Military Review

How the Soviet ruble was killed 60 years ago. The beginning of the end of "underdeveloped" socialism

203
How the Soviet ruble was killed 60 years ago. The beginning of the end of "underdeveloped" socialism

Exchange or deception



At the XXII Congress of the CPSU, Khrushchev promised the citizens of the USSR that in 20 years they would live under communism. However, it did not even occur to him to announce the construction of such a surrogate in the country as "developed socialism", which was later done by his unlucky successors.

But Khrushchev's "Thaw" is customary to praise, despite the fact that in time it coincided with such acts of Nikita Sergeevich, which almost brought the USSR to the brink of disaster. And long before 1991.

There was a virgin land plowed up (almost to death) and there were economic councils, a corn epic and reprisals against personal subsidiary plots. And there was also an unprecedented reduction in the armed forces, above all - of qualified officers in a strange combination with direct participation in the arms race.

Against the background of the festival of young people and students, space flights, almost continuous atomic tests and outright political adventures, many people might have seemed not so important. If it didn’t affect the well-being of the absolute majority of the population.


After all, it didn’t just come to shortages of food, right down to bread - the threat of mass starvation became absolutely real. It was decided to start dealing with the accumulated economic problems with finances, although they just differed simply by enviable stability.

Moreover, the Soviet people unexpectedly calmly postponed the decision to freeze "Stalin's" bonds. According to them, the authorities owed the citizens of the USSR 260 billion rubles, that is, at the exchange rate of that time, more than $ 60 billion. Dollars, by the way, have not yet gone through the shocks of the late XX and early XXI centuries.


By the time these bonds began to be paid off little by little, and the first steps towards this were taken back in 1974, many had lost them or simply thrown into the trash. And the Soviet leaders, after the successes in economic recovery, clearly set themselves too much.

At the same time tightening the screws, obviously out of fear that following economic freedom, people may swagger at political freedom. By the way, the notorious "Thaw" in the Soviet elite, not without reason, was considered as something like an "outlet" for especially dissatisfied.

Stalin's footcloths and Khrushchev's candy wrappers


In the late 50s, the extremely regulated economy began to slip. The Khrushchev Central Committee considered that it was possible to compensate for the failures at the expense of a camouflaged increase in prices. It was decided to carry out this through such a reform, in which prices after the denomination of the ruble will not rise "directly", but due to the corresponding proportions of their recalculation.

That is, when the price tags change not in the ratio of 10 to one prescribed by the reform, but so that they themselves are increased. And in January 1961, the banknotes of the 1947 model in circulation were promptly exchanged for money of the 1961 model at the same ratio of 10: 1.

The banknotes, called "footcloths", which fit in the wallets only when folded, were replaced by small and convenient, but quickly out of order "candy wrappers". However, citizens soon got used to these "hazel grouses", three rubles and fives, and dozens and larger bills were more impressive. And they did not turn at all so quickly.

Obviously, prices and tariffs for all goods and services, tariff rates, salaries, pensions, scholarships, benefits, payment obligations, etc. should have changed in the same ratio of 10 to one. This was done supposedly

"In order to facilitate monetary circulation and make Soviet money more valuable."

It seemed that the goal of raising prices and tariffs had been achieved, with a simultaneous strengthening of the ruble's peg to the US dollar and a decrease in the gold content of the ruble. More precisely, if before the reform the US dollar really cost about 4 rubles, then during its implementation the rate was set ... at 90 kopecks.

But, if you change money 10 to one, the dollar should have cost not 90, but only 40 kopecks. The same thing (that is, a markdown) happened with the gold content of the ruble. Instead of receiving a gold content equal to 2,22168 grams (if in a ratio of 10 to one), only 0,987412 grams of gold was “prescribed” for the ruble directly from the Kremlin.


The gold backing of the ruble, in contrast to the dollar rate, was at least calculated based on the amount in circulation and the size of the gold reserve. But the ruble was ultimately underestimated by 2,25 times, although few ordinary citizens generally paid attention to this.

On the other hand, the citizens felt the falling purchasing power of the new ruble literally on themselves. And, of course, not only and not so much in relation to imported goods. Imports then were mainly Chinese or from the countries of people's democracy - that is, Eastern Europe.

About prices as if they were dead - nothing or just good


At the same time, many did not hesitate to immediately cash in on the reform. And the point is not at all that the value of copper coins has not changed de facto (that is, it immediately increased tenfold) - right up to a penny.

This is a trifle, only crazy people could save a lot of it. Much more important was the fact that prices and tariffs for goods and services, including those on collective farm markets, had actually decreased not by 10, but by no more than 5-6 times.

But the "Jesuit" rise in prices did not seem enough to the organizers of the reform, therefore they decided directly to increase them, moreover, very significant. That is, after the reform, in 1962, it was decided to increase retail prices in the state trade. And of course

"At the numerous requests of workers."

With this “justification”, the decision to raise prices for meat and dairy and some other products (by at least a quarter) was formalized by a simple decree of the Central Committee of the CPSU and the USSR Council of Ministers of May 31, 1962.

As a result, the new price tags for "massive" salaries were simply prohibitive. And all decent and inexpensive goods, both food and industrial, began to flow away from store shelves to markets or to speculators in various ways on a massive scale.

Pre-reform abundance became a pipe dream for many years

This is what, as is known, caused popular unrest in more than 14 cities of the USSR (1962–1964). In Novocherkassk, everything turned into a large-scale uprising, during the suppression of which 24 people were killed. According to Zaven Mosesov (1911-1987), the former head of the control and auditing department, then the personnel department of the Soviet Ministry of Finance of the USSR:

“The well-known consequences of socio-economic“ experiments ”of the mid-50s - early 60s: virgin and corn campaigns, the sale of agricultural machinery to collective farms, etc. combined with a sharp deterioration in the international situation (a new stage in the nuclear, space and other arms race, the development of confrontation with China, aggravation of relations with the United States) - forced the then leadership of the country to urgently seek financial resources. For patching already permanent money "holes".

Such holes, as Z. Mosesov noted,

"It grew more and more in connection with an ambitious space exploration program and with the provision of increasingly wasteful aid to regimes friendly to Moscow."

The latter, the old financier recalled, was also too frankly done to "distance" those countries from Moscow's rivals - from Stalinist-Maoist China and Tito's Yugoslavia.

It is clear that the necessary financial resources, in contrast, could only be found within the country.

Joked and that's enough


In this regard, among the measures mentioned was the fact that since 1956 the “Stalinist” annual decline in retail prices (1947-1955) has stopped, and wages have been “frozen” in at least half of the industries. Then (we will repeat, in view of the “growth of incomes of the population”), bonds were also “frozen” for a long time, with which many workers were paid up to 45-50 percent of wages.

Khrushchev personally announced that the loans will be repaid

"As the USSR approaches communism."

The Soviet leader even summed up this promise with his own poem:

“In a word, it will be more visible there: 20 years is not 20 days”.

And this despite the fact that more than 80% of the total working-age population and pensioners of the country were subscribed to those loans. In addition, since 1958 the taxation of personal and subsidiary plots of collective farmers and state farm workers has been increasing annually.

And already in 1961-1962. in the USSR, taxes were even introduced on fruit and berry, vegetable plantings and on poultry in summer cottages. The application of the first measure was suspended at least in time, but the second decision was canceled only at the end of 1965, although Khrushchev, as you know, was removed already in October 1964.

However, back in February 1959, speaking at the XXI Congress of the CPSU, Khrushchev said:

“Millions of Soviet people voluntarily speak out for a 20-25 year deferral of payments on old state loans. This fact reveals to us such new character traits, such moral qualities of our people, which are inconceivable under the conditions of an exploitative system. "

The people answered with adequate jokes:

“People, however, made some noise,
but did not dare to contradict.
There is print everywhere in the heads:
taught Kashchei to be silent "

or

“People really made some noise,
but did not dare to contradict.
And Khrushchev keeps lying and lying:
"Here is a conscious people!"

Resumption from 1974 of repayment of loans from 1946-1957. ended only in 1990.

Given that the real depreciation of the ruble automatically devalued the same loans and, of course, the amount of their repayment.

Suffice it to say that, according to the State Bank of the USSR, the real purchasing power of the ruble in 1971 did not exceed 70%, in 1981 - 60–62%, and by 1987 - only 40–45% of the 1961 indicator.

The version of the People's Commissar Zverev



Permanent since 1938, the head of the People's Commissariat of Finance, and then the Minister of Finance Arseny Zverev, called the project of the reform imposed by Khrushchev

"Sophisticated killing of Soviet money and the restoration of their dependence on the dollar, which means - to the interests of the United States."

In the last conversation with the chairman of the Council of Ministers, whom Nikita Khrushchev had already appointed himself to, Zverev recalled that the pegging to the dollar was canceled on March 1, 1950 by the Stalinist Council of Ministers. And he resigned on May 16, 1960.

Two weeks before that - on May 4, 1960, Zverev refused to sign Decree No. 470 of the USSR Council of Ministers

"On the change in the scale of prices and the replacement of current money with new money."

And he was almost expelled from the party in the early 60s, which Molotov, Malenkov, Kaganovich and Shepilov, who joined them, did not avoid at the same time.

Zverev understood that the authorities went for a covert increase in prices and tariffs in order to somehow compensate for the dubious "records" of Khrushchev's economic policy. That, taking into account the mentioned "balancing act" with the ruble price of the dollar and with the gold content of the ruble, not only reduced its purchasing power.

This increased the expenses of enterprises and the population for the purchase of anything. The grave consequences of the financial policy, which A. Zverev could not accept, are clearly reflected, for example, in the "Remarks of the USSR State Bank on the draft state budget of the USSR for 1963" dated October 10, 1962, addressed to the Union Council of Ministers:

“In 1962, the plan for savings is not being fulfilled by a large number of enterprises and economic organizations. This is due to the fact that in 1962 many enterprises and state farms did not fulfill their plans for production, labor productivity and costs, which was caused, among other things, by the fall in the sale of goods and services due to the rise in prices and tariffs.

As a result, the unsatisfactory financial condition of industry, agriculture and other sectors leads to the formation of mutual overdue debts of economic agencies, non-payments on loans from the State Bank, and in some cases - a delay in payroll payments.

As of September 1, 1962, overdue debts to suppliers for goods and services amounted to 2,6 billion rubles, and on loans from the State Bank - 1,8 billion rubles.

