Military Review

Fairy tales of new Russia: the tale of how the good king of the central bank of the state nationalized, and the evil boyars prevented him

180
For more than ten years now, the tale of V. V. Putin’s attempt to nationalize the Central Bank of the Russian Federation has been circulating. There are many versions of this tale - from cautious hypotheses to frank delirium, but they all agree on one thing: the corrupt Duma did not allow this to be done.


For some reason, it does not occur to citizens who believe in this fairy tale that the Central Bank of the Russian Federation is the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, just as the government of the Russian Federation is the government of the Russian Federation, and the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation is the Ministry defense of the Russian Federation.

However, the fact that the obvious does not occur to such citizens is quite understandable: it’s boring without conspiracy, the States don’t scold them much, and if you start thinking about the causes of real problems, you come to the conclusion that it’s not the Fed and the State Department that are to blame for them, so it is much more pleasant to believe in a non-existent enemy than to understand the causes of what is happening, risking at the same time to destroy the system of one’s own beliefs.

However, lovers of fairy tales, characterized by paradoxical "logic" and thirsting for victories, cause particular affection: in their opinion, the recent endowment of the American agent, whom they consider the Central Bank, functions of the mega-regulator and the powers of the Federal Service for Financial Markets is a victory agent and the transfer of all the levers of influence in the financial sphere of the country should lead to getting rid of the bondage of the dollar. In their opinion, this should also contribute to the appointment of the head of the Central Bank of the controlled liberal Nabiullina. Although than Nabiullina is more controlled than, for example, Ignatiev, who has been appointed as head of the Central Bank three times without alternatively before her, they cannot explain - just as they cannot explain what it means to nationalize the Central Bank.

Meanwhile NATIONALIZATION is the transfer of property owned by individuals or joint stock companies to state ownership.that is, in relation to the topic we are discussing, it is the replacement in a number of regulatory acts of a part of the text stating that the Central Bank is privately owned, on a text stating that the Central Bank is the property of the state.

For understandable reasons, it is impossible to make the above mentioned: the law on the Central Bank and the Constitution already state that the Central Bank of the Russian Federation is the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, that its authorized capital and property are federal property, and this in turn means that the founder of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation is Russian Federation. As a result, there can be no talk of nationalization of the Central Bank due to the fact that the Central Bank of the Russian Federation is a public institution.

But despite the stupidity of fairy tales about the nationalization of the Central Bank, these tales continue to live and multiply.

For the first time about the attempt to nationalize V. V. Putin, the Central Bank of the Russian Federation was talked about by sensational journalists in 2000.

In particular, “Kommersant” in the 190 number from 11.10.2000 wrote:

“Around the new law on the Central Bank of passions boil for a long time. But until recently the president did not interfere in them. At the end of September, Vladimir Putin made his own amendments - later, by the way, a month and a half after the official deadline for their submission expired; The Duma Bank Committee had to specifically extend it, otherwise they could not be legalized. The meaning of presidential amendments is the nationalization of the Central Bank. ”

And everything would seem to be good, but nobody can find the draft law with the text of the amendments on the nationalization of the Central Bank, and the actions of the banking committee on the legalization of amendments, which Kommersant told, will not tally with the subsequent actions of the Duma to prevent these amendments.

But the fairy tale is a fairy tale, and after 13 years after its appearance thousands of lovers of fairy tales, fueled by the belief in the infallibility of deputy Fedorov, who is the main peddler of fairy tales about nationalization, happily claim that there were attempts at nationalization (though they confused in testimony - the variation of dates for the unsuccessful attempt to nationalize the Central Bank varies from 1998 to 2004, and the number of attempts varies from one to two).

So - maybe the truth, fairy tales do not lie, maybe there was an attempt to nationalize the Central Bank of the Russian Federation?

The answer is unequivocal - no.

