“The most is 4 rubles.” How Stalin freed the ruble from the dollar

67
“The most is 4 rubles.” How Stalin freed the ruble from the dollar
Golden chervonets “Sower” 1923


In Russia, the topic of liberation from dollar dependence and the creation of a single BRICS currency is regularly raised. In reality, you just need to remember your history: how Stalin freed the ruble from the dollar.



General situation


Currency reform 1922–1924 led to the creation of a stable monetary system. By decrees of the Council of People's Commissars of July 25 and October 11, 1922, the State Bank received the right to issue new banknotes - banknotes of large denominations. It was planned to put into circulation banknotes in denominations of 1, 2, 3, 5, 10, 25 and 50 chervonets. Money got its name from red gold (high-grade pure gold), which had a red, that is, red tint.

Subsequently, banknotes in denominations of 2 and 50 chervonets, which were provided for by the decree, were never put into circulation. The Soviet chervonets was equal to the 10-ruble gold coin of the Russian Empire weighing 7,74 g. The chervonets was 25% backed by gold, other precious metals, and foreign currency; 75% of it was provided by short-term government obligations and goods.

At the beginning of 1924, the final stage of the reform was carried out. In the spring of 1924, treasury notes in denominations of 1, 3 and 5 rubles began to enter monetary circulation. They stopped issuing Sovznak and began to withdraw them from circulation by buying them back at a fixed rate. Sovznaki of the 1923 model were bought from the population at the rate of one gold ruble in treasury notes for 50 thousand old ones (50 billion rubles in old banknotes). At the same time, high-grade silver coins in denominations of 1 ruble and 50 kopecks, as well as small change silver and copper coins, were put into circulation.

The successful completion of monetary reform in 1924 led to the creation of a single, stable Soviet currency. Without outside help, they eliminated the disorder of the monetary system on their own, which lasted 10 years. After the release of treasury notes and small change coins, before the withdrawal of sovznak, five types of banknotes were in circulation for some time: treasury notes, chervonets, small change coin, sovznak and transport certificates.

It should be noted that the Soviet government knew why it needed a hard ruble. And this differed from liberal economists who like to talk about the benefits of a “weak ruble” for Russia. In reality, the depreciation of the ruble is beneficial to the West and the East, which make it easier to buy Russian raw materials.

The depreciation of the ruble is also beneficial for large Russian capital. All this reinforces the raw material nature of the Russian economy (the “pipe” economy). And for the development of national production and domestic trade, a solid ruble is needed. The Russian communists understood this well.


Chervonets 1937 with a portrait of Lenin

1947 reform of the year


The Soviet monetary system withstood the test of war. Thus, the money supply in Germany increased 6 times during the war years (although the Germans brought goods from all over Europe and a significant part of the USSR); in Italy - 10 times; in Japan – 11 times. In the USSR, the money supply during the war years increased only 3,8 times.

However, the Great Patriotic War gave rise to a number of negative phenomena that needed to be eliminated.

Firstly, there is a mismatch between the amount of money and the needs of trade. There was a surplus of money.

Secondly, several types of prices have appeared - rations, commercial and market. This undermined the importance of cash wages and cash incomes of collective farmers by workdays.

Thirdly, large sums of money settled with speculators. Moreover, the difference in prices still gave them the opportunity to enrich themselves at the expense of the population. This undermined social justice in the country.

Immediately after the end of the war, the state carried out a number of measures aimed at strengthening the monetary system and increasing the well-being of the population. The purchasing demand of the population increased through an increase in wage funds and a decrease in payments to the financial system. Thus, in August 1945, the war tax on workers and employees began to be abolished. The tax was finally abolished at the beginning of 1946. They no longer held monetary lotteries and reduced the size of the subscription for the new government loan.

In the spring of 1946, savings banks began paying workers and employees compensation for unused vacations during the war. Post-war industrial restructuring began. There was some growth in the stock of goods due to the restructuring of industry, a reduction in the consumption of the armed forces and the sale of trophies.

To remove money from circulation, commercial trade continued to expand. In 1946, commercial trade acquired a fairly wide scope: a wide network of shops and restaurants was created, the range of goods was expanded and their prices were reduced. The end of the war led to a drop in prices on collective farm markets (by more than a third).

However, by the end of 1946, the adverse events were not completely eliminated. Therefore, the course on monetary reform was kept. In addition, the release of new money and the exchange of old money for new was necessary in order to eliminate money that went abroad and improve the quality of money.

According to the People's Commissar of Finance of the USSR Arseny Zverev (managed the finances of the USSR since 1938), Stalin first inquired about the possibility of monetary reform at the end of December 1942 and demanded to submit the first calculations at the beginning of 1943. At first, the monetary reform was planned to be carried out in 1946. However, due to famine, which was caused by drought and crop failure in a number of Soviet regions, the start of the reform had to be postponed. Only on December 3, 1947, the Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks decided to abolish the card system and begin monetary reform.

The conditions for the monetary reform were determined in the Resolution of the USSR Council of Ministers and the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks dated December 14, 1947. The exchange of money was carried out throughout the Soviet Union from December 16 to 22, 1947, and in remote areas ended on December 29. When recalculating wages, money was exchanged in such a way that wages remained unchanged. The coin was not subject to change and remained in circulation at face value.

For cash deposits in Sberbank, amounts up to 3 thousand rubles were also subject to exchange one to one; for deposits from 3 to 10 thousand rubles, savings were reduced by one third of the amount; for deposits over 10 thousand rubles, two-thirds of the amount was subject to withdrawal. Those citizens who kept large sums of money at home could exchange at the rate of 1 new ruble to 10 old ones.