This happened only within two years of the 1961 currency reform. ”

Meanwhile, the USSR, in view of the virtually indefinite consequences of Khrushchev's "agricultural experiments", began to buy grain on an increasing basis.
Author:
Photos used:
back-in-ussr.com, znakzod.ru, ru.citaty.net, sovsojuz.mirtesen.ru
203 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Lech from Android.
    Lech from Android. 20 January 2021 05: 09
    +29
    How many times have our people gone through the devaluation of the ruble by our beloved state and each time everything starts over again, as soon as people accumulate savings and deposits from a certain line, the state becomes interested in zeroing them what , now the same picture is happening ... there is no certainty about the strength of the ruble ... the ruble is becoming wooden again.
    1. Crowe
      Crowe 20 January 2021 05: 50
      +39
      The country did not have time to move away from the Khrushchev reform and live in peace, so here Gorbachev and Pavlov at 91 made their own, and it continues to this day - not washing, so the people's money will be taken away and robbed by skating. go.
      1. vladcub
        vladcub 20 January 2021 15: 05
        +8
        Purely out of harm: Yeltsin was missed with his default. My Odnoklassnik, before the default "kept afloat": installation and repair of refrigeration equipment, and after the default ... 9 years "climbed", but could not get out
      2. Dod Income
        Dod Income 23 January 2021 08: 24
        +8
        Khrushchev is the same Gorbachev, and only now we understand why Stalin strictly treated such stupid and malicious comrades. After carrying out the anti-Stalinist reform, Khrushchev allowed "some to doubt" the veracity of our communist system, and already under Gorbachev it became a kind of perestroika rule and thus destroyed a powerful country!
    2. Civil
      Civil 20 January 2021 06: 48
      +19
      Except for Stalin, any Russian government systematically robbed and will rob the population.
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. EvilLion
          EvilLion 20 January 2021 12: 45
          +22
          Excuse me, but you accidentally confused Stalin with Hitler? Millions of those killed in the Second World War were not exactly killed by Stalin. And when in the USA there was a famine in the 30s, so dem. the pit was formed in 10 million, there, too, Stalin did not lead.
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. Paul
              Paul 20 January 2021 18: 25
              +15
              Is it really all ?! Did you take it straight and make a plan for bloodletting? Hitler persuaded to attack us? And making repayment of loans immediately unrealistic? How do you know that, say, already in 1950, repayment was unrealistic? And he also announced a hunger strike in the 30s (strange that they did not say about the 20s) - he went to the mausoleum and said: "I am going on a hunger strike !!!" In short, everything bad under Stalin is to blame. Damn, well, then Reagan, diagnosed in the 80s, started AIDS.
              1. Sergey Valov
                Sergey Valov 20 January 2021 18: 56
                -21%
                I didn’t answer point by point, one is enough.
                “In short, everything bad under Stalin is to blame” - Stalin alone headed the state, therefore he is responsible for all failures in the economic and political sphere.
                1. Paul
                  Paul 20 January 2021 19: 06
                  +18
                  Very simple of course, but so be it. If everything is so straightforward, then the following conclusion is also true - Stalin alone headed the state, therefore all the successes in the economic (revival of the national economy after the Civil War) and political (victory in the war) happened thanks to Stalin.
                  Perhaps it would be more accurate to assess the actions of individuals with a more flexible approach to the circumstances of their activities?
                  1. Sergey Valov
                    Sergey Valov 20 January 2021 23: 07
                    -20%
                    Of course, it is necessary to evaluate the activities of people by many factors, and consider both positive and negative, let's say, actions. As for the Second World War, it is possible and such a formulation of the question - maybe they won not because of but in spite of? It should not be forgotten that it was not the USSR that defeated Germany, but the coalition that included the USSR. Similarly, on all other issues - would it be necessary to restore industry after the Civil War if the Bolsheviks had not carried out a coup d'etat, the consequence of which was a civil war, etc.
                    1. AllXVahhaB
                      AllXVahhaB 22 January 2021 01: 54
                      +7
                      Quote: Sergey Valov
                      Similarly, on all other issues - would it have been necessary to restore industry after the Civil War if the Bolsheviks had not carried out a coup d'etat, the consequence of which was a civil war, etc.

                      So they did not restore, but created from 0! Before the war, GDP growth was almost 19% per year! When and where else was this?
                      1. Ka-52
                        Ka-52 22 January 2021 08: 28
                        -7
                        Before the war, GDP growth was almost 19% per year! When and where else was this?

                        only more than 68% of industrial equipment was still used, created or purchased before the revolution.
                      2. Kwas
                        Kwas 26 January 2021 10: 40
                        +4
                        Quote: Ka-52
                        only over 68%
                        ...
                        excuse me, where does this incredible infa come from?
                      3. AllXVahhaB
                        AllXVahhaB 26 January 2021 15: 00
                        +3
                        Quote: Ka-52
                        only more than 68% of industrial equipment was still used, created or purchased before the revolution.

                        Crispy-baked brain? I sympathize...
                        Interestingly, that's purely logical: does it mean that it was 100% under the empire? Where is the corresponding growth then? They could not even produce a mosin in the amount necessary for the army. Why are there mosinki ... stupid shells for artillery. Have you heard of the shell hunger?
                      4. Ka-52
                        Ka-52 27 January 2021 04: 48
                        -3
                        Crispy-baked brain? I sympathize...

                        sympathize with your children, their parent is not themselves.
                        Interestingly, that's purely logical: does it mean that it was 100% under the empire? Where is the corresponding growth then? They could not even produce a mosin in the amount necessary for the army. Why are there mosinki ... stupid shells for artillery. Have you heard of the shell hunger?

                        better ask logically how the country of the Soviets could produce equipment when industry in the 20s. either lay in ruins or was plundered. There were not many options then - to restore what was pre-revolutionary or to buy from the damned capitalists. For some reason, the SNK of the RSFSR recognized this, but you did not. That's amazing then lol
                      5. AllXVahhaB
                        AllXVahhaB 27 January 2021 14: 49
                        +2
                        So we bought it! There is no mystery in this: who bought what and how much. And how many of the same American engineers worked in the USSR in the 20-30s. These are facts, but non-smileys ...
                2. Sergey Valov
                  Sergey Valov 23 January 2021 09: 12
                  -5
                  One country had one machine, the second was installed - an increase of 100%. The second country had 100 machines, installed 15, an increase of 15%. The question is, which country has higher real growth?
                3. AllXVahhaB
                  AllXVahhaB 27 January 2021 14: 52
                  +1
                  Quote: Sergey Valov
                  One country had one machine, the second was installed - an increase of 100%. The second country had 100 machines, installed 15, an increase of 15%. The question is, which country has higher real growth?

                  What do you know about the industrialization of the 20s and 30s? And then you are carrying some nonsense ...
            2. Sergey Zhikharev
              Sergey Zhikharev 26 January 2021 14: 13
              +3
              Of course, it is necessary to assess the activities of people by many factors, and consider both positive and negative, let's say, actions
              .
              So what's the deal?
              As for the Second World War, it is possible and such a formulation of the question - maybe they won not because of but in spite of?

              More details, more details.
              It should not be forgotten that it was not the USSR that defeated Germany, but the coalition that included the USSR.

              Without denying the successes and assistance of the allies, it should be remembered that it was the Soviet troops who took Berlin.
              Similarly, on all other issues - would it have been necessary to restore industry after the Civil War if the Bolsheviks had not carried out a coup d'etat, the consequence of which was the civil war, etc.

              Or maybe it was not necessary to overthrow Nicholas-2, you see, there would be no Bolsheviks? Or maybe the Provisional Government was supposed to solve the issues that the Bolsheviks decided?
              1. andreykolesov123
                andreykolesov123 26 January 2021 14: 43
                +5
                Quote: Sergey Zhikharev
                Or maybe it was not necessary to overthrow Nicholas-2

                Nicholas also lost the First World War. and if by some miracle he had stayed until 41, then Russia would have been the German East Gau for 80 years. here no options.
          2. Cut Samshitov
            Cut Samshitov 22 January 2021 09: 49
            +7
            Khrushch is unique. Antiimidas - anything he touched, everything turned into shit.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Valerikk
    Valerikk 20 January 2021 14: 07
    +2
    And who introduced compulsory loans for the population to repay that was unrealistic? Who went on a hunger strike in the 30s with the death of millions? Who allowed tens of millions to die during the Second World War?
    And who is this villain?
    1. Sergey Valov
      Sergey Valov 20 January 2021 15: 13
      -19%
      Guess once.
      1. vladcub
        vladcub 20 January 2021 16: 12
        +2
        Probably Koschey the Immortal
  • smoltish
    smoltish 20 January 2021 17: 37
    -1
    Ignoramus. You don't know the history. Learn.
  • Varyag71
    Varyag71 21 January 2021 09: 23
    +4
    Poor victim of the exam
  • AllXVahhaB
    AllXVahhaB 22 January 2021 01: 50
    -2
    Quote: Sergey Valov
    And who introduced compulsory loans for the population to repay that was unrealistic? Who went on a hunger strike in the 30s with the death of millions? Who allowed tens of millions to die during the Second World War?

    You mixed up a few letters in your last name - swap A and L and add C ...
    1. Ka-52
      Ka-52 22 January 2021 08: 32
      -1
      You mixed up a few letters in your surname - swap A and L and add C.

      what a genius of rhetoric. Perhaps you think this is the height of wit or originality? To begin with, write your last name in the nickname so that he also has the opportunity to scrub on it
  • Dod Income
    Dod Income 23 January 2021 08: 32
    +1
    Therefore, you are probably the very same Kiev Holodomoret ... And what did Etsyv do from the beginning of the 90s ?! ... why are you silent ?! - Where are those collective farms that fed most of the population ?! - everything that was created by great work and hardship, all your Kravchukcha with a troika in Belovezhka was taken away! ... but what do you think, if you hid behind the bathhouse throughout the war, you would win ?! You have to pay for freedom!
  • EvilLion
    EvilLion 20 January 2021 12: 43
    0
    Are you saying that the American did not rob?
    1. vladcub
      vladcub 20 January 2021 16: 14
      +3
      Quote: EvilLion
      Are you saying that the American did not rob?

      They treated them to cookies
      1. Mordvin 3
        Mordvin 3 20 January 2021 19: 20
        -1
        Quote: vladcub
        They treated them to cookies

        The Americans are interested in the confiscation of gold from the population, after which the price for it was raised, I don't remember how much.
  • vlad106
    vlad106 20 January 2021 13: 44
    +2
    Quote: Civil
    Except for Stalin, any Russian government systematically robbed and will rob the population.


    What else to expect from the Khrushchevs (Perlmutters?
  • Machito
    Machito 20 January 2021 17: 38
    +4
    Quote: Civil
    Except for Stalin, any Russian government systematically robbed and will rob the population.

    Our main task is workdays and bread-giving, if you want to be advanced - this square-nest.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Taga
    Taga 25 January 2021 18: 04
    -1
    You shouldn't have ruled out Stalin. Another thing is what such extortions go to, for the benefit of the overwhelming majority or a handful of "special" people.
  • Bar1
    Bar1 20 January 2021 08: 45
    -12%
    I can tell by myself what happened in the late 60s and early 70s. So if under the valentarist Khrushchev everything was still in stores, then already under Brezhnev, goods began to disappear from stores. If under Nikita our space program was ahead of the rest , then under Brezhnev there was a decline in space exploration and the rejection of our lunar program, as well as the recognition of the American lunar scam.
    1. EvilLion
      EvilLion 20 January 2021 12: 46
      -22%
      Well, you have to pay an American for the recognition of the scam with Gagarin.
    2. Strelets1
      Strelets1 25 January 2021 19: 33
      +2
      Quote: Bar1
      So if under the valentarist Khrushchev everything was still in stores, then already under Brezhnev, goods began to disappear from stores.

