Military Review

Defense spending seriously overload the Russian budget

130
According to Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev, the Russian budget is already “pre-crisis”. By 2014, according to forecasts of the Ministry of Finance, the budget deficit will only grow. As a result, by the year 2015, to achieve a deficit-free budget execution, as the president of the country wanted, is unlikely to succeed. The main reason for all the small growth rate of the Russian economy. In this situation, the Minister of Finance of Russia once again offered to encroach on what his predecessor Alexei Kudrin had resigned in due time.


The very next day after the resignation of Alexei Kudrin, then-Russian President Dmitry Medvedev confirmed that in the near future the country's military spending will continue to grow. It was the disagreements on this point that at one time caused the public confrontation of the minister and the president. The president then suggested that all those who disagree with defense spending then seek other work. According to Kudrin, the planned military spending at the level of 20 trillion. rubles in the next 10 years will be an unbearable burden for the Russian budget.

At the same time, experts now and then believe that such high spending on defense is possible only by reducing other items of expenditure. So Elena Penukhina, an expert at the Center for Macroeconomic Analysis and Short-term Forecasting, believes that the growth of military spending is possible due to the reduction of government social programs and largely depends on the external economic situation. In the event that the cost of a barrel of oil drops below the 100 dollars, the increase in military spending will face serious problems.

Defense spending seriously overload the Russian budget

Later, after Putin publicly announced his election promises, Kudrin again noted that their fulfillment would be possible only if spending on national security and defense, as well as subsidies to industry, were reduced in Russia. This point of view was expressed by the ex-Minister of Finance at the conference, which was held at the National Research University Higher School of Economics. Kudrin noted that Russia needs to reduce defense spending by 0,5%, by national security by 0,4%, and by subsidies to industry by 2,8%. In his opinion, this would allow raising budget expenditures on such areas as road construction - by 1,6%, education - 1,3% and health care - 1%.

The most interesting thing is that in the 2012 year, and now the Ministry of Finance actually agrees with the position of the dismissed minister. According to Finance Minister Anton Siluanov, the Russian budget does not cope with defense spending. The Ministry of Finance has already asked the Ministry of Defense that part of the expenditures on the country's military-industrial complex be shifted to the 2-4 of the year. In this case, the decision on this issue will be made depending on the opinion of the military. Today, huge sums of money are being spent on the country's defense capability, unfortunately, today it is a fact from which we can not escape, said Anton Siluanov.

The reasons for the change in the Russian rearmament program were explained by Ivan Konovalov, director of the Center for Strategic Conjuncture. According to him, many contracts, especially multi-billion dollars, were concluded in a hurry. Something was not fully thought out. At the same time, a large number of contractors are involved in the execution of these contracts, not counting the lead contractors. Time has shown that a number of military contracts need to be shifted in time, some contracts need to be recalculated. Although, on the other hand, few people believe in it now. At the same time, we should not forget that the government, the Ministry of Defense, the Ministry of Finance, and the country's armed forces have national security as the most important budget item, but this is just one of its items. At the same time, it has recently come out that it is this article that takes the most budget funds.


According to the chief editor of the National Defense magazine Igor Korotchenko, the reaction of the military department to the proposals of the Ministry of Finance will be generally quite negative. As where it is advised to shift the development or serial production of one or another weapon system to the 2-4 of the year, translated into Russian realities, we can speak of 5-6 or more years of delay. Today it is critically important to fully ensure the implementation of military programs, since in the 90-e and 2000-ies the financing of the armed forces was carried out, unfortunately, at the minimum level. Today, Russia is becoming a hostage to this, the state must pay its debts to the Armed Forces. Without rhythmic financing of the military-industrial complex, without modern weapons We will not be able to ensure Russia's security at a high enough level.

Deficit threatens Russian budget

The Russian Ministry of Finance lowered its forecast for the budget deficit for 2013 of the year - it was previously planned at the level of 0,8% of GDP, now it is now expected to be at the level of 0,6% of GDP. The deficit was reduced due to the fact that budget revenues increased by 129,5 billion rubles, while expenditure remained unchanged, said Finance Minister Anton Siluanov. Interestingly, literally in March 2013 of the year, the Ministry of Finance complained that the 2013 budget could lose about 500 billion rubles due to the “wrong” privatization due to bad conditions for selling shares of state-owned companies and an unexpectedly large amount of VAT refunds. But now this problem seems to have disappeared.

Next year, the budget deficit of 2014 will be at the level of 0,6% of GDP, but this is already a negative outlook, as the Ministry of Finance previously expected that in 2014 this figure could be reduced to 0,2% of GDP. However, this will not be done, since in 2014, a decrease in both oil and gas and non-oil revenues of the Russian budget is planned. The decline in revenues will be about 650 billion rubles, while maintaining at the same level of all budget expenditures, said Siluanov.


The Ministry of Finance cannot reduce budget expenditures in the event of a decrease in revenues due to the current budget rule. The main financiers of the country can only cut the so-called conditionally approved expenses, which next year will be about 350 billion rubles. According to Anton Siluanov, these funds can be reduced to ensure a balanced Russian budget.

At the same time, the growth of the budget deficit next year makes the fulfillment of Putin’s campaign promises practically impossible. Earlier, the Russian president said that by 2015, the country's budget would become deficit-free. At the same time, according to the forecasts of the Ministry of Finance, in 2015, the Russian budget deficit compared to 2014 in the year will even grow and will be 0,7% of GDP. The revenues of the Russian budget in comparison with the plan will decrease by 951 billion rubles, expenses will be reduced by 400 billion rubles due to the part of conditionally approved expenses, said Anton Siluanov. In 2016, the Ministry of Finance also forecasts the execution of the country's main financial document with a deficit - at the level of 0,6% of GDP. However, Anton Siluanov noted that the figures announced so far are a preliminary forecast.

However, apparently, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev shares the pessimistic forecasts of the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Economic Development of Russia. So he acknowledged that the Russian budget, in fact, is pre-crisis. For this reason, financing of some regional projects may be stopped soon. First of all, we are talking about investment projects, for which private investors were involved. Currently, some governors have already appealed to the federal center for help with these projects, but in some cases the government’s obligations to private investors to co-finance projects will be suspended due to the “difficult” Russian budget, the prime minister said. At the same time, Dmitry Medvedev does not exclude that such actions may entail recourse to the court, but nothing can be done about it.


In turn, the Ministry of Finance, in order to improve the situation of the Russian budget, appealed to the military with a request to postpone part of the expenditure on the state armaments program to 2-4. It was done quite gently. “At present, we are considering the possibility of transferring a part of expenses from the Ministry of Defense. If there is such an opportunity, it’s good; if not, it means no, ”noted Anton Siluanov. The lack of pressure is easily explained. First, still quite fresh. история about how Alexei Kudrin lost his post because of disagreements on the growth of defense spending. Secondly, the current budget rule interferes. Recall that in 2010, it was announced that before the 2020, Russia is going to spend on the development of the army and the acquisition of new types of weapons about 20 trillion. rubles.

However, as early as in 2012, the Russian government began discussing the possibility of transferring approximately 20% of expenditures under the state armaments program over the 2013, 2014 and 2015 years to a later date. Then, Anton Siluanov, instead of part of the budget, suggested that the military use bank loans against state guarantees, as well as interest rate subsidies. In turn, the current Minister of Defense of Russia, Sergei Shoigu, according to unofficial information, back in March 2013, ordered the commanders of the families and types of troops before April 1 to prepare their proposals for reducing expenditure items.