Relatively preferential conditions for the exchange of cash savings were established for holders of government loan bonds: the 1947 loan bonds were not subject to revaluation; bonds of mass loans were exchanged for bonds of a new loan in a ratio of 3:1, bonds of a freely marketable loan of 1938 were exchanged in a ratio of 5:1.

The funds that were in the settlement and current accounts of cooperative organizations and collective farms were revalued at the rate of 5 old rubles for 4 new ones.

At the same time, the government abolished the card system (before other victorious states), high prices in commercial trade and introduced uniform, reduced state retail prices for food and industrial goods. Thus, prices for bread and flour were reduced by an average of 12% compared to current ration prices; for cereals and pasta - by 10%, etc.

Thus, the negative consequences of the war in the field of the monetary system were eliminated in the USSR. This made it possible to switch to trading at uniform prices and reduce the money supply by more than three times (from 43,6 billion to 14 billion rubles).

Overall, the reform was successful.

In addition, the reform had a social aspect.

The speculators were pinned down. This restored social justice that had been violated during the war. At first glance, it seemed that everyone suffered, because everyone had some money in their hands on December 15th. But the ordinary worker and employee living on his salary, who by the middle of the month no longer had much money left, suffered only nominally. He was not even left without money, since already on December 16 they began to issue wages in new money for the first half of the month, which they usually did not do. Salaries were usually paid monthly after the end of the month. Thanks to this issue, workers and employees were provided with new money at the beginning of the reform.

The exchange of 3 thousand rubles of deposit 1:1 satisfied the overwhelming majority of the population, since people did not have significant funds. Based on the entire adult population, the average deposit in a savings book could not be more than 200 rubles.

It is clear that the “Stakhanovites”, inventors and other small groups of the population who had super-profits lost part of their money to the speculators. But taking into account the general decline in prices, although they did not win, they still did not suffer much.

True, those who kept large sums of money at home could be dissatisfied. This concerned speculative groups of the population and part of the population of the South Caucasus and Central Asia, who did not know war and for this reason had the opportunity to trade.

At the same time, the whole world was amazed that just two years after the end of the war and after the crop failure of 1946, basic food prices were maintained at the level of rations or even reduced. That is, almost all food was available to everyone in the USSR.

For the West, this was a surprise, and an offensive surprise. The capitalist system has literally been driven into the mud up to its ears.

Thus, Great Britain, on whose territory there was no war for four years and which suffered immeasurably less in the war than the USSR, could not abolish the card system even in the early 1950s. At this time, in the former “workshop of the world,” there were strikes by miners who demanded that they be provided with the same standard of living as the miners of the USSR.


Arseny Grigorievich Zverev (1900–1969). People's Commissar, then Minister of Finance of the USSR in 1938–1960. (with a break in 1948). “His huge figure (he weighed almost one and a half centners) seemed to personify the strength of Soviet finances and the value of the ruble” (Viktor Dementsev, member of the board of the Ministry of Finance of the RSFSR in 1949–1963). Khrushchev's monetary reform in the USSR (1961) was planned without him, since he resigned due to disagreement with it.

Dedollarization


The Soviet ruble has been pegged to the US dollar since 1937. The ruble was calculated against foreign currencies based on the US dollar.

In February 1950, the Central Statistical Office of the USSR, on the urgent instructions of I. Stalin, recalculated the exchange rate of the new ruble. Soviet specialists, focusing on the purchasing power of the ruble and the dollar (compared prices of goods), came up with a figure of 14 rubles for 1 dollar. Previously (before 1947) the dollar was worth 53 rubles.

However, according to the head of the Ministry of Finance Zverev and the head of the State Planning Committee Saburov, as well as Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai and the head of Albania Enver Hoxha, who were present at this event, Stalin crossed out this figure on February 27 and wrote:

“The most is 4 rubles.”

The resolution of the USSR Council of Ministers of February 28, 1950 transferred the ruble to a permanent gold basis, and the peg to the dollar was abolished.

The gold content of the ruble was set at 0,222168 grams of pure gold. On March 1, 1950, the purchase price of the USSR State Bank for gold was set at 4 rubles 45 kopecks per 1 gram of pure gold.

As Stalin noted, the USSR was protected from the dollar. After the war, the United States had dollar surpluses that it wanted to dump on other countries, shifting its financial problems onto others.

As an example of indefinite financial, and therefore political, dependence on the Western world, Stalin cited Yugoslavia, where Josip Broz Tito ruled. The Yugoslav currency was pegged to a “basket” of the US dollar and the British pound sterling. Stalin actually predicted the future of Yugoslavia: “sooner or later the West will “collapse” Yugoslavia economically and dismember it politically.” His prophetic words came true in the 1990s.

For the first time, national money was freed from the American dollar. According to the UN Economic and Social Council and the UN European and Far Eastern Commissions (1952–1954), Stalin's decision almost doubled the efficiency of Soviet exports. Moreover, at that time it was industrial and knowledge-intensive. This happened due to the exemption from dollar prices of importing countries that had lowered prices for Soviet exports.

This in turn led to increased production in most Soviet industries.

The Soviet Union also had the opportunity to get rid of imports of technology from the United States and other countries that relied on the dollar, and speed up its own technological renewal.

Stalin's plan to create a common non-dollar market


The transfer to the “Stalinist gold ruble” of most of the USSR’s trade with the countries of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance (CMEA), created in 1949, as well as with China, Mongolia, North Korea, Vietnam and a number of developing countries, led to the formation of a financial and economic bloc. A common market emerged, which was free from the dollar and, therefore, from the political influence of the United States.