      Sorry, you don’t remember a fig. It was under Khrushchev the corn-grower that wheat bread began to disappear from the shelves, gray bread (in addition to black) and white bread appeared - but not wheat, but corn bread (made from corn flour). As I remember now, the loaf was worth 22 kopecks. And if in the morning they were not fed enough, they grew stale and turned into a sole. It was under Nikita that they began to pour starch into sour cream, and instead of selling meat, they began to "throw it away" in stores ... ("... Galya, run quickly, they threw meat in the grocery store at Shakhtstroy ..!"). And then - queues for bread (in Siberia in particular) - on the "nose" - a loaf of "gray" or a loaf (if you're lucky), if not "corn". The line was occupied from the night. - From 02.00 to 04 -05.00 grandmother stood, then until 07.30 - father. Then my mother and I came to change him. He went to work - and my mother (and my baby sister) and I bought three loaves for three - for the whole family. And that was even before the 1961 currency reform. After that it got even cooler. Food prices (and everything else) have gone up.
      But these were "flowers". "Berries" began under the "late" Brezhnev. But their creator was the "reformer" and creator of "Khrushchev's slush", voluntorist and illiterate agricultural (and not only) "reformer" NS. Khrushchev (in the common people - "Nikita", as he was called during his reign). It was his reforms in agriculture and the economy that hiccupped already under Brezhnev.
      About space, the lunar program of the USSR and everything else is a topic for another conversation. And about "everyday life" - that's how I remember the time of Khrushchev's rule.
      Well, to finish - I agree with the opinion of those who consider the Brezhnev period the best times - precisely the period before his illness and falling into insanity. Well, after that - there is nothing to talk about at all.
      1. Bar1
        Bar1 25 January 2021 19: 56
        +1
        Quote: Strelets1
        Sorry, you don’t remember a fig. It was under Khrushchev the corn-grower that wheat bread began to disappear from the shelves, gray bread (in addition to black) and white bread appeared - but not wheat, but corn bread (made from corn flour). As I remember now, the loaf was worth 22 kopecks. And if in the morning they were not fed enough, they grew stale and turned into a sole. It was under Nikita that they began to pour starch into sour cream, and instead of selling meat, they began to "throw it away" in stores ... ("... Galya, run quickly, they threw meat in the grocery store at Shakhtstroy ..!"). And then - queues for bread (in Siberia in particular) - on the "nose" - a loaf of "gray" or a loaf (if you're lucky), if not "corn". The line was occupied from the night. - From 02.00 to 04 -05.00 grandmother stood, then until 07.30 - father. Then my mother and I came to change him. He went to work - and my mother (and my baby sister) and I bought three loaves for three - for the whole family. And that was even before the 1961 currency reform. After that it got even cooler. Food prices (and everything else) have gone up.


        I don’t remember what it was. In our city, Frunze, Kyrgyzstan, good bread was ALWAYS. But sausage and meat under Brezhnev disappeared in 70, despite the fact that there were 6 mil. rams with a population of 1,5 mil.h.Even condensed milk disappeared: we boys loved her very much, but she disappeared.
        Under Brezhnev, nothing good was out of clothes, shmutki were thrown away for a moment and they flew away. Furniture - not to buy, carpet - not to buy, household appliances - not to buy, crystal - not to buy, a car - not to buy. EVERYTHING was in short supply.
        However, Nikita also did business.

        Quote: Strelets1
        Berries "began under the" late "Brezhnev. But their creator was the" reformer "and the creator of" Khrushchev's slush ", voluntorist and illiterate agricultural (and not only)" reformer "NS Khrushchev (in common people -" Nikita ", that was his name during his reign.) It was his reforms in agriculture and the economy that hiccupped already under Brezhnev.


        but don't you think that this is nonsense, then you said? It turns out that Brezhnev did not have his own will at all?

        Quote: Strelets1
        Well, to finish - I agree with the opinion of those who consider the Brezhnev period the best times - precisely the period before his illness and falling into insanity.


        It is you who repeat the conventional wisdom without using your head. There was NOTHING good with him, the only thing that was good, but this was not from him, but from the Soviet regime in general, it was free medicine, free housing, free education. But this is not personally to someone Stalin, Khrushchev or Brezhnev.
  • AllXVahhaB
    AllXVahhaB 22 January 2021 01: 48
    +1
    Quote: Lech from Android.
    as soon as people accumulate savings and deposits from a certain line, the state becomes interested in zeroing them

    Only now, instead of savings, people have loans ...
    1. your1970
      your1970 23 January 2021 14: 52
      0
      Quote: AllXVahhaB
      Only now, instead of savings, people have loans ...

      In the USSR, savings arose from the inability to spend ... If an apartment was bought for free, and Lada was bought, then there was no longer anything to physically spend
  • apro
    apro 20 January 2021 05: 14
    -5
    At the XXII Congress of the CPSU, Khrushchev promised the citizens of the USSR that in 20 years they would live under communism

    By this time, the IVS Stalin planned to build the material base of communism.
    1. Lech from Android.
      Lech from Android. 20 January 2021 05: 18
      +5
      Alas, man is mortal ... but that would be half the trouble. The bad news is that he is sometimes suddenly mortal, that's the trick! smile
      1. apro
        apro 20 January 2021 05: 19
        -6
        Quote: Lech from Android.
        Alas, man is mortal ... but that would be half the trouble. The bad news is that he is sometimes suddenly mortal, that's the trick! smile

        Why are you doing this?
        1. Lech from Android.
          Lech from Android. 20 January 2021 05: 25
          +5
          Why are you doing this?
          Well, you are a smart person ... you have not read Bulgakov ... a person may have huge plans, but such a nasty thing as sudden death can nullify all these plans. hi
          1. apro
            apro 20 January 2021 05: 37
            -9
            Quote: Lech from Android.
            Well, you are a smart person ... you have not read Bulgakov ... a person may have huge plans, but such a nasty thing as sudden death can nullify all these plans.

            IVS Stalin is not a man, but the system of building communism in the USSR, and an apparatus was created for this, but this system was not able to work without IVS Stalin, and the apparatus was destroyed.
            1. Lech from Android.
              Lech from Android. 20 January 2021 05: 50
              +10
              IVS Stalin is not a man, but the system of building communism in the USSR

              The system rested on the personality of one person ... Stalin died and immediately it swayed because of the actions of Khrushchev ... from the stupidest decisions of one person Gorbachev the USSR collapsed, this is the trouble of our country ... the well-being of the country should not depend on one person.
              1. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 20 January 2021 15: 48
                +9
                Each leader builds his own vertical of power. Leader leaves - the vertical collapses.
                And a new one is being built. All this is accompanied by crises.
                1. Fan-fan
                  Fan-fan 21 January 2021 14: 19
                  -1
                  Why, then, in the United States, presidents change, while the economy and politics are stable?
                  1. voyaka uh
                    voyaka uh 21 January 2021 15: 03
                    +4
                    Because, in the States, there are no verticals of power. And there is one continuous
                    horizontal. It is not the presidents who rule, but the Congress-Senate. And they imperceptibly
                    without fanfare are elected and spend budgets, approve military programs
                    for decades to come. And the presidents obediently sign them.
              2. zenion
                zenion 20 January 2021 16: 48
                +5
                The system rested on the people of the USSR, who gave prochukhana to all of Europe. I asked my father how it happened that all the people rose up? My father replied - I can't say for all the people, but for me the USSR was a country that I built with my own hands, I think for many too. My relatives, both from my father and from my mother, got hard. Remained very small and very old. Although these survived. Stalin died, the people were crying. The people knew who was there.
              3. Sergey Valov
                Sergey Valov 20 January 2021 23: 09
                -3
                A penny for a system that is supported by one person.
                "The well-being of the country should not depend on one person" - golden words.
                1. Fan-fan
                  Fan-fan 21 January 2021 14: 21
                  -1
                  Until now, such a system in Russia - everything depends on one person.
            2. Astra wild2
              Astra wild2 20 January 2021 16: 24
              +2
              "IVS Stalin is not a man, but a system of building communism in the USSR" programmed by Vladimir Ilyich Lenin
              1. Fat
                Fat 20 January 2021 17: 10
                0
                Aster! hi Give the link. I am writing down. It's important for me. Thanks in advance.
  • Far B
    Far B 20 January 2021 05: 18
    +8
    Yeah, the bald ear has heaped up business. If not for the powerful Stalinist backlog, he would have destroyed the USSR at that time. As it is, the forerunner of the Marked One. They took it off on time.
    1. Uncle lee
      Uncle lee 20 January 2021 05: 42
      +3
      Quote: Dalny V
      heaped up business

      Nikita Sergeich...And continued Mikhail Sergeich!
      1. Lech from Android.
        Lech from Android. 20 January 2021 05: 56
        -2
        Sergeyich
        what I will never vote for Sergeiichs ... otherwise they will ruin the country again.
        1. parusnik
          parusnik 20 January 2021 06: 21
          +10
          Yes, you are right, it is better for Nikolaevichs, Antolyevichs, Vladimirovichs, they usually raise the country from their knees. smile
          1. vladcub
            vladcub 20 January 2021 14: 53
            0
            Bravo, it is well said: "Nikolaevich, Anatolyevich, Vladimirovich are better." Nikolayevich did his best. And to this day he hiccups from his labors.
            It is a pity that hell does not exist: it belongs there.
    2. Mordvin 3
      Mordvin 3 20 January 2021 06: 15
      +12
      Quote: Dalny V
      Yeah, the bald ear has heaped up business. If not for the powerful Stalinist backlog, he would have destroyed the USSR at that time. As it is, the forerunner of the Marked One. They took it off on time.

      The authors have not yet written about the destroyed artels. It was they who produced a huge mass of bread and other products, in small bakeries. And state capacities were stupidly lacking. Which deepened the bread shortage. And they did a lot of consumer goods.
      They removed Khrushch, but they did not return to the Stalinist model of the economy, which was a huge mistake. They simply slowed down the collapse of the Union.
      1. Far B
        Far B 20 January 2021 06: 23
        +7
        Yes, he has many "feats" there. He put an end to the MTS, curtailed the Great Plan for the Transformation of Nature ... In short, he is still an activist.
        They removed Khrushch, but they did not return to the Stalinist model of the economy, which was a huge mistake
        drinks
        1. Mordvin 3
          Mordvin 3 20 January 2021 06: 26
          +6
          Quote: Dalny V
          In short, he is still a figure.