Alexander Konovalov, President of the Institute for Strategic Assessments, believes that Russia still lives under the Soviet slogan “You can’t save on defense,” but this is wrong, you can and should save on it, then that if you invest most of the money in the military-industrial complex, the economy will succeed destroy much more successfully and faster than a likely opponent of our country would have done. In today's defense spending in Russia there is a significant social component (for example, the construction of housing for military personnel), but the defense order in the amount of 20 trillion. rubles - this is a huge number, which at one time hit even Putin. According to Konovalov, Medvedev, when he was president, treated the military-industrial complex as if it were a soda machine: how many coins you throw at him, how many cans he will give you. In fact, the Russian defense industry may simply not digest such a huge budget.


Konovalov believes that any modern army requires the development of human capital - without a good education, normal health care (think of the number of young men who are annually declared unfit for service), it cannot be built. The defense industrial complex is no longer considered as an incentive for the development of the economy. The effect when investment in the defense industry gives impetus to the development of civilian sectors works differently in all developed countries of the world: there the defense industry, which needs new technological developments in a number of specialized areas, uses R & D achievements of a much more developed and wider civil sector of the economy.

The Russian MIC, first, requires prioritization (do we need to get everything at the same time by 2020, do we need costly projects such as the Mistral), secondly, it is worthwhile to carry out a procurement reform in the MIC and go to the system of subcontracts market mechanisms. In addition, it is necessary to solve the problem of corruption, to work on the development of a contract army, in order for modern weapons systems to be managed by professionals, it is necessary to carry out systemic reforms that are not limited to simple infusions of trillions of budget funds.

Information sources:
-http: //www.vz.ru/economy/2013/5/22/633818.html
-http: //www.bfm.ru/news/216993? doctype = article
-http: //renta99.ru/smi/econnews/kydrin-hochet-sokratit-rashody-na-oborony
-http: //slon.ru/russia/kak_reshit_spor_kudrina_i_medvedeva-688189.xhtml
Author:
130 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. olviko
    olviko 27 May 2013 07: 15 New
    50
    He who does not want to feed his army will feed a stranger.
    1. Romn
      Romn 27 May 2013 08: 03 New
      13
      Kudrin is an economist, he sees possible only expenditures in those areas from which income will then be. The army was, is and will be the most important point of expenditure of each country! Never cut back!
      1. King
        King 27 May 2013 08: 21 New
        16
        Kudrin is not an economist but a financier. This is his misfortune. But we need to invest in the defense industry, investing in the defense industry we invest in science, we are fighting unemployment, we are developing mechanical engineering, and so on. There will be a deficiency and a little pillow can be torn apart. It is hard to believe that when they thought about the modernization of the armed forces, the government did not calculate all the risks, considering the crisis, an obscurity.
        1. Atrix
          Atrix 27 May 2013 10: 57 New
          +6
          Quote: King
          But we must invest in the defense industry, investing in the defense industry we invest in science, we are fighting unemployment, we are developing mechanical engineering, etc.

          Well, with something I agree. But the minister also says the right thing. What you need to first invest in healthcare and education. A healthy population is a higher level of labor, live longer and work more. Education is the same scientists who will create the sword and shield of the country. These are upscale factory workers. But if you don’t keep all this and just push the billions into the defense industry, and it turns out that Mistral cannot create and buy it abroad, we can’t create your own UAV and buy them abroad, we build ships that were previously built in a year and a half for 6-8 years . And remember the USSR, which also poured billions uncontrollably when the general told me 2 atomic submarines, for example, 2 submarines were built for him. First of all, it is necessary to develop the social sphere and raise the level of labor and develop science by leaps and bounds. And then everything will be and the money for defense and development will be advanced.
          This is my personal opinion.
          1. Blackgrifon
            Blackgrifon 27 May 2013 21: 48 New
            +1
            By the way, Atrix, money is going into health care and the social sphere - I can say this because I work in this field - only under the Health Care Modernization program my region received several billion, for which a lot of equipment was purchased for hospitals. And in the social sphere (I don’t know how in other regions), but with us veterans buy apartments for federal money and give them out. Only another problem surfaced: a veteran, recognized as needing housing, after receiving an apartment continues to live in an old hut, and his children live in a new apartment in the city.

            "Yes, and remember the USSR, which also poured billions uncontrollably when the general told me 2 atomic submarines, for example, 2 submarines were built for him." in the US, the military-industrial complex is the main tug of the entire economy. Our problem is that we produce little dual-use products, we use little of the innovative solutions that are invented for the army in the civilian industry.
            1. smart ass
              smart ass 28 May 2013 08: 24 New
              +1
              "" Only another problem surfaced: a veteran who is recognized as needing housing continues to live in the old hut after receiving an apartment, and his children live in a new apartment in the city. "" - what is the problem ??? A person has earned, has the right to do their property is anything.
              1. Blackgrifon
                Blackgrifon 28 May 2013 20: 52 New
                0
                "A person deserves, has the right to do anything with his property." - no one argues with this - the institute of private property has not been canceled, fortunately - BUT when a veteran lives in a dilapidated shack, and relatives in his good apartment are not an improvement in living conditions.
            2. Black Colonel
              Black Colonel 28 May 2013 16: 20 New
              +1
              And on that lot of equipment that was purchased for hospitals, there are those who can work professionally?
              1. Blackgrifon
                Blackgrifon 28 May 2013 20: 55 New
                0
                "And on that lot of equipment that was purchased for hospitals, there are those who can work professionally?" - there is. The region constantly concludes targeted training agreements with applicants and leading medical universities of the country - the applicant has better conditions for entering a university, the scholarship is increased (we have 4, 5 and 6 courses) and higher than 1 million rubles for employment.
        2. Fin
          Fin 27 May 2013 15: 03 New
          +5
          Quote: King
          Kudrin is not an economist but a financier. This is his misfortune.

          He is neither one nor the other; he is a long-sold liberalist. It is not necessary to scrub loot and invest it in the West of the mind. If Stepashin had been launched into the Central Bank, then Kudrin could have been shot. Before he could completely ruin the army, Uncle Vova suddenly came to his senses. And here again, the Anglo-Saxons demand credit for the best prime minister, so he threw a trial ball through Siluanov.
          He himself built this raw material economy, and now he is pretending to be innocent.
          If you stop rearmament now (move, extend, etc.) then
          it will be late to become Lower Volta with missiles.
        3. Blackgrifon
          Blackgrifon 27 May 2013 21: 42 New
          0
          Judging by his activities, Kudrin is not a financier, but a saboteur. They didn’t arm the army for almost 20 years, they almost lost the Caucasus, where the war is still going on, and on you - and let's not rearm anything ...
          1. chunga-changa
            chunga-changa 27 May 2013 22: 20 New
            +1
            Kudrin is not a saboteur, Kudrin is a traitor.
            1. Blackgrifon
              Blackgrifon 28 May 2013 20: 56 New
              0
              "Kudrin is not a saboteur, Kudrin is a traitor." - given his activities - he is really more a traitor, but the fact of working in another country, unfortunately, has not yet been officially proved :(
        4. Black Colonel
          Black Colonel 28 May 2013 16: 16 New
          0
          It is possible that they counted and voiced what the president wanted to hear. Kudrin’s example is quite fresh.
      2. Andryha_2010
        Andryha_2010 27 May 2013 08: 54 New
        +7
        Kudrin is an accountant!
        1. Nitup
          Nitup 27 May 2013 11: 00 New
          13
          Kudrin is a good specialist. That's just he cares for the interests of another country. And in the current government, it seems, everyone is considered fools. According to the budget rule, 10% of our budget goes to the purchase of US government bonds, i.e., directly to the US budget. And these ministers with a serious look are repeating to us about the burdensome defense order.
          1. ATATA
            ATATA 27 May 2013 11: 09 New
            +1
            Quote: Nitup
            And these s.uki with a serious look tell us about a burdensome defense order.