In the first half of April 1952, an international economic meeting was held in Moscow. At it, the Soviet delegation led by Deputy Chairman of the USSR Council of Ministers Shepilov proposed establishing a common market for goods, services and investments. It was free of the US dollar and was created as a counterweight to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and US expansion. At this time, the Marshall Plan was already in full effect. The economies of most European countries became dependent on the United States.

Back in 1951, CMEA members and China declared the inevitability of close cooperation among all countries that do not want to submit to the US dollar and the dictates of Western financial and trade structures. The idea was supported by countries such as Afghanistan, Iran, India, Indonesia, Yemen, Syria, Ethiopia, Yugoslavia and Uruguay. These countries became co-organizers of the Moscow Forum.

Interestingly, the proposal was also supported by some Western countries - Sweden, Finland, Ireland, Iceland and Austria. A total of 49 countries took part in the Moscow meeting. During his work, more than 60 trade, investment and scientific and technical agreements were signed. Among the main principles of these agreements were: the exclusion of dollar payments; the possibility of barter, including to pay off debts; policy coordination in international economic organizations and in the global market; mutual treatment of maximum favored nation in loans, investments, credits and scientific and technical cooperation; customs and price benefits for developing countries (or their individual goods), etc.

The Soviet delegation proposed at the first stage to conclude bilateral or multilateral agreements on customs, price, credit and commodity issues. Then they planned to gradually unify the principles of foreign economic policy and create a “all-bloc” trade zone.

At the final stage, they planned to create an interstate settlement currency with a mandatory gold content (the ruble was already prepared for this), which led to the completion of the creation of a common market.

It is clear that financial and economic integration led to political integration. Not only socialist, but also people's democratic countries and former colonies, that is, developing states, would unite around the USSR.

Unfortunately, after the death of Stalin, the authorities of the USSR and most other CMEA countries moved away from the proposals of the great leader, gradually falling under the power of the dollar (and their elites - under the power of the “golden calf”).

They tried to forget about the great Stalinist project.

Moreover, in view of Khrushchev’s socio-economic and political adventures (How Khrushchev destroyed the USSR; Part 2), we had to greatly devalue the “Stalinist gold ruble” (by 10 times) and reduce its gold content. At the end of the 1970s, the gold content of the Soviet ruble was de facto completely eliminated.

Since the time of Khrushchev, Soviet foreign trade began to move into a subordinate position in relation to the dollar system. The cost of goods supplied from the Union to capitalist countries was calculated in conventional “foreign currency rubles” at the rate of 1 dollar = 0,6 foreign currency rubles.

In addition, the Soviet Union became a donor to developing countries and began to supply the Western world with cheap energy and industrial raw materials. And the gold reserves that were created under Stalin began to be rapidly lost.

The idea of ​​“Soviet globalization” at the financial and economic level and freedom from the US dollar, independence from the US Federal Reserve System is now more relevant than ever.

Actually, there is no need to invent anything. Everything was already invented by Joseph Stalin and his associates. We just need to show political will and bring his plans to their logical conclusion.

Then Russia will be completely independent in financial and economic terms, will undermine the power of global capital, the Federal Reserve System, Western TNB and TNCs and will receive a powerful tool for restoring both the Russian world itself (including Little Russia and Novorossiya) and “Russian globalization” on the basis of social justice and human freedom.

Russia will receive a powerful tool for the development of the national economy and the well-being of the people.


Portrait of Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin in the Kremlin. Time taken: 31.07.1941/XNUMX/XNUMX. Author: American photographer and journalist Margaret Bourke-White
67 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +10
    23 May 2024 04: 28
    I believe that everything was invented not by Stalin but by the Soviet Ministry of Finance.

    The current one also came up with a lot, but “in the opposite direction.” For on Russian banknotes there is not even the coat of arms of Russia, but something similar to the coat of arms of the Kerensky government is drawn - evidence of the international status of the Bank of Russia, which is not State, as follows from the law of the Russian Federation.
    1. +12
      23 May 2024 05: 51
      Quote: ivan2022
      on Russian banknotes there is not even the coat of arms of Russia, but something similar to the coat of arms of the Kerensky government is drawn
      There is no American coat of arms on the dollars, except for the $1 piece of paper, and on the small change coin, so what? The dollar is also a dollar in Africa.Yes
      Quote: ivan2022
      I believe that everything was invented not by Stalin but by the Soviet Ministry of Finance.
      Yes, it was developed by the Ministry of Finance, and not even by the minister personally, but by a team of specialists. This kind of work is beyond the power of a single person, especially someone who doesn’t do it all the time. But it was Stalin and the minister who set the direction, and they also assessed the conclusions before giving the go-ahead for implementation.
      1. +3
        23 May 2024 06: 57
        Well, you see, there is still a coat of arms on the dollar.

        And on the ruble is the Bank’s own coat of arms, very similar to the coat of arms of a non-existent government of a non-existent country. And the question is:What is this for? Is the coat of arms of Russia in the way? What prevents you from making the traditional image of the state emblem on the banknote?
        1. 0
          23 May 2024 11: 19
          Quote: ivan2022
          Well, you see, there is still a coat of arms on the dollar.
          And on the ruble is the Bank’s own coat of arms, very similar to the coat of arms of a non-existent government of a non-existent country
          Alas, in Russia this is even more honest than in the USA. And even Trump has long stated that in the USA there is a so-called "DEEP STATE". The question arises, what is it? And who does it consist of? Historically, the answer is simple. Namely.