          His energy, but for the digging of the White Sea Canal.
        2. vladcub
          vladcub 20 January 2021 16: 00
          +5
          Dalny, about the MTS, I grew up on a collective farm, knew the local machine operators well. For the collective farm boys, the shefer and the tractor driver were an ELITE. I knew their foreman: "Shurui Ivanych", he started working at MTS in 1945 (he was then about 14 years old). He had one "sorcerer: a hybrid of KhTZ and" vladimertsa ", and all the tractors on the collective farm were: DT-75 and" Belarus "(I don't remember the index).
          Experienced mechanics approved the transfer of equipment to collective farms, and many started at MTS. I didn't give a damn about their arguments then.
          I do not assert or deny anything, but I just remember my collective farm childhood
          1. Taga
            Taga 25 January 2021 18: 25
            +1
            So there was not even a transfer, but a sale. No?
          2. Taga
            Taga 25 January 2021 18: 28
            0
            So there was not even a transfer, but a sale. No?
      2. Reptiloid
        Reptiloid 20 January 2021 18: 26
        +1
        Quote: mordvin xnumx
        ..... The authors have not yet written about the destroyed artels. It was they who produced a huge mass of bread and other products, in small bakeries. And state capacities were stupidly lacking. Which deepened the bread shortage. And they did a lot of consumer goods.
        They removed Khrushch, but they did not return to the Stalinist model of the economy, which was a huge mistake. They simply slowed down the collapse of the Union.
        hi recourse vague doubts torment me, Vladimir! It was about the artels that you yourself wrote comments, in my opinion, a few years ago .. Maybe the respected Authors had an article, maybe from a series of Khrushchev's deeds. In any case, the topic of artels has been discussed repeatedly
        .
        1. Mordvin 3
          Mordvin 3 20 January 2021 19: 11
          +2
          Quote: Reptiloid
          Maybe the respected Authors had an article, maybe from a series of acts of Khrushchev. In any case, the topic of artels was discussed more than once

          In my opinion, Samsonov wrote about them. Hmm ... if you take "Operation Y", filmed in 65th, then, probably, there are echoes of those artels when Goonies Nikulin sold cockerels, and Coward - "shame". My grandfather, for example, was a shoemaker. Once I climbed into the attic, I found two chests of different wooden blocks there. And when the artels were abolished, he moved to the watchman. And where to? So think about where it was more useful. Shoemakers, or watchmen. However, now it is even worse. The guards in all the major stores are idle.
          1. Reptiloid
            Reptiloid 20 January 2021 19: 27
            +1
            Alexander Green also wrote a great comment about the artel. And you also raised such questions about the artel that no one answered.
            Sometimes I was going to sit down and read my comments recourse , but did not do it. request
            1. Mordvin 3
              Mordvin 3 20 January 2021 19: 49
              +1
              Quote: Reptiloid
              And you also raised such questions about the artel that no one answered.

              This topic was taboo under the USSR, and she was buried. It is very difficult, and you practically won’t ask anyone how it was.
              1. Reptiloid
                Reptiloid 20 January 2021 20: 19
                +1
                This topic is still difficult, you asked about the literature on this topic. But literature, apparently, was destroyed, like the artels themselves. It is clear that restrictions on the private economy in the countryside and the liquidation of artels are one and the same process.
                1. Mordvin 3
                  Mordvin 3 20 January 2021 20: 34
                  +1
                  Quote: Reptiloid
                  This topic is still difficult,

                  This is how I write about it. Several years ago, quite by chance, I learned that one of our largest enterprises, owned by Americans with world fame under Stalin, was an artel. The "Third Five-Year Plan" was called. And that's it, no more information, except for the fact that under Khrush it became a state-owned enterprise. Although I remember how the Americans got it. First, a joint venture (joint venture) was organized under Gorbachev, and then simply bought out cheaply. Procter Gamble. Tides, Arieli and the like are released.
                  1. Reptiloid
                    Reptiloid 20 January 2021 21: 05
                    +1
                    Perhaps the topic of artels can be better understood if we turn to the NEP. After all, NEP began to curtail because of the contradictions between economics and politics.
                    Stalin, could this time, with a different form of property, avoid contradictions and antagonism? Was it a good decision? Its a plus. How then can a bald man not destroy Stalin's initiatives out of envy?
                    At the same time, it is worth remembering how, before the Second World War, he himself congratulated Stalin on his birthday, scolding repeatedly "Stalin's enemies"
                    1. Mordvin 3
                      Mordvin 3 20 January 2021 21: 17
                      +1
                      Quote: Reptiloid
                      Perhaps the topic of artels can be better understood if we turn to the NEP.

                      Modern small entrepreneurs are actually a copy of the NEP. The same owners of shops and firms like Ostap Bender's "Horns and Hooves", who bought the same horns for mouthpieces and combs. Just like buying scrap metal today.
                  2. Andrey VOV
                    Andrey VOV 21 January 2021 18: 11
                    0
                    Are you talking about "Novomoskovskbytkhim?"
  • Crowe
    Crowe 20 January 2021 05: 41
    +24
    This was not just a “truncation of zeros.” It was not just a denomination. The 1961 monetary reform brought the country two troubles - dependence on oil exports and chronic food shortages, leading to corruption in trade - these two troubles later became one of the main factors that eventually destroyed the Soviet Union.
    “Now it happens like this: there is a penny on the sidewalk, another person walks by and will not bend over to pick it up. And when there is new money, the penny will not be lying around, it will definitely be raised, because this is a box of matches "
    How many time mines he planted under the USSR is incomprehensible to the mind, and when he had time to destroy agriculture, and shoot workers in Novocherkassk, and give Crimea to Ukraine, and an army with militia (instead of a unified system, separate ministries began to operate in all Union republics - this was the first step towards separatism) to break up, the fleet after the corn plant had to be rebuilt for a lot of money.
    1. Mordvin 3
      Mordvin 3 20 January 2021 06: 24
      +9
      Quote: Crowe
      “Now it happens like this: there is a penny on the sidewalk, another person walks by and will not bend over to pick it up. And when there is new money, the penny will not be lying around, it will definitely be raised, because this is a box of matches "

      Yeah, at 97 they did the same.
    2. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 20 January 2021 15: 50
      +4
      Oil exports to the West began under Brezhnev.
      The Druzhba oil pipeline has been extended to Hamburg.
      1. Taga
        Taga 25 January 2021 18: 31
        0
        And to Eastern Europe even earlier.
    3. Reptiloid
      Reptiloid 20 January 2021 19: 30
      +2
      ..... destroy the fleet. ...
      But the authors have not written about this yet. I waited, waited and did not wait .... until now.
  • nikvic46
    nikvic46 20 January 2021 06: 32
    +11
    In universities they still studied the foundations of Marxism-Leninism, but at the top they had already put all this on the people. All these inventions about developed socialism set the teeth on edge. Since the time of Khrushchev, the practice of approaching his people began. Reduction of the Army. And at the same time, mass admission to the CPSU. How it ended is known to all. If Stalin ruled his entourage, then in the subsequent time everything became the other way around. The next general secretary was kept surrounded by ticks, because it was easy for him to control. Thanks to the author. It was as if he had been in his youth.
  • Gardamir
    Gardamir 20 January 2021 07: 28
    -2
    What is this article for? We live here and now. For 20 years the country has been ruled, not by Khrushchev. Who cares what Khrushchem did. Since then, it was possible to fix everything a hundred times. However, instead of just living, we do all the gymnastics, get up from our knees. By the way, gentlemen, humorists, Russia allegedly started to get up in 2014, and before this year, who ruled the country?
    1. Boris55
      Boris55 20 January 2021 08: 15
      -10%
      Quote: Gardamir
      Who cares what Khrushchem did. Since then, it was possible to fix everything a hundred times.

      In order to fix something, you need to know what to fix or what to prevent, so as not to fix it. This is what the article is about. This is what the president's amendments to the Constitution are about, so that lovers of everything Western would not come to power. So that the next Khrushchev (Medvedev) does not seize the helm of government.

      Quote: Gardamir
      allegedly Russia began to get up in 2014, and before this year, who ruled the country?

      Visibly for you, maybe from the 14th, it was announced in the 7th (Munich speech), but in fact - from the beginning of the century, i.e. with the arrival of Putin, who stopped the destruction of Russia and with the beginning of strengthening it as a state of World importance.

      About kneeling:

      1. Gardamir
        Gardamir 20 January 2021 09: 38
        +1
        About kneeling:
        The picture is certainly beautiful. But how do you feel about the fact that the country's chief instructed the government to bring more arbeiter guests to Russia?
        1. Siberian54
          Siberian54 20 January 2021 10: 33
          +1
          the fightin 'pit of childbearing came up, economists wrote about this in their zero dissertations
        2. Boris55
          Boris55 20 January 2021 11: 05
          +5
          Quote: Gardamir
          But how do you feel about the fact that the country's chief instructed the government to bring more arbeiter guests to Russia?

          First, you need to answer the question: do we have unemployment or there is no one to work?

          "Office plankton", which mostly suffered due to biological warfare, they do not really strive to knead dirt at construction sites, but the country needs to build and develop.

          I am listening to your alternative proposal.
          1. Gardamir
            Gardamir 20 January 2021 13: 42
            +4
            I am listening to your alternative proposal.
            Someone once said, "It's time to drive away from paternalism," that is, he wanted to say, stop relying on the state. But oddly enough, it is the state that takes taxes. decides whether to bring arbeiters into the country. And by the way, life is changing, stop talking about plankton. The country is ruled not by officials, not by liberals. BoKhat ​​are now actors with singers, not oligarchs. If they need to, officials will quickly twist the oligarchs. And finally, about construction sites. Go to any clinic, at least, there are signs on the doors, Akhmedovs, Hajiyevs. The situation is the same in the police. What do you think, God forbid, a brown-eyed brunette policeman is in trouble on the street, on whose side will he take?
            With regard to unemployment. It is more profitable for Tajiks to work in Russia at the dollar exchange rate, but many either go home or choose other countries. Tell me, you allegedly did not know about it.
            As for unskilled labor. And in the Soviet Union people were not eager to take revenge on the streets, but there were no Asians. How is that?
            1. zenion
              zenion 20 January 2021 16: 57
              -9
              All because there is no stratum, that is, the middle class, under the tsar they were called nobles. They defended the king from the people, because they themselves attacked him.
              1. Obliterator
                Obliterator 21 January 2021 01: 29
                +3
                Quote: zenion
                All because there is no stratum, that is, the middle class, under the tsar they were called nobles. They defended the king from the people, because they themselves attacked him.

                The nobles were not even close to the middle class, they were the elite. Their for the whole Empire, 1 percent of the total population would be.
            2. Dart2027
              Dart2027 20 January 2021 19: 07
              +1
              Quote: Gardamir
              And in the Soviet Union, people were not eager to take revenge on the streets, but there were no Asians. How is that?

              For the area.
            3. Mordvin 3
              Mordvin 3 20 January 2021 19: 29
              +3
              Quote: Gardamir
              As for unskilled labor. And in the Soviet Union people were not eager to take revenge on the streets, but there were no Asians. How is that?

              My friend is a student of the street chalk. Part-time, 40 rubles, I don't remember exactly.
            4. Boris55
              Boris55 21 January 2021 08: 24
              -1
              Quote: Gardamir
              Someone once said, "It's time to drive away from paternalism"

              Is it like Gaidarovsky "The market will arrange everything by itself"? Or Chubaisovsky "Well, a couple of million will die, well, they didn't fit into the market"? So what? If you are such an anti-statesman, then what claims can you have against the state (authorities)?

              ps
              State - it is not only a system of violence against the majority of the minority (Karl Marx), but also a system for the survival of the people, the preservation of their culture and identity.

              Public policy and governance in a crowd- "elite" society is an agreement reached on the capabilities of various clan-corporate groupings to use the state structure and system to achieve their narrowly corporate goals.
          2. victor50
            victor50 21 January 2021 10: 16
            +2
            Quote: Boris55
            "Office plankton", which mostly suffered due to biological warfare, they do not really strive to knead dirt at construction sites, but the country needs to build and develop.