            Your words, to God’s ears.
          2. Misantrop
            Misantrop 27 May 2013 11: 23 New
            +2
            Quote: Nitup
            According to the budget rule, 10% of our budget goes to the purchase of US government bonds, i.e., directly to the US budget.

            Surely no less is spent on financing the deputy corps. And you can’t attribute them to the poorest segments of the population.
        2. Rakti-kali
          Rakti-kali 27 May 2013 11: 02 New
          +1
          Quote: Andryha_2010
          Kudrin is an accountant!

          And why was it to insult accountants?
      3. skeptic
        skeptic 27 May 2013 10: 23 New
        +5
        Quote: Romn
        Moreover, experts then and now believe that such high defense spending is possible only by reducing other items of expenditure.


        Such as corruption, theft, kickbacks. You look at the new weapons enough, without attracting additional funds. what
        1. skeptic
          skeptic 27 May 2013 10: 29 New
          0
          I apologize for the erroneous insert Quote: Romn
        2. Nitup
          Nitup 27 May 2013 11: 02 New
          +5
          The number of officials, in a good way, needs to be reduced by a factor of 5 at least. And then, probably, there will be enough money both for the social network and for the defense industry and will remain.
          1. Strezhevchanin
            Strezhevchanin 27 May 2013 19: 02 New
            +2
            Quote: Nitup
            The number of officials, in a good way, needs to be reduced by at least 5 times

            Well, at least. You need to understand that it is not the program that is burdensome, but the number of officials that has become extremely burdensome, and not only in this case, but in general for the country! hi
          2. Blackgrifon
            Blackgrifon 27 May 2013 21: 53 New
            0
            "The number of officials, in a good way, needs to be reduced by a minimum of 5 times. And then, probably, there will be enough money both for the social network and for the defense industry and will remain."
            An old song about the main thing :) and let’s shoot everyone, we’ll take everything and share it :) have you ever been in the offices of the bailiffs or in the departments of specialized bodies? When 4-6 people have several thousand documents a year? Well, even if it is necessary, what to cut back — these are the apparatuses of the central federal ministries and half of the controlling bodies — they duplicate each other anyway.
            1. Anat1974
              Anat1974 27 May 2013 22: 44 New
              +3
              I agree, I quit the bailiff service 4 years ago, having worked there for more than 5 years. Anyone who thinks thinks that they are free there with Velkom in the FSSP. In general (I understand that this topic is not popular to put it mildly), officials work no less than the others, and possibly more. And the bureaucracy, when solving various issues, bothers officials no less than the others, and we also stand in line at the polyclinic, and strangely enough, utility bills are the same as everyone else's, and salaries (this is bad luck) are not so high, at least I replace present top position mun. services do not reach the mid-regional level. And who thinks that the bribe taker, so I will leave you an address. Come see people ask around. This cliche is already fed up.
              For the sake of interest, I raised the case of registering those who need improvement in their veins. conditions for 1987, there are 3 references in the file and he is in line. Now about 20 certificates. (and they say there was a bureaucracy in the USSR) Do you think that the official is blissed out, chasing people for information?
              And it’s impossible to cut back on the defense budget, it is necessary to take an inventory of contracts, check cost estimates and collect penalties from enterprises if the deadlines are delayed. And everything will be openwork.
              Official.
      4. Airman
        Airman 27 May 2013 11: 55 New
        +2
        Quote: Romn
        Kudrin is an economist, he sees possible only expenditures in those areas from which income will then be. The army was, is and will be the most important point of expenditure of each country! Never cut back!


        You can’t reduce costs, but you also don’t need to swell recklessly, they’ll steal. You need to proceed from the realities: 28 out of 4 aircraft factories work, and if Sukhoi can make 50 cars a year, you can pay for 100, but in the end get 50. And money for the remaining 50 are stolen, as has already been done more than once. Therefore, an integrated approach is needed: restoring industry to the modern level and, as a result, increasing the supply of equipment to the armed forces.
      5. Geisenberg
        Geisenberg 27 May 2013 15: 49 New
        -1
        Quote: Romn
        Kudrin is an economist,


        A man who opposes strengthening his country's defense is, to put it mildly, a traitor, and only then an economist. In this case, a normal official should say: yes, the problem is very complicated, but we will try to solve it, and this snitch claims that the budget will not manage ...
      6. smart ass
        smart ass 28 May 2013 08: 22 New
        0
        Licking navel budget unbundled
    2. Grey74
      Grey74 27 May 2013 09: 38 New
      +1
      Definitely !!! and to bureaucrats a question - didn’t try to steal less? maybe there will be no budget deficit.
      1. Blackgrifon
        Blackgrifon 27 May 2013 21: 54 New
        0
        "Definitely !!! but to the bureaucrats the question, didn’t try to steal less? Maybe there will be no budget deficit." Tired of writing on this topic - do not row all the civil servants with one comb.
    3. aksakal
      aksakal 27 May 2013 11: 25 New
      +5
      Quote: olviko
      He who does not want to feed his army will feed a stranger.
      - exactly! Pay attention to what arguments lead here:
      The military-industrial complex is no longer worth considering as an incentive for the development of the economy. The effect, when investments in the defense industry complex give impetus to the development of civilian sectors, works differently in all developed countries of the world: there the defense industry complex, which needs new technological developments in a number of narrowly specialized areas, takes advantage of the research and development of a much more developed and wider civilian economy.
      - Konovalov better go knocking down horses - he’s better at it wassat In all developed countries, the defense industry may be working in this way, but in the post-Soviet countries there isn’t this very “much more developed and wider sector of the economy”. The screwdriver assembly of cars, computers, radio electronics and other things DO NOT BE CONSIDERED BY YOUR OWN PRODUCTION, nor even by any developed "civilian sector", the Russian military-industrial complex can in any case rely on this !!! Yes, even if it were possible - they give the screwdriver assembly the technology of the day before tomorrow (not even yesterday!)! These Konovalovs really undercut the defenses stronger than the enemy - some thread Serdyukov will listen to and break the firewood. The main thing is that Serdyukov may sit down, but the Konovalovs will never sit down, although their direct fault is to pull those by the tongue! am
      It’s time for them, Konovalov, to remember that in Russia in the next 15–20 years only the defense industry will be the locomotive of scientific and technological modernization, because there are no more sectors of the economy in which there is the necessary concentration with respect to advanced developments and technologies, highly qualified personnel, and many years of experience needed resources and generally just good traditions.
    4. Phantom Revolution
      Phantom Revolution 27 May 2013 11: 59 New
      +3
      Here it is more correct to say so, not "Defense spending seriously overload the budget of Russia", but officials and thieves overload the budget.
      1. Blackgrifon
        Blackgrifon 27 May 2013 21: 54 New
        +1
        The budget is overwhelmed by loafers and fools.
    5. Joker
      Joker 27 May 2013 16: 06 New
      +3
      It was necessary not to click and nationalize the Central Bank, squeeze all bankers and lower interest rates on loans, and this question would not arise, our economy generally does not count, some kind of miserable 4% of China, with their volume growing by as much as 10%. What can we talk about if we have the most terrible conditions for doing business compared to Europe, the United States and China. We seem to have both capitalism and socialism, it is not clear that in short, on the one hand they say they are developing private business, and on the other they are building wild obstacles in this. over the years of Putinism 13, we don’t have any clear development plans at all, only they talk a lot and there are no works at all.
    6. reichsmarshal
      reichsmarshal 27 May 2013 22: 03 New
      +1
      After Iraq and Libya, I realized that this was a false truth. More precisely, the substitution of concepts. It will be right this way: a state that does not provoke the people’s desire to feed their army will lead the country to ensure that the people feed a stranger.
      1. Blackgrifon
        Blackgrifon 28 May 2013 20: 59 New
        0
        "After Iraq and Libya, I realized that this is a false truth. More precisely, a substitution of concepts. It will be correct this way: a state that does not provoke the people’s desire to feed their army will lead the country to feed a stranger." - when there is no idea that unites the people, the country is vulnerable.
    7. Krilion
      Krilion 28 May 2013 05: 04 New
      0
      Quote: olviko
      He who does not want to feed his army will feed a stranger.