Of course, every fairy tale is based on some real fact, but the interpretation of this fact has nothing to do with reality - therefore the fairy tale is a fairy tale.

In order to understand what was in fact, it suffices to find in the network a passport of the draft Federal Law No. 99113823-2 “On the Central Bank of the Russian Federation (Bank of Russia)” (which is a prototype of the current 86-FZ) and history its adoption, highlighting only what is even remotely related to nationalization.

So: after the crisis 98 of the year, some of the dogs decided to hang on the Central Bank, in connection with which the decision of the State Duma No.3804-II from 19.03.1999 A working group was created to draft the Federal Law “On Amendments and Addenda to the Federal Law on the Central Bank of the Russian Federation”.

In the new draft law, in particular, it was supposed to clarify the status of the Central Bank, as well as the ownership of property and authorized capital (not nationalization, but still ...)

01.12.1999, the finished bill was submitted to the DG.

Since all the regulations affecting the Central Bank in one way or another, in accordance with the law, are sent to the Central Bank for examination, this case was not an exception, which resulted in the Central Bank’s letter No.01-31 / 1249 from 27.03.2000in which, in particular, it was said:

“Clause 2 of Article 1 of the submitted draft provides for a new edition of Article 2 of the Federal Law, which states that the Bank of Russia exercises authority to own, use and dispose of property in federal ownership on behalf of the Russian Federation. Adoption of the proposed wording of article 2 of the Federal Law seems inappropriate, since the use of the term “on behalf of the Russian Federation” actually identifies Bank of Russia operations, as well as its participation in the capital of credit organizations, with operations of the Russian Federation. We believe that in the conditions of the unresolved problems of the external debt of the Russian Federation, this formulation can be used to hold the Bank of Russia liable for the obligations of the Russian Federation.

In addition, the possibility of withdrawing and encumbering the assets of the Bank of Russia in the cases provided for by the Federal Law provided for by the project is unjustified, since the provision prohibiting such withdrawals and encumbrances without the consent of the Bank of Russia is a legal guarantee that the Bank of Russia will comply with the constitutional provision on the issue of money.


Government Conclusion on this Project No.1529п-П13 from 15.05.2000 It was similar to the conclusion of the Central Bank, and there are good reasons: it is worth remembering the attempts of the West to arrest the property of the Russian Federation (for example, airplanes), estimate if there is a possibility of seizing the property of the Central Bank, then why not a “money machine”, and think hard, apparently, these are the evil boyars-deputies as a result they did (I also want to remind you that the State Bank of the USSR did not answer for the debts of the USSR, and the USSR for the debts of the State Bank, and this is no accident).

Finally, the most interesting thing is the president’s opinion: letter No. Pr-1873 from 21.09.2000 (that is, the very amendments, the purpose of which, according to Kommersant, is the nationalization of the Central Bank):

»As such, the state-legal status of the Bank of Russia is neither defined in the Constitution of the Russian Federation nor in the Federal Law“ On the Central Bank of the Russian Federation (Bank of Russia) ”(hereinafter referred to as the Federal Law). It is advisable in the proposed wording of the first part of Article 1 of the Federal Law (paragraph 1 of Article 1 of the draft) to provide that the Bank of Russia is a federal government body that is independent in its activities from other federal government bodies, government bodies, government bodies local self-government in the implementation of legislatively assigned functions and powers ”.

As you can see, nationalization does not smell like it - we are talking about clarifying the status of the Central Bank, and the proposals of the President, as can be seen from part 2 of the article 1 of the current 86-FZ, were partially accepted.

Next:

“Part two of Article 1 of the Federal Law (paragraph 1 of Article 1 of the draft) provides that the Bank of Russia is a legal entity and has a seal with its name. By virtue of the requirements of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a legal entity may be created in one of the organizational and legal forms provided for by the Federal Law, and the name of the legal entity must contain an indication of its organizational and legal form. It is also necessary to determine the civil legal status of the Bank of Russia, that is, its organizational and legal form as a subject of civil law - a legal entity.