            And in the provinces, too, office plankton sit without work?
            1. Boris55
              Boris55 22 January 2021 11: 55
              -2
              Quote: victor50
              And in the provinces, too, office plankton sit without work?

              In the province, and not only in the budgets, there is a huge amount of untapped funds. Master. Whoever wants is looking for a way. He who does not want is looking for a reason. The choice is yours.
              1. victor50
                victor50 23 January 2021 06: 13
                0
                Quote: Boris55
                In the province, and not only in the budgets, there is a huge amount of untapped funds. Master. Whoever wants is looking for a way. He who does not want is looking for a reason. The choice is yours.

                Go and teach! Show! But everyone can only chat.
      2. Taga
        Taga 25 January 2021 18: 38
        -1
        In order to fix something, you need to know what to fix or what not to allow, so as not to fix it.

        There is no arguing.

        This is what the president's amendments to the Constitution are about, so that lovers of everything Western would not come to power. So that the next Khrushchev (Medvedev) does not get to the helm of government.

        And this, to put it mildly, is not really about "this", but rather not at all about "this"!
    2. Darkesstcat
      Darkesstcat 20 January 2021 08: 28
      +2
      The past repeats itself. So it makes sense to remember him.
    3. EvilLion
      EvilLion 20 January 2021 12: 48
      0
      "History teaches nothing."
  • vladcub
    vladcub 20 January 2021 08: 09
    +5
    Quote: Lech from Android.
    Alas, man is mortal ... but that would be half the trouble. The bad news is that he is sometimes suddenly mortal, that's the trick! smile

    Especially if you are interested in it. And Stalin's death raises my doubts
  • Olgovich
    Olgovich 20 January 2021 08: 30
    0
    Khrushchev, of course, did a lot of things on his own, but, for example, turning a peasant into an agricultural proletarian without an eventful private farm is not his idea - we read the 1939 Plenum on the utmost reduction of private farms.

    Agriculture was completely ruined by scanty purchase prices that had not changed 20 years before Khrushchev and even before him could not cope with providing food to the population. And Khrushchev was forced to raise purchase prices, for which he needed money.

    Even before Khrushchev, taxes on peasants were constantly growing, both in kind and in money.

    As the same Zverev said, after paying all taxes on a cow, the peasant was left with only manure.

    It's funny to talk about "abundance" in food before him:
    Secretary of the Communist Party Central Committee Head of the Commission AB Aristov, 1952: “I was in Ryazan. - What's there? Interruptions? - No, I say, Comrade. Stalin, no interruptions, but for a long time there has been no bread, no butter, no sausage. I stood in line with Larionov at 6-7 am, checked. No bread anywhere
    .

    The 1947 money reform was also absolutely predatory.
    1. Boris55
      Boris55 20 January 2021 08: 42
      -1
      Quote: Olgovich
      The 1947 money reform was also absolutely predatory.

      There is an article on VO: How Stalin freed the ruble from the dollar: https://topwar.ru/45402-kak-stalin-osvobodil-rubl-ot-dollara-stalinskiy-plan-sozdaniya-obschego-nedollarovogo-rynka.html
    2. EvilLion
      EvilLion 20 January 2021 12: 57
      +4
      The reform of 1947 is not predatory, but confiscatory and was intended to seize money from speculators who profited during the war, when prices in state trade and in the market differed significantly. A very standard technique used in the post-war period. A simple hard worker has 3000+ rubles. in the exchange of which he could lose something, as a rule, it simply did not exist.

      Although I have no doubt that the peasants in the deep rear regions, who in wartime could get a sack of money for a bag of vegetables, were very upset that they had taken away the fruits of the actual robbery of those who plowed at the machine for 12 hours seven days a week.

      About the ruin of the agricultural sector, this is about the same as arguments about endlessly dying Russia on the part of those who did not find the 90s, when half of the country was sitting without salary. There was nothing to ruin there, before collectivization 30% of peasant farms did not even pay taxes.
      1. zenion
        zenion 20 January 2021 17: 03
        +2
        Until 1955, they were looking for those who dealt with food in besieged Leningrad. They were caught even in Ukraine and in different places. They were taken to Leningrad and tried there. These were not isolated gizmos. It was also with those who worked in hospitals and pharmacies. The fact that the money will definitely change and the front-line soldiers wanted it to be changed and changed, except for the money that was in the savings banks. They did not profit from the war, this is not American capitalism.
    3. Fat
      Fat 20 January 2021 17: 57
      +3
      Andrey Olegovich! hi There is nothing to argue with you. Little data. Our huge family has gone through ALL bad and turning points. As it was patriarchal, it remained. And the girls loved so much that they allowed a lot .... Duc .... what is it about? Rely on Stalin, but don't do it yourself! The USSR plunged its citizens into the sand repeatedly. Only for some reason, the citizens of the Russian Federation took the rap for the entire all-Union tendency in the periphery - to tear. Earlier, I was sick of talking with "southern" ... every third started by looking for "someone to shove" before the start of the exams. Not stupid, God forgive me, people ... But they corrupted the entire office of higher education in the 80s of the last century ...
      And what have you achieved? Stadium - Market ... Sad ...
      And you also piled up facts about bread ... I'm not bored anyway
  • A. Privalov
    A. Privalov 20 January 2021 08: 49
    +9
    the value of copper coins is up to a nickle.

    More correct - "except for a patch." Only coins of 1, 2 and 3 kopecks remained in their price.
    At home we had the game "Lotto", which was ubiquitous in those days. Many people still remember her wooden barrels today. So, we covered the drawn numbers with 1 kopeck coins. And on January 1, 1961, my grandmother suddenly had a bag with 20 "new" rubles in her hands! 200 worthless coins suddenly became real money. The minimum wage was then 42 rubles 50 kopecks.
    Vending machines became a sign of that time. Carbonated water without syrup - a glass for a penny, with 3 penny syrup. But in the already existing street telephones, instead of 15 kopecks, they had to throw 2 kopecks - a clear rise in price.
    In the winter of 1961 I was 6 years old, I was going to the 1st grade in the fall. Prices for small consumer goods did not change after 30 years. Matches 1 kopeck, salt 5, laundry soap 17, strawberry 11, tooth powder 6-8, a pack or ribbon of pistons for a pistol 4 (to this day I remember this wonderful smell of haze after a shot!), A notebook for 12 sheets 2 kopecks, a fountain pen 3 and 5 kopecks, a pack of nibs 7 and 11 ("herring"), ink 17 kopecks. A glass of tomato juice on tap is 10 kopecks, and a glass of apple juice is 12 kopecks. Fried pie with peas 5 kopecks, and with liver 4 kopecks. Pass for adults on a trolleybus 3 rubles 60 kopecks, student 1 pipe.
    Bonds of loans which in the 50s gave out part of the salary were lying around at people at home in bundles. I myself, more than once or twice, let the airplanes of them from the balcony. lol
    1. Sergey Valov
      Sergey Valov 20 January 2021 09: 15
      -3
      I am 3 years younger, but I also remember a lot - the patches remained, I remember them perfectly, they disappeared completely from circulation only in the 70s. and prices also grew in a rather peculiar way - at first a similar product appeared, but more expensive, then the old, cheap one gradually disappeared from sale. And everything is correct with bonds - people had a lot of them, we children played with them instead of money.
      1. A. Privalov
        A. Privalov 20 January 2021 09: 24
        +2
        Quote: Sergey Valov
        I am 3 years younger, but I also remember a lot - the patches remained, I remember them perfectly, they disappeared completely from circulation only in the 70s

        Apparently, you forgot.
        ... On January 1, 1961, the Pravda newspaper published a message declaring it expedient "not to exchange old-style coins with denominations of 1, 2 and 3 kopecks for new money and to keep this coin in circulation at its face value." Coins minted before 1961 in denominations of 1, 2 and 3 kopecks were required to be accepted in all payments at face value along with new coins of the same denomination.
        1. Sergey Valov
          Sergey Valov 20 January 2021 09: 38
          -2
          You cannot argue against Pravda. drinks
      2. Grim Reaper
        Grim Reaper 20 January 2021 09: 41
        0
        In the 70s, Gypsies bought bonds for almost nothing. I don't know what they thought there ...
        1. Sergej1972
          Sergej1972 20 January 2021 13: 55
          +2
          So since 1974, payments have been made on them. The gypsies did the right thing. And they bought it. probably before 1974. After all, Brezhnev at the 23rd and 24th Congresses of the CPSU in 1966 and 1971 firmly promised that the debts on the bonds would be paid later, and he kept his word. It's just that not all citizens had the patience. And someone went to another world without heirs. My relatives received the money.
      3. Sergej1972
        Sergej1972 20 January 2021 13: 45
        0
        Those who did not throw out the bonds began to receive payments on them in 1974.
      4. zenion
        zenion 20 January 2021 17: 09
        -3
        Some may not know that there were bonds of a gold loan and there were bills that could be cut off and exchanged for money in a savings bank. Of course, it was part of instead of giving money to those who earned a lot and great scientists. Then, first of all, everyone who had the bonds of the gold loan was paid. The rest were sent into the wind.
    2. Siberian54
      Siberian54 20 January 2021 10: 40
      +2
      In 74, my parents sold to the state 700 (the number was not even, well, this is not the main thing) bonds of 100 (ten) rubles each, and one came under the prize of 3,000 rubles. So with the exchange (sale), not everything is so simple and not for everyone they played airplanes with domestic loan bonds, many of them officially rose strongly
    3. populist
      populist 20 January 2021 12: 19
      +3
      A. Privalov (Alexander Privalov)
      In the winter of 1961 I was 6 years old, I was going to the 1st grade in the fall. Prices for small consumer goods did not change after 30 years. Matches 1 kopeck, salt 5, laundry soap 17, strawberry 11, tooth powder ...

      I was then 8 years old. To this list of prices I would like to add a glass of ice cream 9 kopecks (it was 90), an popsicle 11 kopecks (1p 10k).
      Also played in the bonds of the whole family. He laid out in packs 500, 100, 50, 10, etc. There were beautiful "pieces of paper". Then my father said that the money would definitely be returned. They told me to spread it out over the years, put it in a folder and put it away. Parents received money for them in the 70s and 80s. The mother-in-law also received.
      1. A. Privalov
        A. Privalov 20 January 2021 12: 46
        +3
        Quote: populist
        I was then 8 years old.

        And for me all the prices were already in the "new". It was then that, on behalf of my parents, I began to make independent purchases.
        The first purchase for myself was two files for a jigsaw. It was the change from buying a bun for dad to take to work with him. In our area it was called "urban", and in Leningrad - "French". It cost 6 kopecks. and had a delicious fried "scallop" from the full length slit.
        1. populist
          populist 20 January 2021 13: 02
          +3
          Then I bought ice cream, cinema tickets (10kop - children's matinee) and postage stamps. And also, if something had to be urgently bought at a bakery or grocery store. I remember this bun with its delicious scallop. Yes, we in Leningrad called it "French".
    4. ccsr
      ccsr 20 January 2021 13: 06
      0
      Quote: A. Privalov
      On January 1, 1961, my grandmother suddenly had a bag with 20 "new" rubles in her hands! 200 worthless coins suddenly became real money.