      this is not the point .... the Russian budget is not overloaded with defense spending, but with its total plunder ...
    8. Alekseev
      Alekseev 28 May 2013 21: 11 New
      0
      [quote = olviko] Who does not want to feed his army - will feed someone else's.
      Absolutely correct!
      But, I would like for the proverb not to be relevant in relation to our army: "not horse feed".
      In particular, monetary allowance for officers, sergeants and contract soldiers was seriously raised.
      But do they all correspond in moral (spiritual) and professional qualities?
      The facts of the outrages in the troops say no. Personnel work is weak.
      On the other hand, were commanders given, along with a high salary, the authority to restore order?
      No. The army is now "more free" than in the civilian world.
      Give a man at least a million, but if he is not capable, or does not have the necessary and real powers, he will not complete the task.
      Contracts for the purchase of weapons and military equipment separate song, just mention Mistral and Lynx.
      The status of the defender of the Motherland did not undergo any special changes.
      A shameful decreasing coefficient of 0,54 when calculating a pension, by the way not applicable either to prosecutors, judges, investigators, or civil servants. employees, does not ambiguously show the real attitude towards the military: served, man, you have waste material.
      This undermines the spirit of the army. It turns into a place where you can and should not serve, but earn extra money, as in some trading company.
      And if he “flies”, then on x .., on x ..., such an organization. wassat
      So you also need to be able to spend money, and then, with our leaders, it’s quite possible to spend money, and to remain without a real army.
    9. Siberian German
      Siberian German 30 May 2013 04: 21 New
      0
      you are sure that we are feeding our army and not the army of embezzlers - after all, there was information that the order had to be paid up to 100 percent of its price
  2. family
    family tree 27 May 2013 07: 42 New
    +9
    Moreover, experts then and now believe that such high defense spending is possible only by reducing other items of expenditure.
    But didn’t you try to control spending on time and immediately react, instead of looking for extreme ones, after stealing funds? what
    1. xetai9977
      xetai9977 27 May 2013 07: 57 New
      12
      You need to steal less.
      1. Tektor
        Tektor 27 May 2013 11: 11 New
        +3
        The point is not only theft: Kudrin acted as Captain Evidence. It was possible to cope with the planned defense spending only by making non-trivial transformations in economic policy. When it became obvious that no changes were planned, everything again became “as always”. It is necessary to radically increase the profitability of a producing economy, and monopolists and intermediaries must be greatly trimmed. Monopolists, such as energy, housing and communal services companies and other rentiers (living off inefficient services), suck the juices out of the producing forces. Business must realize that for him Russia is a country of opportunity. And unfortunately, nothing will happen immediately, as soon as the correct laws are passed: years must pass, if not push kicks ...
        There are “directions of the main blow” in the economy, for example, agriculture, and if you conduct the right policy there, you can dramatically and quickly (within a year) increase your profitability by several times if you develop the right infrastructure for this business with export in mind: this is a “recipe” "states" how to become an influential power. "
        1. Tektor
          Tektor 27 May 2013 11: 54 New
          0
          Yes, of course, the Russian military-industrial complex has a “knight's move”: to compensate for the gap in budget opportunities and plans for financing the rearmament program through export supplies. Today the turnover is about 500 yards: the profit that can be used is only part of this amount. And the budget is over 2000 yards. And while disparate values, but it is possible to finance on credit for future export contracts.
        2. Blackgrifon
          Blackgrifon 27 May 2013 21: 57 New
          0
          I absolutely agree with you - if in our country 2-4 Gazprom might be, gas would cost less.
          Who remembers how a couple of years ago the FAS blamed the oil industry for conspiracy, even sued him, and the result - as gas prices went up, is getting more expensive.
  3. sigizmund472
    sigizmund472 27 May 2013 07: 50 New
    +9
    Defense spending is seriously overloading ... and hereinafter. But the cancellation of debts, just like that, for beautiful eyes or for false promises, here they in no way hit the budget. Nonsense. Theft by billions is normal and there are no culprits, but the cost of the army hits the budget. Most likely, some grudges gnaw that it’s difficult to run a paw there, so they remembered the budget ...
    1. 0251
      0251 27 May 2013 10: 19 New
      0
      I totally agree. It is impossible to reduce the budget of the Army. The situation in the world is not one to maneuver with the budget of the Russian Armed Forces. It is necessary to demand settlements from the countries of debtors, to fight cruelly with corruption, to make the Army for the most part a contract, and to increase the remaining military service to 1,5 years.
      1. Blackgrifon
        Blackgrifon 27 May 2013 21: 59 New
        0
        “For the most part, make the army a contract” contract army is doomed to defeat. Not a single contract army was able to win a war with EQUAL or more powerful enemies. The contractual basis should be - officers, warrant officers, warrant officers, sergeants, but the soldiers should be mainly conscripts.
    2. Airman
      Airman 27 May 2013 12: 33 New
      +1
      Quote: sigizmund472
      Defense spending is seriously overloading ... and hereinafter. But the cancellation of debts, just like that, for beautiful eyes or for false promises, here they in no way hit the budget. Nonsense. Theft by billions is normal and there are no culprits, but the cost of the army hits the budget. Most likely, some grudges gnaw that it’s difficult to run a paw there, so they remembered the budget ...


      But these debts could not be repaid anyway, so they made a beautiful gesture to save face.
  4. tttttt
    tttttt 27 May 2013 07: 55 New
    +5
    You need to clean the parasites, then there will be enough money. One of the main signs of an empire’s superpower is its army. The army must be the best.
  5. UFO
    UFO 27 May 2013 08: 02 New
    +3
    Although the State Corporations would have withdrawn from offshore and the budget would immediately "recover", not to mention the reduction in the army of officials and other parasites like deputies, we can also arm the same army. yes
  6. Horn
    Horn 27 May 2013 08: 32 New
    10
    The recipe for cost reduction is simple:
    - Shoot thieves (all, not just budget ones), and not feed them in zones;
    - Overclock the main engine;
    - Return to the ownership of the state energy, the resource industry, enterprises of the defense industry, metallurgy, etc .;
    - Be sure to hang Gorbachev and Chubais. Everything else can be postponed, but this is a MANDATORY!
    1. hiocraib
      hiocraib 27 May 2013 10: 26 New
      +1
      with an amount above 500, the suspect automatically goes into the category of witnesses ... what zones are there !?
    2. ATATA
      ATATA 27 May 2013 11: 11 New
      +3
      Quote: Horn
      - Be sure to hang Gorbachev and Chubais. Everything else can be postponed, but this is a MANDATORY!

      100500 good
  7. Dima190579
    Dima190579 27 May 2013 08: 39 New
    +1
    Oh, less would steal. And then, how Matrasikov has a large budget and a little sense.
  8. pav-pon1972
    pav-pon1972 27 May 2013 08: 55 New
    +2
    It seems to me, if you return the funds that our managers, oligarchs wrote for 10 years, then the Russian budget will be 20 years without ....
    1. Airman
      Airman 27 May 2013 11: 07 New
      +1
      Quote: pav-pon1972
      It seems to me, if you return the funds that our managers, oligarchs wrote for 10 years, then the Russian budget will be 20 years without ....