          The lifeblood of the entire economy is money - finance, the currency freely circulated in the country as the most liquid - i.e. as the most sought-after financial commodity. And now, according to marketing, let’s see who historically in the USA monopolized the MASTER OF MONEY and accordingly privatized in the USA, placing their bureaucratic appointees in the government structures of the country at their own discretion and according to their concepts of their world domination. Those who privately monopolized the production of $$$/
          We will get an interesting picture about the true OWNERS of the entire US STATE in its functional parts - no longer just as “masters of money”, but as OWNERS and USURPATORS of the entire COUNTRY - due to their small number at the top of power compared to the entire population of the country.
          Let me remind you. In fact The Federal Reserve System (US Fed) is not a government agency, but is owned by private owners - a group of predominantly foreign bankers. In 1913, Congress gave America into perpetual debt slavery to the private Federal Reserve System, giving it the power to print money and control the American economic system.
          Although under the Federal Reserve Act of 1913, the names of bank owners are kept secret, R.E. McMaster, publisher of "The Reaper", through confidential contacts with Swiss banks, found out that The following banks own a controlling stake in the Federal Reserve:
          1. London and Berlin Rothschild Banks
          2. Paris Bank Lazard Brothers
          3. Italian banks Israel Moses Sieff
          4. Hamburg Bank Warburg, Germany and Amsterdam
          5. New York bank Kuhn Loeb (personally financed Leon Trotsky in the coups d'etat in the Republic of Ingushetia in 1917)
          6. New York Bank Lehman Brothers
          7. New York Bank Goldman Sachs
          8. New York Bank Chase Manhattan (Rockefeller controlled)

          А list of shareholders of the US Federal Reserve, compiled from Swiss banking sources, looks like this:
          1. Rothschilds
          2. Lazard Frerez (Eugene Mayer)
          3. Israel siff
          4. Kun Loeb Company
          5. Warburg Company
          6. Lehman Brothers
          7. Goldman Sachs
          8. Rockefeller and Morgan Families

          And the number of these bankers TOGETHER WITH THEIR RELATIVES is now only about 15 thousand people !!!
          Banker Rothschild recently admitted to the Russian prankster Lexus that over the centuries-old history the Rothschilds had conflicts with the Rockefeller clan. The Rockefellers were involved in the real ECONOMY. Rothschilds - BANKING OPERATIONS (better to say, BANKING SPECULATIONS).
          Rothschild also gladly admitted that his family became the CREATOR of this world.
          See details - Pranker Lexus: Rothschild gladly admitted that his family was the creator of this world. Published 1 month ago. - https://dzen.ru/video/watch/64b91eea15834f1afe19c157
          1. 0
            24 May 2024 07: 40
            Quote: Tatiana
            Lehman Brothers
            bankrupt since 2008.
            1. +1
              24 May 2024 10: 23
              Quote: Nagan
              Quote: Tatiana
              Lehman Brothers
              bankrupt since 2008.

              First of all, it doesn't matter! Even if this is so, then his Jewish banking assets simply flowed in concert in the bank common fund of the US Federal Reserve System under the wing of another Jewish bank of the US Federal Reserve System.
              He doesn't stand on the street with his hat to beg. Don't be naive!

              Secondly, this information that I mentioned was in the media much later than 2008. Namely, from 2011 to 2023. And I’m not changing it and I’m not going to change it.
              Well, for example, look - https://newsland.com/post/1629408-komu-prinadlezhit-frs-ssha

              Where did you get the information from?
              Quote: Nagan
              Quote: Tatiana
              Lehman Brothers
              bankrupt since 2008.
              ?
              And what does this have to do with the message of R.E. McMaster, publisher of The Reaper?
              1. 0
                24 May 2024 17: 53
                Quote: Tatiana
                Where did you get the information from?
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lehman_Brothers
                1. 0
                  24 May 2024 23: 12
                  Quote: Nagan
                  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lehman_Brothers

                  Your link says that
                  The brokerage arm of Lehman Brothers completed its liquidation on September 28, 2022. paying out more than $115 billion to its customers and creditors over 14 years. [147] According to status as of December 2022, Lehman's UK operations were managed by PricewaterhouseCoopers, which expected to complete the administration process no earlier than 2025. [148] See

                  So information
                  R.E. McMaster, publisher of The Reaper, through confidential communications with Swiss banks, discovered that the following banks owned a controlling interest in the Federal Reserve: <...>
                  And the list of shareholders of the US Federal Reserve, <...>
                  6. Lehman Brothers
                  from 2011 does not contradict reality until September 28, 2022.
                  Those., It took 14 years to resell all assets and liquidate all operating branches of Lehman Brothers!

                  TOTAL There is no false information in the statement by R.E. McMaster, publisher of The Reaper, that Lehman Brothers is a shareholder of the US Federal Reserve in 2011.
                  There were ups and downs in the management of Lehman Brothers branches, but the branches themselves existed and operated until September 28, 2022.
          2. +1
            26 May 2024 17: 53
            So here is the list of names of the “World Government”? lol
      2. +3
        23 May 2024 07: 13
        I found the text of the current version of the law on the Bank of Russia on the Internet. The Law states that the money must have the state emblem on it. In reality it doesn't exist.... Formally, it turns out that all money in circulation is counterfeit? Or did I misunderstand something?

        What a cool reason to come to your senses one day and announce the exchange of all banknotes. Whoever does not have time will be late. This is very reminiscent of the attraction with banknotes that Woland staged from The Master and Margarita.
        1. 0
          24 May 2024 07: 37
          Whoever does not have time will be late.


          yes, a well-known trick, it has already been done in our memory
          1. 0
            24 May 2024 23: 14
            4 monetary reforms in the USSR and 1 in the Russian Federation....
      3. 0
        24 May 2024 07: 36
        There is no American coat of arms on the dollars, except for the $1 piece of paper, and on the small change coin, so what? The dollar - he and the dollar in Africa.


