8 September theme of the raising in Russia, the retirement age was made in new, not yet heard the variations. Director of the consolidated Department of macroeconomic forecasting of Ministry of economic development Kirill Tremasov, according to the Rambler News Service, said that this increase is dictated by now the most important motivation — it is able to increase economic growth.
After their older office counterparts Ulyukaev and Siluanov, who are the most ardent and impatient advocates of this measure (as, in fact, a liberal opponent of the government, ex-Finance Minister Kudrin), g-n Tremasov reinforced his statement popular argument. Its essence is that at the present time there is a reduction, as he put it, “labor 200-300 thousand people a year”, because for development it is necessary to reduce “labor shortage”.
Here the main tool is raising the retirement age — said Mr. Tremasov.
Tool found, convinced the representative of the Ministry of economic development, can not seriously, seriously raise the potential growth of the Russian economy from the current 1.5 — 2 to 4 percent. The official noted that such calculations are based no less… on a sustainable long-term dynamics.
Intramural and extramural debate in the higher echelons of power and among the well-known experts in terms of access Russians to retire for the past 2 years periodically fades, then erupts again with renewed vigor.
Find the initiative is a grain of truth in the form of a fiscal effect, tried in the interview to “Novye Izvestiya” Deputy Director of the Institute of world economy and international relations, doctor of economic Sciences, Professor Evgeny Gontmakher:
— If to speak in the short term, the fiscal benefits possible. Recently the Finance Ministry has proposed from 1 January 2016 to raise the retirement age by a year. That is, those who had to retire in 2016 — a 60-year-old man and 55-year-old women on a holiday went, would be retired in 2017. And from this decision the fiscal effect still would be hundreds of thousands of people did not come to the Pension Fund, which was the pension they assign and start paying. But if we consider the issue from the point of view of long-term effects, let’s say I’m retiring, not 60, and 63. For three years I still working, I pay pension contributions, and when I’m 63, obligations of the state in front of me more than if I retired at age 60.
The financial and economic block of Cabinet of Ministers support the transition to the new system. Polewnik of the Russian President for economy Andrey Belousov on 26 may this year in an interview with TASS said that “raising the retirement age is not inevitable; the alternative is the growth of payments to the Pension Fund from employers and the public”.
— When I listen to arguments about raising the retirement age, always ask the question: what will you do with these people? How do they live it? asked Mr. Belousov.
On 28 July the head of audit chamber Tatyana Golikova in an interview with Rambler News Serviceвыступила parsing arguments “for” and “against”, making myself focus on the fact that the entire pension reform would be the right thing to carry out, based on not so much because of fiscal priorities, how much of a special scientific research.
— For a long time it is time to carry out these studies, and these events should not economists, financiers, and physicians, gerontologists, statisticians, experts in the field of occupational medicine, said Ms. Golikova.
Much more abruptly spoke 17 August Authorized under the Russian President for human entrepreneurs Boris Titov. As reported by Finmarket, he did not see any financial benefits which supposedly will get the state from novation, but guaranteed, according to Titov, the new problems of social properties, and in a country rife.
Alexei Kudrin proposes to determine the age of retirement, almost equal to the average life expectancy among men. That would be the only country when you come to retire and immediately to the cemetery, — said Titov.
…However, advocating raising the retirement threshold is not tired to push on public opinion. This is done, of course, with the sole purpose to convince him that “the increase in the working age of Russians”, on the wording of the Finance Ministry, there is no alternative, and that is quite objective and logical process, is comparable to how to solve this issue in Western countries. While favoring the later period of retirement in their silent arguments about the fundamentally different level of medicine and the average wage in those European countries where governments have decided to take this step.
On the sidelines of the June 2016 International economic forum (SPIEF), where (typically for this kind of events) was the soloist Siluanov, Kudrin and Ulyukayev, the subject is again tested many times. The confusion in the concept of the proposed changes affects not the best way for themselves, those for whom, in fact, and prepared in the foreseeable future, a gift from the government. Some ideologues of the pension reform offered a “gradual” transition to retirement with 63 years, others 65. But the striking unanimity “of the podnimateli” retirement age is that none of them intends to leave Russian women with a pension at 55 years old, is still as valid today. So the future of their young grandchildren, grandparents will most likely see much less than today.
— This is nonsense that we heard from the official Ministry of economic development; representatives of the financial-economic bloc in the government on the subject endlessly repeat like parrots, repeating is actually what is irrelevant, ” says the Deputy of the state Duma, doctor of economic Sciences Oksana Dmitrieva.
— Economic growth requires something quite different: lower taxes, to provide legal and physical persons to affordable credit, encourage investment, and not to forget about indexation of wages and pensions to support and develop thus the solvent consumer demand.
“SP”: But, by the logic of the head of the Department of economic Affairs, all these steps would not prevent another measure, very popular today in the government. She, by the way, in November last year, Minister of healthcare Veronika Skvortsova even called “useful” help “in General, for men and for women” “longer be in service”.
— Yes, but only in the statement Tremasova something I have not heard a about loans, nothing about taxes. In General, the concept of “retirement age” and “GDP” is, as they say, “never”. There is no causal relationship. If the problem is to consider the subject, in a crisis it would be better to think not about how to raise the retirement age, but rather how to ensure an early retirement. The crisis leads to decline in production, which, in turn, reduces jobs, so an anti-crisis measure, which arises, directly opposite to that proposed on August 8, the Ministry of economic development.
— This statement many will probably perceive as perfect nonsense on the background of the passing of the election campaign, when the authorities it would be easier once again to get sharp corners, but apparently the economy are so unimportant that officials from the Ministry of economic development has nothing more to offer, ” says Director of the Institute of strategic analysis FBK, doctor of economic Sciences Igor Nikolaev.
— There is a background: the Board and Ministry’s experts are constantly asked in the Kremlin, where many times the projected economic growth? In other words, the speaker and his colleagues constantly report that we passed the next the “bottom” of the crisis, then another, etc.; and the promised result is not visible. Then float measures such as “to Raise the retirement age, why, and GDP will also rise.” In this regard, several questions arise. First, we see backward, absolutely extensive approach to increase the gross domestic product.
Surprisingly, in the twenty-first century power in Russia speaks not about increasing productivity, not on new technologies to facilitate labor, and that in fact “you, Russians, we are forced to work more,” you stupid raising the retirement age. And I don’t know if the speaker of the initiative, Mr. Tremasov that the vast majority of Russian citizens who have reached retirement age, this pension does not come out. They continue to work because it is very small, as low General standard of living. And here comes the next question the official account of what was going to increase GDP, if the pensioners are working — as long as they lack this power?