      It is unlikely that they will be able to return these funds. But it is urgent to ban the WITHDRAWAL of money from Russia abroad. And then enough for everything: defense, roads, medicine, education, pensions, etc. And for the withdrawal of money abroad -firing, so that it was not disastrous.
  9. irka_65. irina
    irka_65. irina 27 May 2013 08: 58 New
    0
    Army spending cannot be reduced. But to quietly melt the budget, so thieves-parasites from bureaucrats to raise it YES!
    1. Scoun
      Scoun 27 May 2013 10: 10 New
      +2
      To all those who disagree with defense spending, the president then proposed to start looking for another job.

      Quote: irka_65. irina
      bureaucrat thieves from bureaucrats to raise it YES!

      I completely agree! If they can’t cope with the work ... if they cannot raise the level of GDP ... if they are plundered like Agroleasing .. like Serdyukov, like the former head of KSK bilalov (now another resident of London), Medvedev / Dvorkovich must be driven into the neck with the confiscation of the property of their closest friends .. who only do what they rob and rob and grab the most important and strategic .. (for example, a strategic granary) ...
      How tired of these arrogant thieves ...... still arrogant muzzles on the box say how people are baked ... at least they put quotes when they say "people" ..
      They steal straight .......
      "Not for profit, but for current because of the obligations that bound me." (C)
  10. Argon
    Argon 27 May 2013 09: 01 New
    +3
    Yes, in general, it is possible to paint any budgets, but until the main, in the real sector of the economy, industrial production becomes, it will be a filkin letter that can be rewritten at least once a quarter, in accordance with the indicators of the oil market. that any systematic program (and defense, including) is turning into patching the holes of a grandmother’s blanket, which burned down last year for a flask. sad
  11. sevtrash
    sevtrash 27 May 2013 09: 01 New
    +2
    Theft is one side. Another - stretch your legs on clothes. The economy is primary, otherwise there will be nothing at all. Do not catch up with countries that are ahead in terms of GDP. It is necessary to choose projects without which it is really impossible, or those on which you can earn money and pay for yourself.
  12. Andryha_2010
    Andryha_2010 27 May 2013 09: 04 New
    +1
    Defense spending is one of the few areas of domestic industry where at least some means go. Yes, it is not efficient to spend money and all that ... five more years would have sat on a starvation diet and we would definitely not have such an industry.
  13. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 27 May 2013 09: 06 New
    +8
    Having recovered, we’ve been tortured already.
    What do we have there today? Budget deficit? 0,6%? uzhos-uzhos-uzhos ... If the Ministry of Finance is not lying, then for the 2013 year we have planned costs of about 11500 billion rubles. 0,6%? This, if anything, 70 billion rubles. Well, reconsider the subsidies to Skolkovo, Rusnano and the Olympics, business ... For one skolkovo in 2012, they were going to allocate 49 billion rubles. I don’t know how much they allocated, but presumably about the same amount
  14. SPIRITofFREEDOM
    SPIRITofFREEDOM 27 May 2013 09: 07 New
    +2
    They would remember the start of the defense service business, and what were the losses
    And the fact that the guilty are sitting in their 20-room penthouses and not with a term in the bullpen !!!!
    learn to fight corruption not in words but in practice !!!!!
  15. crazy_fencer
    crazy_fencer 27 May 2013 09: 11 New
    +2
    Sawing the budget and billions to export abroad is not necessary - then, look, and enough for the defense. And for everything else too. And the proposed reduction in investment in industry means only that it is beneficial for Kudrin and his owners to leave Russian industry at the level of the Middle Ages. If you do not invest in it, it will never be competitive. We will sit on an oil needle, as we did.
    1. Airman
      Airman 27 May 2013 11: 20 New
      +1
      Quote: crazy_fencer
      Sawing the budget and billions to export abroad is not necessary - then, look, and enough for the defense. And for everything else too. And the proposed reduction in investment in industry means only that it is beneficial for Kudrin and his owners to leave Russian industry at the level of the Middle Ages. If you do not invest in it, it will never be competitive. We will sit on an oil needle, as we did.

      I agree completely, without industry development, we won’t last long. And instead of factories, we are building supermarkets and shopping and entertainment centers. Have you heard the message that you have built a new steel mill or something other than factories for the assembly of imported cars?
  16. Dwarfik
    Dwarfik 27 May 2013 09: 12 New
    0
    Good Well, they started talking about the inappropriateness of defense spending, but apparently such conversations can cost their initiators too expensive.
  17. gabs
    gabs 27 May 2013 09: 17 New
    +6
    I propose reducing salaries to all officials and deputies to the average level in the region. I wonder what the savings in the country will be?
    1. evgenii67
      evgenii67 27 May 2013 09: 39 New
      +1
      Hello everyone! Theft in all areas, in every region and in almost every managerial position, is the cause of all ills.
      Quote: gabs
      I propose reducing salaries to all officials and deputies to the average level in the region. I wonder what the savings in the country will be?
      The basic salary of officials does not add up to the official salaries of officials.
    2. djon3volta
      djon3volta 27 May 2013 10: 30 New
      -4
      Quote: gabs
      I propose reducing salaries to all officials and deputies to the average level in the region. I wonder what the savings in the country will be?

      the cost of the T-90 reaches 118 million rubles. This is an example.
      Example number 1: the salary of a diplomat is approximately 150 thousand rubles multiplied by 450 diplomats = 67 million. Even if the diplomats are deprived of 100% of their salaries, there WILL NOT be enough money to build EVEN one tank !!!
      so what nonsense do you suggest.
      I understand that if Prokhorov gave 95% of his money and said that with this money build 100 T-50 planes .. here's something else you can buy for Prokhorov billions. right away.
      1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        Andrei from Chelyabinsk 27 May 2013 10: 59 New
        10
        Quote: djon3volta
        example number 1: salary of a diplomat about 150 thousand rubles

        Quote: djon3volta
        so what nonsense do you suggest.

        Well, let's take it :))))
        151 thousand - the salary of the deputy. + 35% - deductions from it to all sorts of pension and medical funds. A total of about 204 thousand comes out. But here's the thing - each deputy is allocated another 100 thousand rubles to pay for the work of the deputy’s assistants. Well, the same 35% of deductions - a total of another 135 thousand rubles, and all in all - 339 thousand rubles. per month or 4 068 thousand rubles in year. But this is not all - each deputy also has a quarterly bonus, and their size reaches 800 thousand rubles. But we (for brevity) will halve 400 thousand rubles per quarter or 1,6 million per year. Total, therefore, 5,668 million rubles. per year for one father of the people.
        But here we would recall the numerous benefits - a social package that includes free medical care, free relaxation in the best sanatoriums in the country, etc.
        Something about 6 million per year per person is already coming out ... And there are 450, for all of them 2,7 billion is already obtained ...
        But we underestimated something - the maintenance of 450 deputies costs us approximately 5,4 billion rubles. Http://moycent.ru/zarplata-chinovnikov/zarplata-deputatov-gosudarstvennoj-du
        my /
      2. Airman
        Airman 27 May 2013 11: 29 New
        +2
        Quote: djon3volta
        Quote: gabs
        I propose reducing salaries to all officials and deputies to the average level in the region. I wonder what the savings in the country will be?

        the cost of the T-90 reaches 118 million rubles. This is an example.
        Example number 1: the salary of a diplomat is approximately 150 thousand rubles multiplied by 450 diplomats = 67 million. Even if the diplomats are deprived of 100% of their salaries, there WILL NOT be enough money to build EVEN one tank !!!
        so what nonsense do you suggest.
        I understand that if Prokhorov gave 95% of his money and said that with this money build 100 T-50 planes .. here's something else you can buy for Prokhorov billions. right away.