        So we are not discussing the “value” of a given currency, but what it represents...
        in this case, there is no “link” to the state on behalf of which she acts
  2. +7
    23 May 2024 04: 52
    Russia regularly raises the topic of liberation from dollar dependence and the creation of a single BRICS currency. In reality, you just need to remember your history: how Stalin freed the ruble from the dollar.

    It would be better to figure out how to attract the remnants of the Russian-speaking population into real life - otherwise you look at the generation of 20-30 years old, they dream of either being a barista or a video blogger. And they toil in offices at jobs they hate. In the meantime, the country can do nothing except pump out the remaining resources using imported equipment - nothing can be changed, resource traders do not need either a strong ruble or a sovereign government.
    1. +1
      23 May 2024 05: 41
      And for the development of national production and domestic trade, a solid ruble is needed. The Russian communists understood this well.

      Actually, there is no need to invent anything. Everything was already invented by Joseph Stalin and his associates.

      Only the powers that be are not interested in this and the IMF rules!
    2. +8
      23 May 2024 09: 51
      Quote: Vladimir80
      It would be better to figure out how to attract the remnants of the Russian-speaking population into real life - otherwise you look at the generation of 20-30 years old, they dream of either being a barista or a video blogger.
      Have you tried paying? Is your real life (for others) working hard for a small salary? Baristas don't get paid much either, but at least you won't get silicosis there.
  3. +6
    23 May 2024 05: 45
    The Russian Federation is modern, not the USSR... As Mishustin said, getting acquainted with the “new” Volga, it even has a Chinese steering wheel.
    1. +2
      23 May 2024 10: 56
      As long as there are “outsiders” in the Kremlin, nothing good will happen for the working people of the country.
  4. +2
    23 May 2024 06: 10
    Everything was already invented by Joseph Stalin and his associates. We just need to show political will and bring his plans to their logical conclusion.

    It will never take off.
    Stalin made his decisions under the conditions of socialism or early socialism; we live in a different economic formation. Laws, decision-making and implementation of actions in different formations often have completely different results.
    Even if these actions are identical, such as nationalization, the result, both social and economic, is radically opposite.
    1. -7
      23 May 2024 06: 27
      Will never take off
      It's about to take off. And do you know why? Because Russia is a self-sufficient country and, unlike other countries, can completely exist autonomously, spitting down on all the “common people” who are trying to impose sanctions. As for other countries, you are right here
      1. +3
        23 May 2024 06: 49
        As the cat Matroskin said: “We have the means, but we have no mind.” And this is worse than a shortage of funds.

        To break your own country into pieces in peacetime “so as not to feed these and these” has never occurred to any nation in the history.
        1. -4
          23 May 2024 06: 51
          . And this is worse than a shortage of funds
          Lack of funds contributes to the development of intelligence and dexterity wink
          1. +3
            23 May 2024 07: 10
            Yes, at the beginning of his affairs Gorbachev uttered the phrase: “our natural resources have corrupted us.” One can only add that we have proven to be extremely capable of debauchery.
      2. +8
        23 May 2024 06: 50
        Because Russia is a self-sufficient country

        Are you talking about the Chinese Volga with a Chinese steering wheel?
        You are a little lost in time, Russia was, key word, self-sufficient 30 years ago.
        If you turn on “self-sufficiency” now, you won’t exactly write a comment on VO, you won’t even be able to use your gadget in the form of a hammer.
        hi
        1. -4
          23 May 2024 06: 53
          If you turn on “self-sufficiency” now, you won’t exactly write a comment on VO, you won’t even be able to use your gadget in the form of a hammer
          Before enabling self-sufficiency, it is first necessary, I quote:
          Everything was already invented by Joseph Stalin and his associates. We just need to show political will and bring his plans to their logical conclusion
      3. +5
        23 May 2024 06: 54
        Are you kidding me ? To be a raw material appendage and a sales market for someone else’s products of production, intellect, science, to parasitize at the expense of someone else’s labor - is this to be a self-sufficient State?
        1. -3
          23 May 2024 06: 56
          To be a raw material appendage and a sales market for someone else’s production
          As the saying goes, you heard a ringing, but you don’t know where it is wink
          1. +3
            23 May 2024 06: 57
            So, you yourself don’t believe what you wrote?
      4. 0
        24 May 2024 23: 22
        Because Russia is a self-sufficient country and, unlike other countries, can completely exist autonomously, spitting down on all the “common people” who are trying to impose sanctions. can not. Simply due to problems with obtaining technology...
        1. +1
          25 May 2024 04: 48
          Simply due to problems with obtaining technology...
          There are no problems with obtaining technology. They can be bought, copied or, finally, stolen, as the young USSR and later China did. The problem here, rather, is the reluctance of the authorities to do anything - you can buy everything with oil and gas
          1. +2
            25 May 2024 08: 30
            They can be bought, copied or, finally, stolen, as the young USSR and later China did.- the problem arose with the complication of technology.
            The USSR chose to buy AvtoVAZ and they sold it to us, and when now they wanted to buy an Opel for quite decent money, fig. Although there weren’t even sanctions yet.
            Capitalism did not feel much of a competitor in the USSR, so it sold technology quite easily. The Russian Federation did not succeed in this way; capital sensed the risks of competition for itself.
            1. +2
              25 May 2024 08: 34
              wanted to buy an Opel for quite decent money
              The failed deal with Opel very well characterizes the so-called. free market relations wink
              1. 0
                25 May 2024 08: 49
                Exactly.
                The USSR could easily sell AvtoVAZ, supercomputers and jet engines for combat aircraft - they will never sell such things to the Russian Federation.
                And this is against the backdrop of official anti-Sovietism and the Cold War.
                The ideology of the USSR did not frighten or interest anyone - as soon as they realized that the USSR would not go further than the existing borders. And they began to trade despite the Cold War.
                “Peaceful coexistence of two ideologies” - and without ideology we are a competitor
                1. +1
                  25 May 2024 08: 57
                  The USSR could easily sell AvtoVAZ, supercomputers and jet engines for combat aircraft
                  This could only have happened before the passage of the Jackson-Vanik Act, which prohibited the export of dual-use goods to the USSR. Remember the scandal with the Japanese company Toshiba, which sold us grinding machines that were used to process the propellers of our nuclear submarines. Although Japan was not subject to this law, it was nevertheless pressured with the force of the industrial press
                  1. 0
                    25 May 2024 09: 24
                    All the same, the sanctions of the D-V law applied generally to twins. Conventional technologies were sold quite easily
  5. +6
    23 May 2024 06: 40
    It is clear that the “Stakhanovites”, inventors and other small groups of the population who had super-profits lost part of their money to the speculators.