In connection with the above, the second part of Article 1 of the Federal Law is proposed to be amended as follows:

“The Bank of Russia is a federal state institution with the rights of a legal entity. The Bank of Russia has a seal with the image of the State Emblem of the Russian Federation and its name, indicating its organizational and legal form. "


And again, talking about clarifying the status of the Central Bank and not its nationalization, although the proposal was rejected by the deputies.

Then, in the same vein, neither the responsibility of the obligations of the Russian Federation on the part of the Central Bank, the transfer of the issuing function under the control of the government or the president, or dependence on anyone for the implementation of the Central Bank of its functions and powers in the proposals of the president words - we are talking about clarifying the status of the Central Bank, about an insignificant redistribution of functions, about strengthening the control over financial activities and the board of directors (to steal less), but not about nationalization. And this is not surprising: it is impossible to nationalize the fact that, in fact, is in fact initially a state one.

PS For those who wish to familiarize themselves with the documents on the alleged “nationalization” of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, I recommend using the resource “Consultant Plus” to “search”: “Passport of the draft Federal Law No. XXUMX-99113823“ On the Central Bank of the Russian Federation (Bank of Russia) ” - everything is there.
Author:
180 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. predator.3
    predator.3 11 November 2013 15: 15
    -3
    The ex-head of the Department of Property Relations of the Ministry of Defense, Evgenia Vasilyeva, does not want to return the paintings seized during the search for inspection: investigators suspected that under the top layer of paint were hidden canvases of famous artists that adorned the walls of the Ministry of Defense. About this "Izvestia" said Vasilyev herself.

    - It all started with the fact that they came to me to look for paintings, although shortly before the arrest, the prosecutor's office checked and documented that the valuable paintings that were in the Ministry of Defense did not leave the department. Therefore, the investigator did not want to seize them. But then he changed his mind - I think, due to constant pressure. As a result, the paintings were taken away, and the more I didn’t see them, the suspect complains. - They say that the paintings then shone through under some rays to reveal whether there are any masterpieces under the paint. I was very afraid that they would be hurt, which, in general, happened: they broke the frames and said "I'm sorry." I didn’t see my paintings anymore.

    In the fall of 2012, Evgenia Vasilyeva became a defendant in a case brought against the Ministry of Defense under the control of Oboronservis OJSC, and was dismissed during the investigation. A search was also conducted in Vasilieva’s apartment.

    “In addition to documents of relevance to the case, more than 3 million rubles, antiques, several dozen paintings, a large amount of jewelry and jewelry were seized from Evgenia Vasilyeva,” said Vladimir Markin, head of the media relations department of the Investigative Committee, based on the search.

    Four criminal cases were instituted against Yevgenia Vasilyeva, which were separated into separate proceedings. October 15 followed by informed the lawyers Vasilyeva about the completion of the investigation.



    Read on: http://izvestia.ru/news/560422#ixzz2kKgOaZD2


    So the voice erupted!
    1. baltika-18
      baltika-18 11 November 2013 15: 32
      -10 qualifying.
      Quote: predator.3
      Ex-head of the Department of Property Relations of the Ministry of Defense Evgenia Vasilyeva does not want to return the paintings

      What are you talking about?
      According to the article. An unambiguous plus. Yarosvet laid out specifically. What supporters of Mr. Fedorov will say.
      1. Hleb
        Hleb 11 November 2013 15: 35
        -8
        I will also support the plus article. It’s time to sort this issue already
        1. crazyrom
          crazyrom 11 November 2013 20: 27
          19
          This text is an impudent lie of liberalists. Read in the law on the central bank itself, or on the website of the Central Bank, everything is written there, this body is not subordinate to the government not the president and is a branch of the Fed, and fulfills the orders of the Fed.
          1. Yarosvet
            12 November 2013 13: 08
            0
            Quote: crazyrom
            and is a branch of the Fed, and fulfills the orders of the Fed.