        You forgot to multiply by 12 months, + a bunch of assistant deputies + service staff and more, and this is a lot. See how much the budget spends on the maintenance of the State Duma and the Federation Council.
        1. aviamed90
          aviamed90 27 May 2013 19: 51 New
          +1
          You forgot to take into account regional deputies, regional ministers and their servants. If you count all over the country, you get a huge amount!
  18. Kolyan
    Kolyan 27 May 2013 09: 23 New
    +4
    It is necessary to reduce officials, nationalize the Central Bank, then you will see the money.
  19. JIaIIoTb
    JIaIIoTb 27 May 2013 09: 33 New
    +3
    The beginning of the end of Medvedev, is laid. (sorry for the phrase, but it fell))))
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      Andrei from Chelyabinsk 27 May 2013 11: 35 New
      +2
      Sorry, I did not understand. What did Medvedev put to an end?
      1. Alexander Romanov
        Alexander Romanov 27 May 2013 11: 42 New
        +2
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        What did Medvedev put to an end?

        Are you really so interested laughing
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          Andrei from Chelyabinsk 27 May 2013 11: 50 New
          +3
          If our Chairman of the Government speaks of a "pre-crisis" (budget) - perhaps some very, very difficult and massive ... problem is exerting strong pressure on him.
  20. Standard Oil
    Standard Oil 27 May 2013 09: 35 New
    +3
    You can’t save on three things: defense, healthcare and education, we have an example before Russia in the 90s, but you don’t need to stupidly fill up with money, because then they simply steal Serdyukovism here as an example, again, you need to use Soviet or American experience so that the structure in which the money received is fully accountable for every penny, because in the same United States, as the deadlines for the report to the Senate Commission on Defense Expenditures, the military or suppliers of military equipment, etc., in the form of specific representatives of companies of manufacturers stock up on Vaseline for the future, because if the senators fathers find at least the slightest inconsistency in the submitted reports will leave both military and civilian heads indiscriminately, therefore the Americans prefer to rob foreign countries rather than their own and the paradox is that these robbed countries are also grateful to them. And the appearance of Serdyukovism there is impossible in principle.
  21. sigizmund472
    sigizmund472 27 May 2013 09: 46 New
    +1
    Quote: SPIRITofFREEDOM
    And the fact that the guilty are sitting in their 20-room penthouses and not with a term in the bullpen !!!!
    learn to fight corruption not in words but in practice !!!!!


    Ahmed Bilalov moved to England. Everything is correct, but how to get it there? LOW !!! And then the West will look askance at us. Well, stole, well, washed off, just managed to get away, and we have nothing to do with it.
    Here is a fight against corruption. Where does the defense money come from ...
    1. aviator_IAS
      aviator_IAS 27 May 2013 13: 14 New
      +2
      Ahmed Bilalov moved to England. Everything is correct, but how to get it there? LOW !!!


      Maybe give him a scarf? what
  22. Beibit
    Beibit 27 May 2013 09: 49 New
    +5
    yes brothers ... I see you are also doing badly. there are so many traitors in person ... the people know ... everyone is talking, but the government, officials, law enforcement agencies are not doing anything. what does it mean?! If someone covers up criminals, then he is a criminal himself ...
  23. TUMAN
    TUMAN 27 May 2013 09: 51 New
    +3
    According to Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev, the Russian budget is already "pre-crisis."
    The very reign of Dmitry Medvedev, for Russia is pre-crisis. In some cases, clearly treacherous.
  24. annenkov242
    annenkov242 27 May 2013 09: 55 New
    +4
    Talking about budget overload suggests that tomorrow oil will rise in price.
    Thanks for the tip. All the same, the government will have to disperse the GDP, we have enough money, we only need priorities and the full surrender of ourselves, for the good of the state.
  25. rus_ak_93
    rus_ak_93 27 May 2013 10: 20 New
    +4
    the article is extremely provocative and harmful, although such articles are needed to know who to put first of all against the wall. no reduction in defense spending, just go ahead. The same with education, raise, no, restore at least to the previous level (Soviet), remove the exam, as a harmful phenomenon that dulls children. healthcare has already switched almost to self-sufficiency, you just need to leave the necessary number of social clinics and pharmacies in terms of the number of residents (almost this has already happened, only raise your salary).
    and, of course, total control over the spending of the allocated funds, followed by punishment, regardless of the person and position held (send to the construction sites of the national economy together with the family (always with the family) and until they work what was stolen there let them live.
  26. Prapor Afonya
    Prapor Afonya 27 May 2013 10: 23 New
    +2
    Quote: olviko
    He who does not want to feed his army will feed a stranger.

    I completely agree with the comment, the army is a guarantee of security from external influences and therefore there’s no way to go nowhere, but you’ll have to pay debts for those years when the army was not funded (to be honest, it was not funded at all)!
  27. optimist
    optimist 27 May 2013 10: 33 New
    +3
    Everything is clear: the country is once again "on the eve of a grandiose rascal"! Putinoids sense that the "gingerbread" in the treasury is ending, and that "lay the straw." And in general, -all this is the good old tradition of "round numbers": 20 trillion. by the 20th year !!! Why not 19,1 or 21,3? All this is the same piz..zh, as well as the promises of a humpbacked apartment to each family by the 2000th.
  28. a
    a 27 May 2013 10: 52 New
    -5
    ha, how everything is predicted! the military still did not understand that the USSR collapsed in part because of their immoderate appetite. they began to make guns instead of butter, tried to keep up with America, so there was no money in the country. you probably already forgot all the deserted shelves in stores, products on the cards. oh yes, you military then lived on rations in their units. you were on the drum that the workers of large factories that did military equipment for you could not buy anything in stores. what do you think then people went on strike? Yes, because there was nothing for the people to eat. all the best, the army. no not like this. ALL-ARMY. and that’s ... there is no country. and again you want to drive us into that grayness, into that poverty. The main thing is to fill your weapons depots. the country must live within its means. if we can’t earn, then we need to spend less. by all, to reduce the appropriations for education, science, for doctors and teachers, for retirement. and the military too. there is no other way. otherwise, another arms race, another shortage of everything and everything, another massive strike and, unfortunately, another collapse from the country. and there are new loans from the West and a new dependence on the West. you yourself pour water on the mill of destruction of Russia.
    1. RussianRu
      RussianRu 27 May 2013 11: 50 New
      +2
      Buddy Correct you. The arms race was not due to the immoderate appetite of the military, but because of the ambitions of the Communist Parties. Is “catching up and overtaking” such a slogan familiar? Moreover, comparing that time and order with the present is simply absurd. But the army must be, and be strong. Now they earn enough, the question is different. How and how much they pay (or do not pay, as you please) taxes. About the West. The West is pushing its loans not only to countries on the verge of collapse, but also completely successful, including for the defense industry. Your experiences are groundless. Russia will stand and be strong.
      1. Airman
        Airman 27 May 2013 12: 28 New
        +3
        Quote: Russian
        Now they earn enough, the question is different. How and how much they pay (or do not pay, as you please) taxes. About the West. The West is pushing its loans not only to countries on the verge of collapse, but also completely successful, including for the defense industry. Your experiences are groundless. Russia will stand and be strong.