      They became "money" much later, and not immediately, because at the beginning of the reform, copper was withdrawn from circulation in huge quantities. And only those who saved them for games or forgot about them, three years later realized that their trifles had increased in value 10 times, because the government made a special decision to put them into circulation at a new denomination. This did not affect the "silver", which is why 20 kopecks were later used in machines with soda instead of 3 kopeck coins, those who kept them.
      Quote: A. Privalov
      Prices for small consumer goods did not change after 30 years.

      Yes, it really was, including travel by transport.
      Quote: A. Privalov
      Bonds of loans which in the 50s gave out part of the salary were lying around at people at home in bundles.

      They were issued to those who SUBSCRIBED to them, and in state institutions it was a mandatory procedure, otherwise they looked askance at those who refused to subscribe. And the private sector did without them, so not everyone had bundles of bonds. My mom got something for them, because we also had a lot of them, as well as some other pensioners.
    5. Sergej1972
      Sergej1972 20 January 2021 13: 48
      +1
      My grandma got something in the mid 70s - early 80s when the loan payments were made. She also acquired bonds of a winning loan in 1982.
    6. nerovnayadoroga
      nerovnayadoroga 30 January 2021 20: 46
      +1
      Thanks for the comment, everything is true in your words, 1962 itself. and I remember all the prices and the availability of food in the shops of Leningrad, and villages, and villages in the USSR!
  • vladimirvn
    vladimirvn 20 January 2021 08: 51
    0
    Why can our country live only by robbing its own people or selling off its natural resources? A bit exaggerated. But still, why?
    1. EvilLion
      EvilLion 20 January 2021 12: 57
      -4
      Probably because she doesn't live like that.
  • Aviator_
    Aviator_ 20 January 2021 08: 52
    +2
    Good article. Respect to the authors. And what about the Kosygin-Lieberman reform of 1965, which also brought the collapse of the USSR closer?
    1. Reptiloid
      Reptiloid 20 January 2021 18: 33
      +2
      Quote: Aviator_
      Good article. Respect to the authors. And what about the Kosygin-Lieberman reform of 1965, which also brought the collapse of the USSR closer?

      hi yes, I also liked the article very much. The Authors have many articles about that recent past. And these, in my opinion, are very difficult topics. However, we must try to understand this.
  • vladcub
    vladcub 20 January 2021 09: 04
    -2
    “The increasingly wasteful aid to regimes friendly to Moscow” from my elders heard that at that time there was such a caricature abroad: Khrushchev stood on the map of the Soviet Union and shouted: “Who are the last cowards?”.
    This "brotherly help" came to us at a good penny. The Aswan Dam alone ate how much of our money, and Kamran in Vietnam! After Khrushchev, this help did not decrease, but increased and at least appreciated, and they both yours and ours, remember Romania. If I am not mistaken, Romania was the only country in the Eastern bloc to whom America granted: "Most Favored Nation".
    So: the "destructive process of M. S. Gorbachev" began somehow earlier and ....
    1. Siberian54
      Siberian54 20 January 2021 10: 47
      +3
      Egypt paid for Aswan, Vietnam-advanced air defense from there
      1. A. Privalov
        A. Privalov 20 January 2021 11: 09
        +3
        Quote: Siberian54
        Egypt paid for Aswan

        ... On December 27, 1958, an agreement was signed between the USSR and Egypt on the participation of the Soviet Union in the construction of the Aswan High Dam and the provision of a loan for this construction. In accordance with this agreement, the Soviet Union provided a loan for 12 years at a rate of 2,5% per annum in the amount of 34,8 million Egyptian pounds for the supply of equipment and technical assistance for the first stage of construction, and on July 27, 1960, an additional agreement was concluded for the amount of 78,4 million pounds on the same conditions for the completion of all works on the hydrosystem.
        For political reasons, Egypt's debts on loans were not charged.
        Partial write-off of funds took place on a net basis, taking into account the permission of the Egyptian side to use several naval bases and airfields before the withdrawal of Soviet specialists in 1972.
    2. Sergej1972
      Sergej1972 20 January 2021 13: 58
      +3
      In all fairness, Romania was not one of the countries that received the greatest assistance from the USSR. By the way, under Brezhnev, aid to developing countries was many times greater compared to the times of Khrushchev.
  • Abrosimov Sergey Olegovich
    Abrosimov Sergey Olegovich 20 January 2021 09: 27
    +5
    Quote: Bar1
    I can tell by myself what happened in the late 60s and early 70s. So if under the valentarist Khrushchev everything was still in stores, then already under Brezhnev, goods began to disappear from stores. If under Nikita our space program was ahead of the rest , then under Brezhnev there was a decline in space exploration and the rejection of our lunar program, as well as the recognition of the American lunar scam.


    Let me note that Khrushchev did not come to power for a relatively long time, the merits of Khrushchev about which you write: "under the valentarist Khrushchev, everything was still in stores", "under Nikita, our space program was ahead of the rest of the world" country Stalin.
    Under Brezhnev, this impulse began to wane gradually.
    However, I have the assumption that we are still moving on the remnants of this impulse ...
    1. apro
      apro 20 January 2021 12: 08
      +1
      Quote: Abrosimov Sergey Olegovich
      However, I have the assumption that we are still moving on the remnants of this impulse ...

      We are not moving anywhere today .. we are slowly descending into the swamp.
      1. Sergey Valov
        Sergey Valov 20 January 2021 15: 20
        -6
        Judging by the number of private cars on the roads, the number of vacationers abroad, a sharp decrease in working women, the number of private homes in townspeople, we have sunk deeply to 30 years.
        1. apro
          apro 20 January 2021 15: 22
          0
          Judging by the fact that today it is being produced in the Russian Federation that imported and exported, this is beyond doubt.
          1. Sergey Valov
            Sergey Valov 20 January 2021 15: 39
            0
            Touched by soft signs. When did you finish school?
            1. apro
              apro 20 January 2021 15: 57
              +2
              Quote: Sergey Valov
              Touched by soft signs

              happens .. long ago.
        2. victor50
          victor50 21 January 2021 10: 27
          +1
          Quote: Sergey Valov
          a sharp decrease in working women,

          And men too!laughing е
    2. Sergej1972
      Sergej1972 20 January 2021 14: 01
      0
      Khrushchev won the power struggle in 1954-1955. True, until 1957 he was rather the first among equals in the collective leadership, in the Presidium of the Party Central Committee. And they removed it in 1964.
    3. zenion
      zenion 20 January 2021 17: 22
      +1
      Plans for the decade were until 1958. It was on these plans that they kept, and built, and took. And then there was a mess. Neither the government nor the party could agree on plans for the five-year plan. No for a five-year plan, there will be a seven-year plan. Three seven-year plans and the USSR will be under communism. Do not remember that everything was under Khrushchev. It was before the winter of 1964, but the beginning is felt in the fall of 1963. And then suddenly in the spring, in the beginning, everything disappeared from the shops. I went to work on the first shift, everything was in stores. I left work at about five in the stores empty. I went in and asked what happened? The sellers shrugged and not a sound. Corn is the queen of the fields, peas are the king! This is how they returned to the reign. And they went bread with ground corn, or peas. They tried so hard to please Khrushch that they planted corn in the Arctic, even though potatoes did not grow there. And he was still against the personality cult, but then he saw that it was good.
  • Krasnodar
    Krasnodar 20 January 2021 10: 07
    +1
    “In a word, it will be more visible there: 20 years is not 20 days”.

    Donkey or padishah)).
  • prior
    prior 20 January 2021 10: 08
    +3
    Everyone knows today what should have been done yesterday. All are smart with hindsight.
    Instead of building beautiful today and tomorrow, constantly picking at past wounds and scars.
    That today, everything is being done correctly and fairly?
    1. apro
      apro 20 January 2021 12: 13
      +1
      Quote: prior
      That today, everything is being done correctly and fairly?

      Oddly enough ... yes. Today there is no intention to build an advanced society. No one promises any progress for everyone. Only personal interests. Only personal benefit. And this is clear to everyone. And agree with this.
      The communists promised and moved in the chosen direction, and with mistakes and delusions.
      1. Astra wild2
        Astra wild2 20 January 2021 14: 27
        +5
        Colleague Apro, allow me to clarify: "Communist-Leninists promised and moved in the chosen direction."
        Р
        S
        Unfortunately, I do not have the opportunity to legally prohibit the name: "Communist or Bolshevik Party". For me, the communists - the Leninists, are sacred, but are the "social-compromisers", remember, Lenin's definition, similar to the Leninists? They SPECULE on people's love and trust in the name of the Communist Bolshevik. If they refused the names "communist" or "Bolshevik party" then I would look at their REAL rating
  • BAI
    BAI 20 January 2021 12: 00
    +1
    Once again about the role of personality in History. How it all depends on one person.
  • Sergej1972
    Sergej1972 20 January 2021 13: 09
    +2
    I cannot take these authors seriously after they, relying on materials from a satirical site, "confirmed" by them the change in the policy of the PRC and the CPC in the field of privatization. And they wrote, again, relying on the materials of this site, about the allegedly pursued policy of "decabalization". And they never apologized to the site visitors for misinformation. Pride obviously doesn't allow it?
  • Tektor
    Tektor 20 January 2021 13: 11
    +1
    They did not try to kill the ruble, but tried to save it. But the wrong option was chosen. Insufficient measures were taken as a 2 times cheaper price for gold did not help in any way, i.e. it was necessary to reduce the cost more, 3-4 times. And the decision was made to disguise this real decline under the guise of a denomination, which made the people a fool. Which gave rise to distrust of the leadership among the people.
  • ccsr
    ccsr 20 January 2021 13: 22
    -1
    Author:
    Alexey Chichkin, Alexey Podymov
    That, taking into account the mentioned "balancing act" with the ruble price of the dollar and with the gold content of the ruble, not only reduced its purchasing power.

    Why did the authors decide that this is exactly how it was, but I think they zagged a little, not understanding THAT situation. Firstly, our people practically did not travel abroad, they did not spend Soviet rubles on foreign currency, so by and large they didn’t care how many grams of gold were in a chervonets. Secondly, the state also did not care much about this, because at that time another important parameter was the official ratio of the ruble to the dollar, which, by the way, was also provided by gold at that time. Therefore, the 1961 reform was purely internal and did not cause any upheavals in the country, unlike the Pavlovian reform or the Stalinist post-war reform.
    The raising of the gold security threshold to the chervonets had no effect on the turnover of rubles abroad, since free export was up to 30 rubles, and everything else had to be changed in our country if you were traveling abroad. This ruled out possible economic sabotage against the USSR, complicated the supply of money to the agents, because everything that was above 30 rubles was smuggled and confiscated at the border. So I don't see any point in building any speculations on this topic - everything was much more banal and simpler. And really, the new money was immediately liked by its compactness - people tried to change it right away, although the exchange period was long. There was no change in retail prices then - the price tags indicated two prices at once.
    1. zenion
      zenion 20 January 2021 17: 26
      0
      A worker, a front-line soldier, suffered from the Stalinist reform, how could this happen?
      1. ccsr
        ccsr 20 January 2021 18: 55
        +2
        Quote: zenion
        A worker, a front-line soldier, suffered from the Stalinist reform, how could this happen?

