Years after writing about this and as about a wall peas. It is not the brain, and the hump can understand it. Or we have a population deprived of even the ability to develop conditioned reflexes (i.e. the degree of biological organization descended lower than animals???). Because the animal received an electric shock and a lump of sugar goes to the sugar, not the current. And our people having lost everything in the 90s (and having much of the Soviet Union), nonetheless it hopes to market (especially on the invisible hand), the mythical foreign investment (which in the industrial production in principle MAY NOT). So this will be the theme of the next poll AK
The people have spoken in the sense that instead of the right hand at the monument “the invisible hand of the market” (and there is a strong suspicion that she emptied all of our pockets)
Indeed the population of the Russian Federation lost the ability to develop conditioned reflexes?
Indeed the population of the Russian Federation lost the ability to develop conditioned reflexes?
1 Yes, indeed lost the ability to develop conditioned reflexes
14(60.9%)
2 No, not lost
6(26.1%)
3 More in the comments
3(13.0%)
Attempt to build in Russia a market economy on the Western model, by and large, failed. And to understand why it happened, I propose to compare the conditions in which this economic model exists in Europe and in Russia.
From this comparison it will become clear whether it is feasible in Russia build a market economy on the Western model, at least in the long run, or it’s just impossible.
So, what are the differences between Europe and Russia:
1. Population (in Europe 5 times more).
2. Area of the territory (Russia has 1.7 times more).
3. Population density (in Europe at 8.5 times more).
4. Natural resources (Russia has many times more).
5. The amount of natural resources per capita (in Russia much more).
6. The climate (in Russia on average less than favorable).
7. External conditions (geo-Economics and geopolitics unfavorable for Russia).
8. The completion period of the market (in Europe more than 100 years in Russia, 25-30).
Surely someone will say that I forgot about the cultural differences and mentality. No, I’m talking about is not forgotten. Just the mentality and culture values are not countable, therefore, the stringency of comparison will first deal with the accounts values, and then return to the question of cultural identity and mentality.
For a moment assume that cultural differences between Russia and Europe, there is and evaluate whether or not to operate successfully in Russia the market economy of the Western model. If you want to – imagine all the people held a session mentolovye and became exactly the same as in Europe.
Presented? Then let us begin.
The market economy assumes free competition and liberal economic model requires minimal government intervention in business. It is true in Europe and the United States economy has moved away from the liberal model of state regulation and there is even there, but we will not delve into this topic.
In addition to free competition and laissez-faire business, there are rules of the WTO and a set of rules called the Washington consensus, involves both open markets and low protective duties.
What does it mean?
This means that for the successful functioning of a liberal market economy in Russia, it needs to produce goods and services that are comparable in terms of price/quality European. And in fact even superior. Otherwise, in the absence of protective duties open economy, the losing of imported goods in terms of price/quality will continue to decline.
How to get the best rate price/quality?
The cost is known to be very dependent on the volume of output. As a rule, the larger the production volume the lower the unit cost. There are exceptions, but rarely.
Thus, to achieve a lower cost per unit of output, it is necessary to release more than releasing a competitor (with comparable technology, cost of raw materials and other costs).
But the above shows that the population in Russia is less than in Europe, therefore the domestic market less. Therefore, in order to achieve the best balance quality/price, you need to take part of the European market or much to save on raw materials, fuel, materials and labor.
But liberal Economics, the Washington consensus and WTO rules lead to the fact that the cost of materials, raw materials and fuel lines, because grants, subsidies and export restrictions on raw materials are not welcome.
And commodity corporations too unprofitable to sell on the domestic market of raw materials and fuel are much cheaper world prices. If the domestic prices of a particular type of raw materials are much lower than the world, then there is either the flow of contraband, masked corrupt officials or mining corporations lobby for their interests and take out most of the raw material, resulting in the domestic market, a shortage occurs and prices are aligned. Or both carried out in parallel.
In short, no significant difference between domestic and world prices for raw materials in the liberal market model can not be. The difference can be 10-20% or a little more, but not 2-3 times.
However, the difference of the order of 10-20% in raw material prices is insufficient to create a competitive production, with a 5 times smaller domestic market.
And then you need to take into account that the European market was formed much earlier than the 91-th year, when Russia began to implement liberal economy. And in that moment, when the Russian manufacturers only has established a new market economy after the dissolution of the Soviet planning system, European manufacturers have long worked and they have all been established.
This means that while the Russian manufacturer is to produce and to market, this market is filled with imported goods, then the task is dramatically complicated and the ratio of the volume of production of European manufacturers is not even 1:5, as the size of the domestic market of Russia, Europe, and 1:20 or 1:100.
Let me remind you that protective tariffs and subsidies, the liberal model is not welcome, and without them even the Russian market, which is 5 times less than the European, the Russian manufacturer to take is not possible.
Now note the area and population density. Large area and low density means higher transport costs.
Additional transportation costs are incurred for all products distributed in Russia, including imported ones. But the European manufacturers in the European market, there are low transport costs, and on the Russian market sends the results of its overproduction, so to speak. The Russian producers from the beginning to work with higher transport costs.
Add to this a harsh climate, which also increases the costs of storage and transportation of many goods in the winter, the heating costs of production and storage facilities, offices, as well as short season when it is possible to perform construction works, equipment installation and so on.