        Oligarchs and billionaires pay 13% income tax, as well as a simple hard worker with a salary of 10 tr (if they still pay, but do not evade taxes). The lowest income tax. Make a progressive tax - and a budget without deficits.
        1. RussianRu
          RussianRu 27 May 2013 13: 00 New
          +1
          I agree with you. But the trouble is not only in collecting taxes but in many other things that can replenish the budget. For example, this is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWyGz1r4sYs
        2. a
          a 27 May 2013 18: 05 New
          0
          I agree. it’s time to already make the income tax progressive. Do you know why they don’t do it? :) because not everyone in the Putin clan has filled their pockets.
      2. a
        a 27 May 2013 18: 03 New
        +1
        buddy, I agree, the army must be strong. but the army exists at the expense that the country can afford. if a country cannot afford to spend a lot on the army, it is necessary either to optimize expenditures or increase revenues. revenues do not grow, on the contrary, the budget is scarce. need to reduce costs. let’s reduce the salaries of teachers, doctors, pensions for pensioners. they, as it was before, and now in places, will be miserable. but the army will be strong. the question is, why do poor people have an army? the poor will not need an army.
        as for the old days, then here you are mistaken. you think this was our Politburo, let's catch up and overtake America in arms. no !!! The Politburo, for the most part, had little knowledge of arms issues. always and everywhere- the army orders weapons, industry produces. So it was in the USSR. The army ordered, the government distributed orders for research and production. relatively speaking, a thread a member of the Politburo Grishin or Romanov understood little in armaments. so do not remove from the army its responsibility for the collapse of the country
    2. shamil
      shamil 27 May 2013 11: 51 New
      0
      I don’t know + you put or-
    3. Roll
      Roll 27 May 2013 12: 18 New
      +4
      wassat The fact that the USSR collapsed due to exorbitant military spending myth and stupidity. In the USSR, there was never a choice to make tanks or combines. We just made disgusting combines, tractors, cars because it was so planned. We ruined crops, Engineers stupid was like dirt. In the collapse of the USSR, the merit of the military-industrial complex is extremely small. It’s just our disorder, the rot of the State Planning Commission and the CPSU, the licentiousness of the people, who began to steal with might and main at the enterprises and led to the collapse of the USSR. Yes, and also the desire of the upper classes to plunder the common egg.
      1. Airman
        Airman 27 May 2013 12: 46 New
        +1
        Quote: Rolm
        wassat We just made disgusting combines, tractors, cars because it was so planned. We ruined crops, Engineers stupid was like dirt. In the collapse of the USSR, the merit of the military-industrial complex is extremely small. It’s just our disorder, the rot of the State Planning Commission and the CPSU, the licentiousness of the people, who began to steal with might and main at the enterprises and led to the collapse of the USSR. Yes, and also the desire of the upper classes to plunder the common egg.


        As for the licentiousness of the people, you are wrong! These are the shifters who were communists, but who became shit-democrats, destroyed the Union, industry, the army, agriculturally drove Russia into this hole (from the USA).
        1. Roll
          Roll 27 May 2013 12: 54 New
          +2
          fellow And why it’s wrong, I worked at the Komunar plant at that time, they stole many called them nonsuns, they drove marriage lightly, there were a lot of loafers at the plant, labor discipline was low and it was everywhere, I didn’t say anything about the plan, we were driven to the base sort the crop, so on the fruiting base the crop is rotten or generally silent. They dismissed the people. And like drunken tractor drivers on a collective farm, they plowed crookedly arable land, dumped fertilizers in a heap. Under Stalin, half of the workers and engineers in a month would receive and share.
    4. Garrin
      Garrin 27 May 2013 12: 41 New
      +4
      Quote: uno
      ha, how everything is predicted! the military still did not understand that the USSR collapsed in part because of their immoderate appetite. they began to make guns instead of butter, tried to keep up with America, so there was no money in the country. you probably already forgot all the deserted shelves in stores, products on the cards. oh yes, you military then lived on rations in their units. you were on the drum that the workers of large factories that did military equipment for you could not buy anything in stores. what do you think then people went on strike?

      Yeah. Found the culprits. To blame the military rations, but as soon as you could think of such a seemingly overly inflamed brain. Do you know what it means 25 years to wander from one end of the country to the other and go with your family, almost nowhere? In the best case, they’ll put them in a hostel, or even in a barracks or barracks. And to get up at night on an alarm, and in the morning already be at a "hot spot" under the bullets? And for 20 hours in the service of hanging around, without days off and walk-throughs? And have you seen these rations, where are the stamps on the meat for another 30-40s?
      He will still reproach am
      1. Roll
        Roll 27 May 2013 13: 53 New
        0
        wassat And I also wanted to add that the army in the USSR partially supported itself, each decent division had its own pigsty, though the pigs were some kind of vile breed, but they ate well with army parasites (soldier's grub), every decent bus sent cars and drivers to the virgin lands, though shitty zil 130 were killed for 1-2 virgin lands, but they are basically cheap, the construction battalions built not only military facilities, but sometimes civilian ones, and there were unintentional construction battles in the USSR. Well, and so on the little things, too, the army helped.
      2. a
        a 27 May 2013 18: 12 New
        0
        and when you went to study at a military school you didn’t know that you would roam without an apartment for 20 years?
        I will tell you so, I served an urgent term in 83-85 years. the food in our unit was better than in my hometown (millionaire, by the way). everything was at home on the cards. EVERYTHING .. and this is back in the years far from the collapse of the country. and in the army they fed normally. Of course, instead of meat they gave lard, there were other troubles. but I’ve never been hungry in the army.
        By the way, I also knew all the charms of army service. and he was in dresses for several days and marching at night for many tens of kilometers. here was not under the bullets.
        I reproach not ordinary soldiers and officers. I reproach that the army as an independent organ of our life does not always behave correctly.
    5. Fin
      Fin 27 May 2013 14: 45 New
      0
      Quote: uno
      ha, how everything is predicted! the military still do not understand

      The shale appeared. For 5 days, 70 comments, and all the garbage is. He writes about the USSR, but at that time he himself was not in the project either.
      1. a
        a 27 May 2013 18: 14 New
        0
        I express my opinion. no more. do not agree, your right.
        when I was a project and stuff, it’s certainly not for you to judge.
  29. Goldmitro
    Goldmitro 27 May 2013 11: 04 New
    +3
    <<< Moreover, experts then and now believe that such high defense spending is possible only by cutting other items of expenditures ..... that military spending is possible by cutting government social programs >>>
    And why our liberal economists stubbornly do not want to consider the issue of reducing the costs of maintaining a huge apparatus of officials who do not deny themselves anything and have not been afraid of any crises or their "comfortable" maintenance (including, with an outrageous payment "golden" parachutes) is it IMPORTANT for Russia to reconstruct in a short time (time and situation not wait) a modern, equipped with new equipment of the Russian Army? It seems that the task of these Gaidar liberal economists and their ideological Western sponsors, which is ruling in Russia, is precisely to slow down and prevent the re-establishment of a powerful Russian Army, capable of reinforcing the unwanted West’s independent policy of Russia and the reference to the need to reduce precisely social programs. designed to excite public opinion against the implementation of the military program!
  30. Forget
    Forget 27 May 2013 11: 22 New
    +1
    I don’t understand what the budget problems may be .. reduce the export of oil and gas, and instead create a state-owned, necessarily popular nation-wide energy company and increase the production of electricity, heat, fuel for transportation at times and there will be no problems.
    1. a
      a 27 May 2013 18: 17 New
      0
      Well, actually you wrote nonsense. if you don’t sell oil and gas, the budget will collapse altogether. in order to fill the budget you need to collect taxes. taxes are mostly collected when something is sold. if you don’t sell anything, then there’s nothing to collect taxes from. the sale of oil and gas provides 40 percent of the revenues to our budget .. so do not offer more such suicidal options :)
  31. RussianRu
    RussianRu 27 May 2013 11: 33 New
    +3
    Abaldet. Liberals yelled earlier; -Damaged the whole army, sawed all the missiles, etc. .. Now they scream; -The budget for the defense industry must be reduced, or the implementation is possible due to other items of expenditure.
    And why do you have the whole economy is based only on reducing budget spending. Why not say a word about offshore. There is not a lot of money spinning and the country has no taxes on them. Maybe you need to think about those who work in Russia to register their companies in Russia. This applies not only to Russian citizens, but also to import dealers. Who does not want, dosvidos, there are other entrepreneurs. Well, or whatever the choice. If you like being in offshore, then pay a certain amount of denyushki for commercial activities in Russia to the state budget.
  32. Forest
    Forest 27 May 2013 11: 44 New
    +1
    Putin, like Stalin, in a hurry to rush to put the army in order before the war. And the gibblers are again against it. It's time to arrange a 37 year old, without it all good undertakings are artificially inhibited.
  33. The comment was deleted.
  34. saturn.mmm
    saturn.mmm 27 May 2013 11: 48 New
    0
    The article was perplexing. Let us assume that defense expenditures are budgeted at a rate of 3%; within 3 years, this money of the military-industrial complex was spent on 50-70%. And now the question is, how in this situation defense spending can overload the budget?
    It remains only to declare an amnesty to Russian business so that everyone understands that in Russia theft is already the norm and is not criminally prosecuted and is transferred to the category of economic violations and has administrative responsibility (a penalty of 10% of stolen). Very effective economic policy of the state. good
    1. djon3volta
      djon3volta 27 May 2013 12: 22 New
      -1
      Quote: saturn.mmm
      Let us assume that defense expenditures are budgeted at a rate of 3%; within 3 years, this money of the military-industrial complex was spent on 50-70%. And now the question is, how in this situation defense spending can overload the budget?