            This is also written on the website of the Central Bank and in the law? laughing
            1. Ulus5
              Ulus5 13 November 2013 19: 54
              +1
              Quote: Yarosvet
              Yarosvet (5) Yesterday, 13:08 ↑
              Quote: crazyrom
              and is a branch of the Fed, and fulfills the orders of the Fed.
              This is also written on the website of the Central Bank and in the law?

              The law says
              Article 2.

              The authorized capital and other property of the Bank of Russia are federal property. In accordance with the goals and in the manner established by this Federal Law, the Bank of Russia exercises authority to possess, use and dispose of the property of the Bank of Russia, including the Bank of Russia gold and currency reserves. Withdrawal and encumbrance of obligations of the specified property without the consent of the Bank of Russia are not allowed, unless otherwise provided by federal law.

              The state is not liable for the obligations of the Bank of Russia, and the Bank of Russia - for the obligations of the stateif they have not assumed such obligations or unless otherwise provided by federal laws.

              The Bank of Russia carries out its expenses from its own income.

              In fact, the Central Bank of the Russian Federation is the same commercial private enterprise as, for example, Cherkizovsky Market. Only the Bank uses property and state property for free, but does not share its own revenues with the state.
        2. Skiff-2
          Skiff-2 11 November 2013 20: 37
          26
          Quote: Gleb
          I will also support the plus article. It’s time to sort this issue already

          What is there to disassemble: Russia gives a debt to America at 0,7% per annum, and takes from her at 8%. This is such a form of tribute, hidden from amateurs and its existence can always be challenged, and the Young patriots will stigmatize the "bloody gebnya" in power without seeing what they can and are still alive thanks to such intelligent, careful, tough and determined people ... An attempt to throw off the Fed's stranglehold was in 2005 ... it didn’t work out and still hasn’t worked out, so don’t hysteria, but work for the good of the Motherland, everyone in their place ... and Carthage will be destroyed.
          1. Onyx
            Onyx 12 November 2013 01: 43
            +1
            Quote: Skif-2
            An attempt to throw off the Fed’s noose was in 2005 ... failed

            Could you give more details on what happened in 2005?
          2. Hleb
            Hleb 12 November 2013 06: 05
            -3
            therefore, do not hysteria, but work for the good of the Motherland
            is that for hysteria you say?
          3. velikoros-xnumx
            velikoros-xnumx 12 November 2013 13: 15
            +2
            Quote: Skif-2
            Do not hysteria, but work for the good of the Motherland, each in his own place ... and Carthage will be destroyed.

            good
        3. Nick
          Nick 11 November 2013 22: 49
          13
          Quote: Gleb
          I will also support the plus article. It’s time to sort this issue already

          So, first disassemble, and then plus or minus. The author accuses the President of not nationalizing the Central Bank, but the status of the Central Bank is established by the Constitution. The President is the guarantor of the Constitution; violating it, he will fall under criminal prosecution. Changes to the Constitution are not introduced by decree of the President or someone else, but only by popular vote and not otherwise ... Sometimes it is necessary to use brains for their intended purpose, and not scatter the poles ...
          1. The comment was deleted.
          2. falcon
            falcon 11 November 2013 23: 29
            12
            Quote: Nick
            The President is the guarantor of the Constitution; violating it, he will fall under criminal prosecution.

            Under what article of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, can you tell?
            Quote: Nick
            Changes to the Constitution are not introduced by decree of the President or someone else, but only by popular vote and not otherwise.

            Not so long ago, the term of the President was changed to six years, the State Duma to
            five years, and no popular vote was noticed.
            Sincerely.
            1. aviamed90
              aviamed90 12 November 2013 10: 32
              +4
              falcon

              That's it.