        As my father told me, neither the workers nor the front-line soldiers suffered from the Stalinist reform, due to the fact that they did not have much money either. Those who have amassed huge sums of money during the war by dishonest means, having access to the distribution of products or engaging in speculation, have suffered.
        For example, they had a conscript in their regiment in the Far East, who was from the local and had a cow and other animals on the farm. His wife sold milk and other food to the families of the officers, especially those with children. In general, he accumulated a lot of capital during the war, but he could not exchange it for reform, and the story ended somehow sadly for him - he seemed to be moved by reason, or something else happened to his health and he was discharged.
    2. victor50
      victor50 21 January 2021 10: 44
      +3
      At least someone objectively assessed what was happening. I liked the statement that this reform in the 60s led to almost famine. I remember the conversations of adults in those years. They scolded Khrushchev (and did they scold any of the top officials?), But there was no talk of hunger. In a small provincial town, almost 2000 km from the seas, there was a fish store full of fish, pollock who did not die of dystrophy, and ... cod was not considered fish. And that there is no bread or not enough ... request That, the present ... I am very happy when all sorts of authors, many (most) of whom simply cannot know that time, talk about my unhappy childhood and nightmarish life, about periodic dying of hunger, fear that they will be jailed for something , about the fact that they were afraid to speak, they were silent only that there was nothing at all. Apparently the smiles on the faces of the people in the photo of those years - so beautiful, kind, happy - they don't know how to smile now - staged shots. And when Gagarin flew into space, the people demanded bread, and not "everything into space!" I remember when they said that he was dead, my parents cried. Are we going to grieve about someone now? How else to praise the present life, if not denigrate the past !?
  • Astra wild2
    Astra wild2 20 January 2021 13: 34
    +4
    "the beginning of the end of" underdeveloped "socialism" colleagues, it hurts me from these words: all my childhood, I perceive it as a fairy tale, passed under the motto: "building developed socialism" and suddenly "underdeveloped" in other words, flawed.
    Colleagues, before minus, remember: in the 70s, early 80s, is this time like a flawed one? If we compare with the current reality, then everything will immediately become clear
    R.
    S
    Authors, you - for the title and + for the content
  • CastroRuiz
    CastroRuiz 20 January 2021 14: 06
    +3
    Svinopas chistoy vodi trockist.
    On bi bil mezhdu svoimi v Evrokomisii i ES.
  • clerk
    clerk 20 January 2021 14: 10
    +1
    Authors are hack, or ideological liberda - reform is garbage. They did not voice the main Khrushchev decisions - which led to the need for this reform - a multiple increase in purchase prices for agricultural products with a simultaneous 100% purchase of crops from collective farms (under Stalin, there was actually a commodity tax of 30-50% of the crop). The "anti-Stalinist" Khrushchev did this under the pretext of improving the living standards of collective farmers. These two decisions led to the fact that agricultural production fell sharply, even bread disappeared from the stores and it was necessary to go to waste with the development of virgin lands, monetary reform and other palliatives. Which led to the depopulation of rural Central Russia and demographic problems. To cover up his grandiose failure with this, Khrushchev launched an anti-Stalinist campaign in 1956
    1. Aviator_
      Aviator_ 20 January 2021 19: 50
      +4
      even bread disappeared from the shops and they had to get rid of the development of virgin lands, monetary reform and other palliatives.

      Dear, all of the above happened in a different sequence.
      1 - virgin land
      2 - monetary reform
      3 - white bread disappeared, coupons were introduced for butter
      1. clerk
        clerk 20 January 2021 21: 11
        -2
        At the July 1957 plenum of the Central Committee, the new party leaders, branded an "anti-party group", reminded its participants of the situation in the country in those years: "Comrade. Malenkov ... You have brought agriculture to a huge decline! Indeed, even in Leningrad and Moscow, in the largest centers of our country, there was not enough milk, vegetables and potatoes! In other cities there was no bread either, ”F.R. Kozlov, in the early 50s, secretary of the Leningrad city committee and regional committee [20, p. 199, 200]. A no less depressing picture was painted by A.M. Puzanov, then head of the Council of Ministers of the RSFSR: “Apart from meat, milk and butter, there was a lack of bread even in the largest cities and industrial centers. Who does not remember until now those thousandths of queues, which very often formed in the evening! "
        1. Aviator_
          Aviator_ 20 January 2021 22: 28
          +4
          The angry speeches of the secretaries of city committees and regional committees are not a decree for me, although here at VO there are two fans waving newspapers with shouts: "This is a document!" I perfectly remember the events from 1960 and closer, and my parents considered all the 50s the most comfortable. And it happened in Vozzhaevka (Far East) and in Chkalov (Orenburg).
          1. clerk
            clerk 21 January 2021 22: 22
            -1
            It looks like in the 50s you fed from a special distributor.
            1. Aviator_
              Aviator_ 22 January 2021 08: 24
              +3
              From the collective farm market and ordinary shops. Mom is a pediatrician, father is an Air Force captain, a navigator school teacher, just a suitable composition for a party distributor. And they lived first in a rented apartment, and then in a communal apartment, where there were 10 neighbors in the kitchen, and five of us lived in a room of 12 sq. m. Then I liked this corridor where you could play football. Do not take seriously the party speeches at the plenary sessions, they were made with the aim of hooking up the competitors, and these figures did not know what was being done among the people and did not want to know. Did you yourself live in the USSR?
              1. clerk
                clerk 22 January 2021 10: 41
                -3
                In the USSR, in childhood and adolescence, I lived at the end of stagnation. The memories of your parents about the well-fed 50s are memories of their youth against the background of comparison with the worse 60s. As for the speeches of party secretaries, I will remind you that this is 1957 and they were pronounced by people who had already occupied posts. And spoken on the basis of facts.
                1. Aviator_
                  Aviator_ 22 January 2021 17: 21
                  +4
                  The end of stagnation is not the best time, the majority of the population can consider it good only in comparison with the 90s. The 60s were not more "worst", they were, perhaps, more diverse. If at 40-50, as Vysotsky wrote, "prices were reduced", then in the 60s they were only raised, to 64 - sharply, after Khrushch - imperceptibly, but increased, as in 70-80.
                  And spoken on the basis of facts.

                  Well, yes, facts. For example, in 1953 Khrushchem Kukuruzny announced the "facts" about Beria, who suddenly turned out to be someone's spy, who, in addition, fucked up half of the female population of Moscow. And no one had the simple idea that the leadership of the atomic project did not leave time for anything else. However, none of the population knew that he was in charge of this project. Most of the "facts" are a way to dethrone a competitor and take his place.
                  1. clerk
                    clerk 22 January 2021 19: 29
                    -2
                    Once again I propose to pay attention to the year of the quote and the position of those quoted.
                    1. Aviator_
                      Aviator_ 22 January 2021 19: 43
                      +2
                      Once again I propose to pay attention to the year of the quote and the position of those quoted.

                      It is the year and the positions that testify to the fact that there has always been an apparatus struggle, the methods are the same. And now it is the same between the "Kremlin towers". Only the communiqué from the meetings is not published. As for the "potato plight" somewhere out there, if there was one, it was the usual joint of local authorities used for the apparatus struggle. I developed immunity to various "exposures" of the history of the USSR - none of my relatives were in prison, no one was in the VOKhR (the liberal thesis - half is in prison, half is guarding), everyone worked to the best of their ability and skill.
                      1. clerk
                        clerk 23 January 2021 22: 54
                        0
                        It is advisable to know the history, and not to hide your head in the sand. The USSR is not a sacred cow, but a state with its own successes and shortcomings. Which you need to know in order not to allow yourself to litter your brains with either "those" or "that".
                      2. Aviator_
                        Aviator_ 23 January 2021 23: 15
                        +1
                        It is desirable to know the history

                        If this is you for me, then at the wrong address. I know her not only for her propaganda slogans.
                      3. clerk
                        clerk 23 January 2021 23: 22
                        -2
                        Yes, yes, I understand - from the recollections of parents who are at least fairly over 80. (It's good if they are still alive).
                      4. Aviator_
                        Aviator_ 23 January 2021 23: 25
                        +1
                        And from personal memories, since I'm 65
                      5. clerk
                        clerk 23 January 2021 23: 30
                        -1
                        It's about the history of the 50s
                      6. Aviator_
                        Aviator_ 24 January 2021 10: 28
                        +2
                        It's about the history of the 50s

                        Thats exactly what I mean. Read the speech of Khrushch Kukuruzny at the XX Congress, later it was established that there is not a single fact at all, everything is completely delirium of a fool who has grasped the highest power.
                      7. clerk
                        clerk 24 January 2021 10: 46
                        -1
                        Firstly, this speech is not at the Congress, but on the sidelines. Secondly, I read it. Thirdly, it has nothing to do with the controversial topic (bread disappeared in stores only in the 60s after the failure of virgin lands or in the mid 50s after a multiple increase in purchase prices and a guarantee of 100% redemption of the harvest).
                      8. Aviator_
                        Aviator_ 24 January 2021 11: 11
                        +1
                        This is the so-called. "Closed report". The attitude to the topic under discussion is the most direct. A little higher I was asked "not to hide my head in the sand, but to study the documents." I show that these documents must be treated critically.
                      9. clerk
                        clerk 24 January 2021 13: 03
                        0
                        All documents must be treated critically.
  • 1536
    1536 20 January 2021 15: 24
    -3
    Yes, "Cases of bygone days, Traditions of deep antiquity ..."
    Our great poet A.S. Pushkin said well. And a lot can be said about "dear Leonid Ilyich" - the faithful successor of the party's cause. So the fingers are obediently typing that after I.V. Stalin ... Soviet Russia was unlucky for leaders, but for some reason the heart speaks of the opposite, of some kind of fatal hopelessness, which gave rise to a vicious circle of potential destroyers coming to power in the country. Surprisingly, people come to power in order to destroy it and lose everything. This is only possible in Russia, I think. And such people are born with enviable regularity, much more often than the gatherers and builders of the Russian land. And what was built and conquered at the cost of innumerable sacrifices and suffering of the people suddenly turns out to be destroyed, plundered, sold and lost within several years. No matter what period of our history you can take.
    I respect Yeltsin (I can imagine how many minuses I will get). But it was Yeltsin, who voluntarily left the top post on New Year's Eve, said: "Take care of Russia!"... Maybe he realized at the end of his life that power kills for power's sake.
    How to prevent the new Khrushchevs from coming to power? How to see them at distant approaches, wherever they are: whether abroad, behind bars, in power, close to face to face, see and stop them? How not to fall for them, how not to believe their sweet words and promises, etc.? Probably, you really need to know who they really are. Or the people should have some big business. For example, increasing the birth rate, protecting the territory, repelling an arrogant enemy. Or something else in the same spirit.
    1. ccsr
      ccsr 21 January 2021 14: 22
      +2
      Quote: 1536
      I respect Yeltsin (I can imagine how many minuses I will get). But it was Yeltsin, who voluntarily left the top post on New Year's Eve, said: "Take care of Russia!" Maybe he realized at the end of his life that power kills for the sake of power.