      no way! for this, panic articles with confusing text are written. the author focuses if oil falls below $ 100 then the budget will not pull. but THIS AUTHOR does not write that if oil DOES NOT Fall below $ 100, then what will happen.
      oil will not get cheaper, over the years oil will only rise in price. because the peak of production in the WORLD has declined several years ago, which means that oil becomes less and not more! and if the goods become scarce, it rises in price. The whole world is tied to oil and it’s useless to deny it! It’s enough to scare Iran like last year, immediately quotes crawled up as soon as they lagged behind Iran, prices stabilized around $ 100.
      1. a
        a 27 May 2013 18: 25 New
        0
        I hope that there will be no fall. still want our army to be strong. but for the sake of truth, I note that you are not quite right. the fact is that oil is tied to production. and if there is a crisis in the world, then less food is needed and less oil is needed. demand decreases - oil prices fall. so it was in 2008 when there was a severe crisis. since then, in fact, Europe cannot get out of the recession and the demand for oil is supported only by China and the States.
        Of course, there may be political reasons for the rising cost of oil. for example, a war in the Middle East ... or just a hectic situation. but you yourself understand, such situations are temporary.
  35. shamil
    shamil 27 May 2013 11: 49 New
    +1
    Cut it there, put it there. It's like pissing in your pants in winter: at first it’s warm, then it’s cold!
    And pissing in the wind is necessary, but not against.
  36. ed65b
    ed65b 27 May 2013 12: 08 New
    +4
    How to save on defense? Let's get spears, bows. Let's get on wooden horses? These hucksters have little money. Banks feed again. The army almost asked .. if. A soldier in Georgia fought like a ragged man.
  37. Diviz
    Diviz 27 May 2013 12: 25 New
    0
    OPC will pay for itself. but what I wanted to wish was to do military research equipment using the latest technology.
  38. Volkhov
    Volkhov 27 May 2013 13: 13 New
    0
    These expenses are not for defense, but for a short war in the interests of others.
    What was being prepared for defense was given to blacks and Arabs, and special units will go "for export."
  39. nod739
    nod739 27 May 2013 13: 20 New
    0
    [quote = UFO] Although the State-owned corporations would have withdrawn from offshore and the budget would immediately "recover," not to mention a reduction in the army of officials and other parasites like deputies, we can also arm the same army. [/ quote]

    support +

    quote = Andrey from Chelyabinsk]
    .... free rest in the best sanatoriums of the country, etc.
    Something about 6 million a year per person is already coming out ... And there are 450 of them, 2,7 billion are being obtained for all ... [/ quote]

    here's the money:

    It’s especially annoying when you see how a deputy BMW of the 7th series or a Mercedes is riding, and the question always tormentes: WELL HOW DO PEOPLE'S SERVICES RIDE A CAR AT THE COST OF 3X COMN. APARTMENT ???
    And I, WHO FEEDS THESE SERVERS, I RIDE ON SIMPLE 9ke.

    1. a
      a 27 May 2013 18: 27 New
      0
      why are you writing about this here? and who chose those servants of the people? the people themselves chose.
  40. jayich
    jayich 27 May 2013 13: 44 New
    +1
    ALWAYS IT IS EASIER TO WANT THAN TO WORK, which, in principle, is written in the article, to ask someone to throw in 3-4 AUGs right away, transfer bureaucrats to basins, let them go, they will leave the small apartments to the budget, reduce the thought by half, and the deficit has disappeared .. ..
  41. Svyatoslav72
    Svyatoslav72 27 May 2013 13: 57 New
    +1
    Read in scrap, I see that "Teddy Beer" sculpts a hunchback from the beginning. The free voice of the oligarchy, in the person of Kudryashka, is shaking for loot that has not yet been stolen, for which something worthwhile and useful can be bought from a fool (Often he began to “trade in” and “sing songs,” apparently wants to be President).
    Both of them (and all Power) are least interested in the well-being of the Russian Federation, stability and development. There is no need for special education or a significant position, one must be realistic and live in the real world, and not a part-machine vegetable and an elite parasite with the stigma on the ass - "made for the Authority."
    People! ask yourself: - What would I do if I would represent the interests of the Nation and the State? How would I do it, why and for what? Any answer you receive will be wildly different from what these Tovaris-Chi-UraHlentsy.
    They have different motives, and priorities, and Our security of independence and self-sufficiency does not bother them very much.
  42. Dimkapvo
    Dimkapvo 27 May 2013 14: 02 New
    +2
    These p-balls are not used to limiting themselves. Yes, if at least they tear off all the watches from them, we’ll take the Mistrals away, and still have to!
    And the gentleman who pokes military rations to the officers a direct road to the next branch - it is clearly visible which of you turns out.
  43. rekrut
    rekrut 27 May 2013 14: 21 New
    0
    It is necessary to dispossess the thief-millionaires, make them return the money to the state and arm the army with this money. But this is a fairy tale.
    1. Abakanets
      Abakanets 27 May 2013 14: 45 New
      +1
      Once dispossessed, I think it was enough for everyone for a long time.
  44. silver_roman
    silver_roman 27 May 2013 14: 30 New
    +1
    I agree that the army should not be touched, but I also agree that it is necessary to cut back on “dubious” contracts, for example, the same mistral that is indicated in the article. Well, wild corruption, of course, is the way to the abyss. this must be fought hard.
    we must not forget about the lessons of history and the difficult stages that we went through. The defense industry (and not only) at one time hit hard on the USSR. for example, China, which is building its state at an accelerated pace, pays great attention to studying the mistakes of the USSR, we should do the same. Otherwise, the same rake will come across again and again.
  45. a.hamster55
    a.hamster55 27 May 2013 14: 43 New
    0
    While working I would say: -You can tolerate, if only there was no WAR. But with a pension that will not be
    Indexing will have to be tight.
  46. Komsomolets
    Komsomolets 27 May 2013 14: 56 New
    +1
    In addition, it is necessary to solve the problem of corruption.

    The only phrase from the entire article that solves all the problems. The issue of corruption and the military budget could be doubled.
  47. Yun Klob
    Yun Klob 27 May 2013 16: 47 New
    0
    Different heart-like ones would be stolen less, there would be less overload.
  48. The comment was deleted.
  49. Perch_xnumx
    Perch_xnumx 27 May 2013 17: 32 New
    +2
    The budget of Russia is overwhelmed by the Olympics, soccer championships, and the associated excessive corruption and theft.
    The main allies of Russia are its army and navy, and whoever does not want to feed someone else’s army should feed his own.
  50. I think so
    I think so 27 May 2013 17: 32 New
    0
    If you return to the Russian people those 60 billion bucks in the YEAR (!) That Kudrins steal from them, then there would be no problems with paying for weapons ...