              All this does not prevent the president from changing the Constitution for himself.
          3. Yarosvet
            11 November 2013 23: 56
            +2
            Quote: Nick
            You know my dear - when I came to this site I was glad about the existing censorship, but now I’m not happy anymore, because I often want to swear.

            The author accuses the President of not nationalizing the Central Bank
            I wrote that Fedorov’s talk about unsuccessful attempts to nationalize the Central Bank is nonsense (a fairy tale), and now I have every reason to accuse you of lying.

            The President is the guarantor of the Constitution, violating it, he will be prosecuted.
            The president (this one) repeatedly violated the Constitution (which is elementary proof), but he cannot fall under criminal prosecution, neither after the termination of his powers (since there is an unconstitutional 12th Federal Law), much less during the exercise of powers (by virtue of action 91- th article of the Constitution) - so I have every reason to accuse you of stupidity with the letter "T".

            Changes to the Constitution are not introduced by decree of the President or someone else, but only by popular vote and in no other way ...
            Dullness is apparently progressing - articles from 134th to 137th inclusive.

            Sometimes you need to use brains for their intended purpose, and not scatter the poles ...
            How self-critical are you - I applaud good
            1. viborzanami
              viborzanami 12 November 2013 01: 35
              -2
              [quote = Yarosvet] I wrote that Fedorov’s talk about unsuccessful attempts to nationalize the Central Bank is nonsense (a fairy tale), and now I have every reason to accuse you of lying. [/ quote
              So Fedorov tells about private national business tales, business does not work for the sake of replenishing the budget and not for the sake of new technologies, but only for its own profit.
              And in your article you poured mud over the president, did not reveal the topic, in short, minus you from me.
          4. Hleb
            Hleb 12 November 2013 06: 09
            +1
            laughing you yourself read what the wise guy read in the article? wipe your eyes. I plusanul in order to read adequate comments with explanations on this issue. below them are enough. what did you actually expect. and what did you write? accused Yarosvet of what he didn’t even hint at.
          5. Vladimir 23rus
            Vladimir 23rus 26 November 2014 21: 12
            0
            So let's vote all the people what is the problem? Ah yes the guarantor does not put to a vote crying sadness.
      2. Normal
        Normal 11 November 2013 16: 15
        0
        Quote: baltika-18
        . What supporters of Mr. Fedorov will say.

        Supporters of Fedorov actively minus. Well, they don’t want to admit that they are wrong and part with illusions, well, they don’t want tolaughing
        And of course Yarosvet plus. Keep it up!
        1. baltika-18
          baltika-18 11 November 2013 16: 56
          -1
          Quote: Normal
          Fedorov's supporters actively minus

          Supporters of Fedorov apparently do not know that the main fighter against occupation in the occupied country feels great. He has 5 apartments, a house, two land plots and an annual income of 2 million 819 thousand .375 rubles. Data from the State Duma website.
          1. orek
            orek 11 November 2013 21: 46
            +6
            And in your opinion he should be in rags, begging for alms near the State Duma ??? This is pocket money for many "gentlemen" in Russia. all the more, he openly says that he worked for "effective managers."
            RUSNANO has rolled back its 2,5 annual income for one "commercial" video.
            Do you think that such income does not allow you to say the right thing. ????
            1. Yarosvet
              11 November 2013 22: 23
              -6
              Quote: orek
              And you must be in rags, asking for alms near the State Duma ???
            2. edmed
              edmed 12 November 2013 05: 30
              -3
              hi Forgive me not being reasonable, greedy and wretched, it's like, he took 2,5 per annum on his pocket from "effective managers" and went "truth-womb" about bribe-takers, this is not understood by the poor-minded. request
        2. Genur
          Genur 11 November 2013 19: 53
          +1
          "MAYOR GRU" said: http://mayoripatiev.ru/1383835358
        3. Nick
          Nick 11 November 2013 22: 53
          +8
          Quote: Normal
          And of course Yarosvet plus. Keep it up!