    It’s very “nice” that the author put inventors on a par with speculators. I don’t know how inventors lived in Stalin’s times, but I can definitely say about Brezhnev’s. I don’t know of a single case of inventors receiving excess profits (I am an inventor myself and I know many). They always paid such little money for inventions that applications for inventions were written under pressure in a planned manner at the request of their superiors.
    1. +3
      23 May 2024 10: 00
      200 rubles, incentive fee for the entire team of authors. But they did not take income tax from them, as well as from remuneration for rationalization proposals.
  6. 0
    23 May 2024 06: 52
    . Those citizens who kept large sums of money at home could exchange at the rate of 1 new ruble to 10 old ones.

    Stalin was a wise man. If only the oligarchs and officials could change their money like this now!
    And there is no need to feel sorry for them - they will not become poorer because of it. Since they will still be a thousand times richer than an ordinary citizen. But how much money will appear to be spent on social needs. For medicine, for education, for improving demographics, etc.
    1. 0
      24 May 2024 23: 31
      Stalin was a wise man. but the population howled in unison after the 1947 reform. A bunch of reports from the field about citizens' dissatisfaction.
      And they especially howled - when the cards were canceled - with low pre-war prices and their stability. And suddenly it turned out that everything went to the market and there prices were from 5 to 15 in markup from store prices.
      And the stores began to sharply exceed the plan - handing over everything in bulk to resellers - now they no longer need cards for reporting, only money...
  7. +1
    23 May 2024 08: 29
    There will be a strong economy - I don’t care about the dollar, there will be no strong economy - and there is nothing to talk about.

    Currency is part of the financial system and reflects its state, but does not in any way determine the economy itself. For example, if our labor productivity is 3 times lower than the American one, then even if you introduce kuna, there will be no sense, we will still buy high and sell low.

    The international currency ensures trade, the dollar is the generally recognized reserve currency of the world. If our economy suddenly becomes comparable to the United States, then we will not face any “dollar dependence”. Actually, there is no dollar dependence - there is a dependence on imports, and it does not matter at all for what tugriks we buy goods.

    The fight against the dollar at the present stage is the result of sanctions, freezing of assets and the inability to use dollars due to high risks. This situation is used by our propaganda, which does its job, and that’s why this strange term appeared.
    1. +2
      23 May 2024 09: 22
      There will be a strong economy - don't care about the dollar
      Yeah, there will be happiness for people, happiness for centuries, because this government has a strong hand, its strong hand is raising the economy higher and higher, already the fifth economy in the world, the second in Europe.. A couple more jerks and the imperialist world will collapse with a bestial grin, The era of universal prosperity will come with the smile of a baby. smile
      1. 0
        23 May 2024 10: 27
        Quote: kor1vet1974
        Yeah, people will be happy, happy for centuries, because this government has a strong hand, its strong hand is raising the economy higher and higher, already the fifth economy in the world, the second in Europe.


        "Don't read Soviet newspapers before dinner." (With).

        The Volga car, which the prime minister is asking to install at least a domestic steering wheel, is not an indicator of a strong economy.
        1. +3
          23 May 2024 10: 37
          But I didn’t write about the Volga... and not about the Chinese steering wheel... They pretended that they didn’t understand and okay...
          1. -2
            23 May 2024 11: 24
            But I didn’t write about the Volga... and not about the Chinese steering wheel... They pretended that they didn’t understand and okay...


            I'm flattered by your opinion of my intelligence :)
            1. +3
              23 May 2024 12: 05
              Yes, you are not the first here who comes across someone with such intelligence. You told him about Foma, he told you about Yerema. I wasn’t surprised.
  8. 0
    23 May 2024 08: 36
    Quote: ivan2022
    And on the ruble is the Bank’s own coat of arms, very similar to the coat of arms of a non-existent government of a non-existent country. And the question is: why is this? Is the coat of arms of Russia in the way? What prevents you from making the traditional image of the state emblem on the banknote?



    What's unclear? The issue of the ruble is not determined by the Russian state, but by the “international” Central Bank, which is a branch of the Federal Reserve System.
    What symbols are on a piece of paper is not so important, especially since cash is increasingly becoming a rudiment. More important is who controls the printing press.
  9. +1
    23 May 2024 08: 38
    Quote: Stas157
    Stalin was a wise man. If only the oligarchs and officials could change their money like this now!