      How cheap are you forgiving sins - apparently soon all the current elite will line up to you, accompanied by shouts, "Come on, it's cheaper ..."
      Thank you, the truth is unlikely to say those who lived with a drunk - I'm sure of that.
  • tank64rus
    tank64rus 20 January 2021 15: 37
    +1
    Khrushchev, as he was, remained a Trotskyist. Now the descendants of the "demon of revolution" have seized power in the United States. Today is their holiday. Then they will show everyone "Kuzkin's mother" and the Americans the same.
  • Eug
    Eug 20 January 2021 16: 09
    +1
    My deceased (kingdom of heaven) grandmother won from the reform - she worked as a technician at the institute and collected more than 200 rubles, 1 and 2 kopecks each, down the stairs and corridors. With a salary of 420 rubles (pre-reform), it was just wealth. About virgin lands - I have heard more than once the version that it was a cover for the construction of Baikonur and other objects, whether it is true or not - I do not know. As for the rest, it was Khrushchev's policy that unequivocally laid the foundations for the "explosion" of the USSR. I wonder where the "party comrades" were looking, especially considering the more than strange moments in Khrushchev's biography? Or was the weakest figure the most compromise?
    1. bober1982
      bober1982 20 January 2021 17: 45
      -5
      Quote: Eug
      I wonder where the "party comrades" were looking, especially considering the more than strange moments in Khrushchev's biography?

      Khrushchev did not have strange moments in his biography, where did you get it? He was a real Leninist-Stalinist, why he is being recorded as a Trotskyist is not entirely clear.
      Party comrades were no better and no worse than Khrushchev, and they looked exactly where Nikita Sergeevich was.
      With the death of Stalin, Soviet Russia was doomed, under any leader and in any scenario.
      1. Aviator_
        Aviator_ 20 January 2021 20: 00
        +5
        He was a real Leninist-Stalinist, why he is being recorded as a Trotskyist is not entirely clear.

        He was a Trotskyist because he did not take into account either the possibilities of the economy or the population. He ordered - and so be it. He was neither a Leninist nor a Stalinist, Lenin was generally more a theoretician than a practitioner, and did not lead the state for long, but he managed to win the Civil War with the slogan "Land for the peasants", and even Denikin admitted this to him. Stalin was a statesman who dispersed both the Bukharinites (which is worth their slogan "Get rich") and the Trotskyists with their "permanent world revolution". And Khrushch Kukuruzny was only a zealous sneak-performer, so after Stalin's death no one took him seriously, but in vain.
      2. Eug
        Eug 21 January 2021 14: 42
        0
        Took from what I read about it. In short - Khrushchev is the son of the estate manager (and not a peasant) in the Kursk province, a Pole by nationality (the surname is somehow in the letter "G"), and a message from Stalin's personal intelligence, signed, if I remember correctly, Nikolaev, that the mine, on which Khrushchev, according to his autobiography, began his career, has not been found. For some reason I believed it, I did believe it, although I admit that it is a fake.
        1. bober1982
          bober1982 21 January 2021 14: 48
          +1
          Quote: Eug
          In short - Khrushchev is the son of the estate manager (not a peasant)

          His father worked as a miner.
          1. Eug
            Eug 21 January 2021 23: 58
            +1
            Is the father real or registered in the metric? Are you sure it was the same person? Life is not easy, there could be nuances.
            1. bober1982
              bober1982 22 January 2021 04: 59
              0
              Quote: Eug
              Life is not easy

              I agree with that.
              Khrushchev did not start his career in a mine; he began herding pigs as a child.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Mikle2000
    Mikle2000 20 January 2021 20: 15
    0
    The dispute about how much the dollar was worth in rubles is similar to the dispute about how many angels fit on the tip of the needle.
  • sanya
    sanya 20 January 2021 21: 49
    -5
    And Stalin's price cuts from love for the working people were probably?
    After the war, there was the same Stalinist "reform" as a result, people just buy nothing dumb
    and prices began to decline ...
  • Motorhead
    Motorhead 20 January 2021 22: 37
    -5
    Another bullshit about $ 100, which is always $ 100. But the ruble is always wretched ...
  • Sancho_SP
    Sancho_SP 21 January 2021 00: 43
    -1
    Much has been written, but the essence is simple:

    In a closed country, a limited amount of goods is produced and no matter how much money there is, there is nothing to spend it on. The many billions in the hands of the population would simply lead to an even wider crisis at the first sign of scarcity.
  • Alexander P
    Alexander P 21 January 2021 01: 10
    +1
    The impression is that Khrushchev and Gorbachev are enemies of the people. Foreign "isms" and religions are rubbish, empty information.
  • Iskazi
    Iskazi 21 January 2021 04: 50
    +4
    Criticism of Khrushchev's monetary reform is trivial, everything is correct, but the author is missing the main point, Khrushchev was not a freak on his own ..., behind him was a group of "comrades." The author also did not mention the topic of Khrushchev's Nationalization of the Non-State Sector of the Economy, about 15%. Looking back into the history of the USSR, we can say that Stalin was never the Sole Dictator ... rather he was the real center of Compromises, and with his death everything was covered with a copper basin .. got freedom of action, unfortunately cospirologists are not so far from reality as they usually think ... If Stalin were really the sole dictator ... then the post-Stalinist USSR would be completely different, but yes, everything is written correctly ... , but from the point of view of the Brezhnev USSR ..., it's sad.
  • Alexey Lantukh
    Alexey Lantukh 21 January 2021 13: 50
    +2
    The article is purely about economics and absolutely illiterate. First and second: the gold content and the exchange rate of the ruble? What did this have to do with the population? No !!! After all, few people traveled abroad. Yes, and for goods ... Settlements with socialist countries were made in transferable rubles, which are not at all the same rubles. With capital countries exclusively in dollars. All prices were set by the state, with the exception of the collective farm market. If the state wants it, it raises prices (inflation). Doesn't want to reduce. However, one cannot trample on the laws of economics. You can't sell for less than it really is. Otherwise, the crash. Here is the economy of the dictatorial socialism of Lenin-Stalin-Khrushchev-Brezhnev-Gorbachev-Andropov and failed. And under Khrushchev, at least they paid attention to the collective farmers and stopped killing tens of thousands.
  • victor_5
    victor_5 22 January 2021 10: 01
    0
    An overdeveloped specialist in the Soviet economy is immediately visible from afar.
  • humbov
    humbov 23 January 2021 00: 35
    +3
    The ball-head made so many "mistakes" that even the latter was not capable of such. There will not be enough fingers, to bend them, on the arms and legs, listing what he had created as the main enemy of Stalin and the hidden enemy of the USSR. Respect to the author for his attempt to unearth the truth. As a result of this excavation, a kind of pit was formed. If the chosen from this pit is called the truth, then it is interesting to know what size the pit will become if we finally find out 100% of the truth?
  • Old warrior
    Old warrior 23 January 2021 21: 15
    +3
    Not "thaw", but "Slush". We must call a spade a spade. It was Khrushchev who did everything to doom the Union to collapse. Gorbachev, Yeltsin are just pathetic remnants.
  • Orrin
    Orrin 23 January 2021 23: 11
    +5
    At the XXII Congress of the CPSU, Khrushchev promised the citizens of the USSR that in 20 years they would live under communism

    It all started with Khrushchev. As he went to promise the people, so to this day the promises continue.
  • Andrew ))))))
    Andrew )))))) 24 January 2021 12: 54
    +1
    It was with Khrushchara that the collapse of the USSR began, and now the followers of this very figure are being driven against Stalin, and all that had to be just continued his course, but Stalin had mistakes, but who does not have them, and this figure just began to ruin all the good that created and achieved by our grandfathers by winning such a difficult war.
  • hostel
    hostel 24 January 2021 16: 24
    0
    Fuck, nothing has changed.
  • Lew
    Lew 25 January 2021 10: 02
    0
    how much text ........................ something is true, something is not ... but most importantly, write ..
    as an article, to defend a Ph.D. ...
  • Armen Sologyan
    Armen Sologyan 25 January 2021 13: 28
    +1
    Underdeveloped socialism was made by those who, pretending to be activists in the Komsomol, were secretly liberals worshiping American jeans and playboy magazine!
  • Taga
    Taga 25 January 2021 18: 00
    0
    And, dear authors, what is the conclusion?
    Khrushchev could not get into dialectics or was he a fierce enemy of the USSR?
  • Taga
    Taga 25 January 2021 18: 01
    0
    And, dear authors, what is the conclusion?
    Khrushchev could not get into dialectics or was he a fierce enemy of the USSR?
  • Valery Nikolayevich
    Valery Nikolayevich 25 January 2021 23: 42
    0
    The article could be useful if there were less lies, exaggeration, distortions, and tendentiousness in it!
  • Valery Nikolayevich
    Valery Nikolayevich 25 January 2021 23: 47
    0
    Do you feel in whose interests this article is written? It was not Gorbachev, Yeltsin and Putin dealt with the USSR, it was Khrushchev who started, and they just finished, these God's dandelions! ... Soon we will learn that it was Lenin himself who destroyed the USSR, and all the rest had nothing to do with it!
    1. www3
      www3 26 January 2021 01: 23
      0
      so Lenin, according to Putin, laid a bonbu under the USSR))
  • AllXVahhaB
    AllXVahhaB 26 January 2021 14: 55
    0
    Quote: your1970
    In the USSR, savings arose from the inability to spend ... If an apartment was bought for free, and Lada was bought, then there was no longer anything to physically spend

    Come on! Do I understand correctly that you were born in 1970? Don't you remember Levi's for 1000 rubles? And the sheepskin coat? Sharp tape recorder, color TV for 700 rubles, carpets, crystal, jewelery, rest in Yalta, restaurants, summer cottage outside the city ... And the apartment is not necessarily for free, there were also "cooperative" ones. If you have money, you can always spend it ...
  • Frank Muller
    Frank Muller 27 January 2021 00: 05
    0
    I remembered one old anecdote about Khrushchev's authoritative stupidity. Gathered Nikita - "Traveler" to the future "May Friend" Eisenhower, who invited him to the States. The American special services guaranteed the safety of the distinguished Soviet guest and his retinue. The British, without giving any guarantees, began to think about how to remove the party leader and the head of the USSR. To be convincing, they decided to consult with the most fierce enemy of the advice - Churchill. “Sir Winie” carefully listened to these gentlemen and summed up: “I fought all my life against the Soviet regime, but I did not harm it as much as this unlucky bald layman from state politics and economics. Do you want to remove it ?! "
  • anclevalico
    anclevalico 28 January 2021 08: 01
    0
    I remember, as a boy, in '77, I looked at these bonds at my grandmother's. There was no question of any repayment at that time. They just lay dead weight.
  • meandr51
    meandr51 28 January 2021 17: 25
    0
    The exchange of money had no effect on ordinary people. Moreover, wages were growing faster than prices. Living standards continued to rise until the mid-80s. Nothing dramatic and comparable to the hell of the 90s is remembered.
  • VLADIMIR VLADIVOSTOK
    VLADIMIR VLADIVOSTOK 7 February 2021 07: 06
    0
    Khrushchev is a traitor to the Motherland! What was his son Nikita, who escaped to the USA with secret developments! There will be no good shoots from rotten seed!