          They love malacholny in Russia ...
          1. Normal
            Normal 12 November 2013 00: 23
            +4
            Quote: Nick
            They love malacholny in Russia ...

            ......
            Yarosvet
            Full name: Yarosvet
            Group: Visitors
            Date of visit: November 11 2013 23: 56
            Registration Date: 24 May 2013 17: 24
            Publications: 1 [View All Publications]
            Comments: 2399 [Recent Comments]
            Rating: 49485


            Nick
            Full name:
            Group: Visitors
            Date of visit: November 11 2013 23: 40
            Date of registration: September 13, 2011 22:34
            Publications: 0 [View All Publications]
            Comments: 2918 [Recent Comments]
            Rating: 77477


            The rating shows the attitude towards the comments and their author, that is, "love in Russia", and therefore, in your opinion, a little unwholesomeness. You are ahead in this "quality" and Yarosvet and me
      3. dmitrich
        dmitrich 11 November 2013 16: 38
        +6
        where does the bank, on military review?
      4. Asgard
        Asgard 11 November 2013 16: 51
        -2
        I would add, but I'm driving, driving to Moscow, writing a lot, ....
        Yarosvet man, correctly stated .... factology a bit chaotic))))
        Yes and I'm afraid of Zaminus))))))
        1. Botanologist
          Botanologist 11 November 2013 19: 55
          22
          Quote: Asgard
          Yes and I'm afraid


          A personal attitude to Putin or someone else is not a reason to pull quotes into an article, blabbering the gist of the issue. The Bank of Russia is a very sophisticated entity; the author did not reveal the topic at all. Apparently, he didn’t write for that.
          1. aksakal
            aksakal 11 November 2013 21: 28
            17
            Quote: Botanologist
            Quote: Asgard
            Yes and I'm afraid


            A personal attitude to Putin or someone else is not a reason to pull quotes into an article, blabbering the gist of the issue. The Bank of Russia is a very sophisticated entity; the author did not reveal the topic at all. Apparently, he didn’t write for that.

            and if you take into account the Westophilism of Yarosvet, when he lowers Russia to the full just because of the lower consumption level of its population, while all the counter-arguments are either not taken into account or ignored, then the picture does not cause respect to the author of the subject. For example, the astronomical debt of almost any western country - isn’t it where the high consumption in these countries comes from? Yarosvet does not see this point-blank that the Westerners live on credit, and the Russians live strictly on their own, and even they are robbed a little by sly red faces, gentlemen in white and Westerners themselves, who do not want to pay back arms debts for autocratic regimes and dictatorships , in short, who is not lazy. He mechanically stupidly compares the level of consumption and, on this basis, issues a verdict on the development of the West and the underdevelopment and slowness of Russia.
            Here I also clung to the term "nationalization of the National Bank" and on the basis of a not entirely accurate (not entirely accurate - because the Russian language in the field of finance is not at all as developed as English, many terms simply do not exist, there is, for example, a Russian analogue of the term "Goodwill" ) using this term, as it were, to obstruct the patriots of Russia, and at the same time kick Putin laughing Yarosvet, I am explaining especially for you - the slogan "nationalization of the Central Bank" cannot be understood literally because of the absence in the Russian language of a term that well describes the current situation around this Bank, Russia and the financial owners of the planet. In the absence of such a term, we are forced to use the INACCURATE wording "nationalization of the Central Bank", meaning the return of this Central Bank a) under the full control of the Russian state, b) so that this Central Bank in its activities is guided exclusively by the interests of Russia, which should be, because it is the Russian Central Bank !
            Below Alekseiyal provided links - at least read something. And after that, criticize reasonably. And the fact that you brought figures to letters here - incoming or outgoing - these are not arguments. These are all incoming or outgoing numbers of letters in which it is reported about the need to clarify the status of the Central Bank. Nobody argues with you that the Central Bank of Russia is a subject of the Russian Federation. Nobody argues with you that the Central Bank belongs to the Russian Federation. It is about the fact that the people, Fedorov, Starikov and others question the fact that the financial policy of this Central Bank pursues precisely the goals of Russia, despite the fact that this Central Bank belongs to Russia.
            1. aksakal
              aksakal 11 November 2013 21: 34
              20