    Holy simplicity! These gentlemen rarely use rubles.
  10. 0
    23 May 2024 08: 43
    Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
    Stalin made his decisions under the conditions of socialism or early socialism; we live in a different economic formation.


    Stalin made his first decisions during the NEP. That era had a lot in common with the current one, by the way.
    The point, strictly speaking, is not a matter of conditions, but of resources and sufficient support for political forces. Stalin had someone to rely on; United Russia and the “vertical of power” can hardly be considered a reliable support (in some issues, the solution of which such a “support” may not be beneficial).
  11. +2
    23 May 2024 09: 00
    But the ordinary worker and employee living on his salary, who by the middle of the month no longer had much money left, suffered only nominally.

    What about unusual? Among those who were able to buy a tank or an airplane during the war? How did they get hurt?
  12. +2
    23 May 2024 09: 06
    Quote: Illanatol
    Quote: Eduard Vaschenko
    Stalin made his decisions under the conditions of socialism or early socialism; we live in a different economic formation.


    Stalin made his first decisions during the NEP. That era had a lot in common with the current one, by the way.
    The point, strictly speaking, is not a matter of conditions, but of resources and sufficient support for political forces. Stalin had someone to rely on; United Russia and the “vertical of power” can hardly be considered a reliable support (in some issues, the solution of which such a “support” may not be beneficial).

    You can lean on the points, why not support?
  13. +3
    23 May 2024 09: 14
    In Russia, the topic of liberation from dollar dependence and the creation of a single BRICS currency is regularly raised.
    How long can this topic be raised? They raised it when the CIS was more or less functioning, they raised it when the EAEU, but it didn’t go beyond the name “Altyn,” and the BRICS countries in different economic weight categories. But it’s not harmful to dream.
  14. +4
    23 May 2024 09: 59
    Compare our current non-state with the country that was created by true communists led by I.V. Stalin makes no sense. The goals that the government of J.V. Stalin set and fulfilled and the goals that the current government is fulfilling are practically opposite.
  15. +2
    23 May 2024 12: 19
    Good and necessary article. I also read somewhere on the Internet that Stalin industrialized the country largely thanks to barter, which everyone has now forgotten. Moreover, almost all major corporations in the United States and the West worked with the USSR. The USSR began cooperation with one corporation, it saw significant benefits for itself and then the rest of the “partners” came along. And it was done very simply. Do you want Russian raw materials, we have a lot of them: coal, oil, ores, etc., the price on the market is, say, $100? we will supply you with delivery to the border in Poland for 70, BUT you do the following to us for this: you supply equipment, transfer design and technical documentation and train Soviet engineers in high-tech work with this equipment. Now, at least before the sanctions, our scheme was this: we give them raw materials for dollars, and then we also withdraw this currency from the country. Feel, as they say, the difference between state building and colonial policy.
  16. +1
    23 May 2024 12: 44
    "after the death of Stalin..." He died.
  17. +3
    23 May 2024 13: 15
    Hard rubles are primarily needed for state planning, national projects, foreign trade, etc., and for this, the main bank should not be on its own, but be part of the Ministry of Finance.
    War costs money, and therefore the money supply always increases during a war and is compensated. In case of victory, expenses incurred are covered by material acquisitions.
    Monetary reforms are aimed at balancing the money supply, shadow circulation and speculation.
    All world banknotes are in one way or another tied to the leading world currency - the dollar, and therefore in market conditions cannot be independent and are subject to external influence. Therefore, government regulation of the Renminbi exchange rate gives the United States grounds to accuse China of currency manipulation.
    After Yeltsin’s coup d’etat in the Russian Federation, a course was proclaimed towards building capitalist “democracy” and “market” relations, which implied the independence of the main bank, which is tantamount to voluntary consent to semi-colonial dependence. The rupee cost 30 pieces for 1 US banknote, then 60, today about 100, and tomorrow? This is despite the fact that the economic bloc is pleased with the growth of GDP and the purchasing power of wood, and capitalists constantly complain about tariff regulation, a clear example of which is the price of fuel, especially during the sowing and harvesting period, feed and almost all goods without exception. This creates scissors and gives rise to inflation, which the main bank fights by targeting, increasing the exchange rate, and increasing loans.
    In such conditions, a common market for goods, services and investments within the CIS, Eurasian Economic Union, Brix and even a union entity with Belarus can only be imagined.
    Bilateral or multilateral agreements on customs, price, credit and commodity issues will always be of a formal nature without government regulation, i.e. refusal of market-speculative relations and peg to the dollar.
    The practical benefit of CMEA is primarily in the creation of a single currency, the so-called. transferable ruble for external(!) payments, which did not infringe on national-patriotic and economic interests, did not eliminate the national banknotes of the participating countries, but at the same time put a barrier to the influence of the dollar, and in today's realities such a forus from the area of ​​the obvious-incredible even taking into account the transition to digital banknotes.
  18. -2
    23 May 2024 16: 31
    The corn grower has crap everywhere, in 10 years he has managed to destroy the firewood. Well done to the Politburo members, still young then, in 1964, for defeating this evil spirit. But then they fell asleep. No, of course there were Kosygin, Mazurov, and Lenya himself before his illness, but it wasn’t enough...
    1. +5
      24 May 2024 00: 39
      Quote: Glagol1
      The corn grower has crap everywhere, in 10 years he has managed to destroy the firewood.

