. Basically it is possible that trading monopolists will try to take money away from people which they still have after increase of tariffs for housing and communal services but it is too dangerous to do before election - besides, by and large, becoming poor population has almost next to nothing.

So it is a right step. Though it doesn't change system based on arbitrariness of monopolies - from "Gazprom" to the company engaged ostensibly in competitive garbage removal - and consequently in 2013 we should wait for compensating "missed profit of investors", stronger than usually growth of tariffs.

Certainly, one understands that it won't end with payoff of voters by means of putting off of extortionate growth of tariffs and that the state will try to provide financial and economic transparency of natural and municipal monopolies. This measure can lead to sharp decrease in tariffs - consequently if it will be tried to carry out, I am afraid, it will not be ended up with seven bullets as with the mayor of Sergiev Posad.

- What's your generalized characteristic of the budget? What's its difference, what's the share of social expenses in it? Whether it takes into account essential needs of the population?

- Budget-2012 - is the budget of consecutive and conscious refusal of modernization, so, it's the budget of inertial sliding to system crisis.

Its main priority - providing of safety and law-enforcement activity, that is, roughly speaking, FSB and the Ministry of the Interior: expenses for these purposes will grow by 37.2% for year. Possibly, the number subjected to repression for different types of "extremism" - like the slogan "Down with Autocracy!" - will be increased consequently.

The second priority of the ruling gang - financial gamble, that is expenses for upkeep of absolutely excessive, as it has been shown above, state debt: they will grow more than by a quarter (25,1 %).

The third and the fourth priorities - defense and social policy: expenses for them will grow more than by one fifth, by 20,5% and 20,4% accordingly. Though there is nothing to cheer about here: dizzy growth of expenses for army is paradoxically combined with its "reform" more reminding liquidation, while social expenses mean basically  plugging up of holes in Pension Fund made by extraordinary high social payments and absence of due control over it.

On the other hand, expenses for education will grow only by 1.4%, that is in real expression it will be reduced. Expenses for economy - notorious "modernization" - will be reduced by 3.9%, for culture - by 7.6%, for housing and communal services - almost in 2,5 times.

Dynamics of expenses shows real priorities of the ruling gang: power structures and financial gamble. I am not sure that they really have any relation to the real needs of Russia.

Send by mail

Print