What we get in the end?
In the end, get what the Russian manufacturer is in much more difficult conditions than the European, especially if he has long been present on the market.
And even if there is some new production, which opens in Russia and Europe at the same time, the European manufacturer still has the advantage due to the fact that he within a radius of thousands of kilometers away from the plant much more consumers less transportation costs to capture domestic market, less climatic difficulties.
The advantage of the order of 10-20% in the price of fuel and raw materials, which may have a Russian manufacturer, is not sufficient to compensate for the fivefold difference in size of the market, twice the difference in the distances, and even the difference in climatic conditions.
And more cheap labor does not help, because at the present level of automation, the share of wages in product cost is not too high. In addition, the difference in pay at the liberal economic model is also constantly decreasing, because qualified staff is committed to where they pay more, that is in Europe.
Also we should not forget about the geopolitics and geo-Economics. European producers will always have an extra advantage at the expense of political support and excellent service standard close ties with the US. And due to the fact that in addition to the European market, they take part American and part middle Eastern.
If you add up all these factors, it is easy to understand that after the 91st of the year in Russia the chances of had only the production, which at the time of the dissolution of the Soviet Union was superior to European competitors on product quality.
These industries include the helicopter industry, nuclear power, aerospace, weapons production, and perhaps all.
The rest of the industry that has not had a significant advantage and a safety margin, were in a dire situation and many are already bent.
Moreover, the new production will also be in an unfavorable situation compared to European competitors – existing and new.
That is why Russia is not restored to production. The liberal economic model, it will not recover ever. On the contrary, will be permanently reduced.
Once in Europe, learn how to make helicopter, comparable in performance with the Mi – will be covered with the Russian helicopter industry. Once in Europe learn how to build a nuclear power plant better than the Russian or will achieve success in nuclear fusion – will be covered with Rosatom. Of course, if Russia to refuse from the liberal economic model.
Everything depends on liberal economic model, which gives European manufacturers a lot of advantages due to the fact that they have a 5 times greater the domestic market, less distance, higher population density, better climate, and favorable geopolitics and geo-Economics.
In a market economy, Russia would be able to support their producers of cheaper raw materials and fuel, which should be 10-20% cheaper, than in Europe, and in 2-3 times, better 5 times. But you need to abandon the liberal model and to impose severe restrictions on the export of raw materials up to the state monopoly.
Russia can support their producers with subsidies, subsidies and protective duties, but it is also necessary to abandon the liberal economic model and decisively to withdraw from the WTO. And to take action to avoid going back.
In fact, this is not enough.
The capitalist model dictates the principle of maximum profit, the principle is flawed, because the modern economy should not be capital growth, employment, technological development, increase of standard of living.
While in Russia in the forefront is capital growth, the economy will remain raw because they are the only reserves of natural resources our country has an advantage over Europe, in all other respects – climate, distance, population density – we are falling behind.
Specifically I will explain about population density – high population density in the modern economy is an advantage. That is why the greatest development reach cities and countries such as Japan and Singapore. High population density enables faster communication, more dynamic labour market, greater efficiency in the service sector.
The liberal economic model, the services sector in Russia, too, will give European. Services are less quality and more expensive (in terms of salary).
To achieve comparable with the European quality of goods and services, production development and increase of living level, it is necessary to compensate for unfavorable climate, large distances and low population density more affordable (cheaper) energy, fuel and raw materials. As well as introduce subsidies, protective tariffs and… to develop science and education to defeat not only the low cost of raw materials, but also high qualification of the specialists.
And all this rests on the economic model and policy of the state.
In liberal market capitalist model dictates the pursuit of profit, open markets and free competition, in which Russian manufacturers will inevitably be in a worse position than the European, no prospects for development in Russia and never will be.
And refer to cultural characteristics and mentality just does not make sense. Even if the entire nation somehow replaced by Germans, French and Japanese, it will not change any territorial or climatic factor. And population density in the 1:1 replacement will not change.
Moreover, the mentality is derived from the living conditions of the people, from the climatic, territorial and vneshnepoliticheskikh factors. So if somehow Russians and Germans are interchanged, then in a hundred years who had come to Germany Russian will be the Germans, who arrived in Russia the Germans become Russian. Actually it is proven. The Germans, French and other Spaniards who went to Russia a hundred or more years ago, it became indistinguishable from the Russian. And not because of intermarriage, but because being determines consciousness, and nothing to do.
The conclusion from all this is:
Liberal market economy in Russia failed not because the user is incompetent or the people are so worthless. Liberal market economy in Russia with its territory, population density and climate in principle, can not be successful. But the mentality is derived from the same territory, climate, population density and external factors, which simply increases the discrepancy between the liberal market model with Russian realities.
And the leadership we have in the last 30 years was not incompetent, and criminal. Because they could not fail to understand, how it ends. I do not believe that Gaidar and Chubais did not know how to read and didn’t understand the above. They just would don’t care about Russia and its future, they have achieved their goals and successfully resolved them.
And Putin and Medvedev to solve their problem and also quite successful. They are engaged in the implementation of the project under the code name of greater Europe, in which Russia will be nothing more than a raw materials appendage, because in a liberal market is nothing but supply of raw materials from Russia is profitable, and therefore suitable in accordance with the cap model – will not.