      Under Khrushchev, fellow citizens stopped starving en masse; serfdom, introduced by Stalin under the guise of collective farms, was de facto abolished (de jure serfdom for peasants was abolished under Brezhnev and they were allowed to obtain passports). They stopped repressing people for studying the laws of genetics, cybernetics, and resonance theory. They stopped repressing outstanding scientists and designers. Such “worst enemies of the people and saboteurs” as Myasishchev, Korolev, Glushko, Petlyakov, Tupolev, Polikarpov, and “foreign spies” Rokossovsky and Meretskov were acquitted. Security service employees lost the opportunity to repress those they disliked and to appropriate the belongings of those executed or repressed through “random stores.” Probably it is the latter, in your understanding, that is the most important firewood broken by Khrushchev.
      1. -1
        26 May 2024 18: 14
        The monument to Nikita - the "Traveler" ("Kukuruznik") on Novodevichy contains, in fact, two colors - black and white. Looking at it, everyone personally notices the predominance of one of them. I personally notice the predominance of the first, although it is impossible not to notice the second. lol
        1. -1
          26 May 2024 19: 32
          Quote: Frank Muller
          two colors - black and white. Looking at it, everyone personally notices the predominance of one of them.

          Why are you afraid to honestly say that part of the country considers Khrushchev to be bad for carrying out half-hearted de-Stalinization, which led to his resignation, while the other part of the country accuses him of de-Stalinization. But for some reason, Stalin’s apologists forget that all the heads of the NKVD and MGB turned out to be foreign spies and enemies of the people. At the end of the Stalin era, the organs of the MGB and Stalin himself were actually controlled by Allen Dulles, who during Operation Split indicated to Stalin, Beria and Mehlis who they should repress. After the overthrow of Khrushchev, the CIA organized the arrest of Sinyavsky and this provoked a split between the authorities and the intelligentsia, which led 25 years later to the complete collapse of communism and society in the USSR.
  19. +4
    23 May 2024 17: 35
    I read and think “Samsonov”, I read further “Exactly Samsonov” and in the end, yes - Samsonov.
    Thoughts, as always, are correct, but conclusions and romanticization not only spoil much, but distort it.
    For the average person, the Stalinist USSR is a low-tech autarky. The average person got a minimum of foreign goods on his table; the average person existed in conditions of scarcity and, I would say, “need,” consumption was quite weak, there was no overconsumption at all.
    Of course, in view of this, the USSR was minimally tied to the dollar - because it was interested in the dollar (like pounds, like francs) only insofar as it bought some technologies, assembly lines, machines for it and paid salaries to foreign specialists. For the average person, there was an autarchic circuit - where he consumed only what was produced within the country and, moreover, for the most part not even on equipment purchased abroad. Because such equipment mostly worked for the military-industrial complex. Considering the great depression in the USA and their much more light-hearted views on the sale of technology lines, the USSR really needed the minimum to pull up its heavy industry, since both France and Germany were ready to help it much more than in some 1960s. As, in fact, the fact that technology was still at such a level that good machines could be bought from many developed state capitals - the United States had not yet gone into the severe technological gap from them that it would after BB2.
    After the Civil War, Soviet society did not show off, and even during the war, people often had a very good time. there was a limited range of clothing, there were no household appliances, food and leisure consumption was at a minimum compared to today's levels. So many of the successes described by Mr. Samsonov in the article are not so much the successes of Stalin’s economic course, but rather the successes of poor peasant autarky in principle.
    If, for example, they started selling machines to Joseph Vissarionovich at a higher price, he would simply chuckle in his mustache and burden the Gulag members or collective farmers with this, this would have a minimal impact on the well-being of citizens.

    Another thing is how it went further - namely, the demands of society, scientists, filmmakers, artists began to increase - it was necessary to purchase various consumer goods or equipment for their production, progress after BB2 began to skip, and the USSR, catching up with it, slid ever more firmly down the hook of international capitalism. This is where the fairy tale ends!
  20. +4
    23 May 2024 19: 12
    Funny nonsense - what kind of liberation is this if citizens within the country were prohibited from using foreign money? - and this course continued to exist in foreign trade, etc. nothing changed tongue
    1. -1
      23 May 2024 21: 54
      Then the state declared the guaranteed purchasing power of the ruble, and the ruble was equal to a certain amount of goods, but the state is not obliged to guarantee the purchasing power of someone else's currency, so citizens were forbidden to use it (the mass of goods was limited) simple logic.
      1. +1
        23 May 2024 22: 31
        Do you see the meaning in what is written?
  21. 0
    24 May 2024 07: 23
    At the same time, the government abolished the card system (before other victorious states)

    In other countries, however, from 1947 thousand to 800 million people did not die of starvation in 1,5 due to cannibalism and corpse-eating), as in the USSR.

    And the card system did not apply to more than half of the country’s population - the peasantry, who survived and ate as best they could and no one cared.
    1. -2
      24 May 2024 16: 36
      Quote: Bone1
      Do you see the meaning in what is written?

      In those years, they tried to ensure that the money supply corresponded to the commodity supply, just like the number of grain cards corresponds to the amount of bread in the warehouse of a besieged city, so if, for example, someone buys cards from a foreign city, it means that someone from their own will not have enough
  22. -2
    24 May 2024 20: 54
    Reading these words, you understand how strong a power there was, which did not listen to anyone, but itself put forward proposals to which other countries listened.
    "The Soviet delegation proposed at the first stage to conclude bilateral or multilateral agreements on customs, price, credit and commodity issues"
  23. -1
    26 May 2024 17: 59
    And after this, how can one not believe in the once (though rather timidly) version of a specially organized action to organize the death of Joseph - “The Merciless”? Even under the guise of an apocalyptic blow! Yes