              Answer, my dear author of SABZH, to one simple question - why the Fed Can give loans to second-tier US banks, moreover, at the rate at which it considers it necessary, but the Russian Central Bank cannot? The Russian Central Bank can only designate this rate, the so-called. refinancing rate, and EVERYTHING! Even the Bank of England does this, even the bank of this tiny and useless island can issue loans on the basis at which it sees fit (among the Britons, this rate is called the LIBOR rate), but the Central Bank of huge Russia CANNOT do this? And the second question - why the Russian Central Bank, when issuing its national currency, is obliged to look back at how many US dollars are in the bins of this Central Bank? How did this rule come about? Why should you be afraid to print your NATIONAL CURRENCIES exactly as much as there are foreign exchange reserves, nominated, moreover, in the currency of a completely foreign state? Yes, these two facts alone give substantial grounds to suspect that the Central Bank of Russia, with all its formal affiliation with Russia, in fact, is CONTROLLED by those people who print the currency that the Central Bank is obliged to look at when issuing the ruble. And instead of dispelling all these suspicions that I expected from this SABZH, I just read a set of some numbers that indicate incoming or outgoing numbers to some obscure letters that have a purely production character, and this is an unintelligible action by the author SABJ with visible pleasure tucks inappropriate sarcasm interspersed with the arrogance of "initiated into special knowledge."
              The article is just a minus. Pass by, I did not see any benefit from this article. TOPVAR site, I would like to express my wish for a more careful selection of material, because the level of the site's "residents" is actually higher.
              1. Neil
                Neil 11 November 2013 21: 56
                11
                Dear Aksakal - I fully agree with you !!! The author has a "credit" minus !!!
              2. Botanologist
                Botanologist 11 November 2013 22: 00
                +5
                Quote: aksakal
                I’m just reading a set of some numbers indicating incoming or outgoing numbers to some unintelligible letters of a purely production nature,


                As my Russian teacher used to say - "the topic is not disclosed." Moreover, it is not fully disclosed and in absolute form.
                +
              3. Yarosvet
                11 November 2013 22: 56
                -11 qualifying.
                Quote: aksakal
                why can the Fed give loans to second-tier banks in the United States, and at the rate at which it sees fit, but the Russian central bank cannot do this?
                See the conclusion of the Central Bank and the government - for that document numbers are given.
                And in a broad sense:
                1 Do you want the Russian Federation to have a debt like the United States (and this with the insurmountable mania of the Current Authority to repay these debts)?
                2 Ask V.V. Putin, who signed 86-ФЗ, and didn’t even try to veto or send a bill for examination of the Constitutional Court (he has every right to do so)

                The Russian Central Bank can only denote this rate, the so-called refinancing rate, and EVERYTHING! Even the English Bank does this, even the bank of this tiny and useless island can give out loans on the same line, according to which he himself will find it necessary
                You rave: either the refinancing rate is higher than inflation, or the Central Bank law does not contain provisions for EFFECTIVE reserve management and existence at your own expense.

                And the second question is why the Russian Central Bank, when issuing its national currency, is obliged to look back at how much total US dollars are in the bins of this Central Bank?
                And where did you get the idea that he MUST do it? Are you able to name the normative act in which this "obligation" is spelled out? laughing

                Yes, these two facts
                These are not facts - they are speculation.

                print the currency that the Central Bank must look back when issuing the ruble
                He, a plaque fly, is not obliged, but forced due to the fact that we ourselves do not produce nichrome, but sell us something (80% of the total turnover) for dollars.

                And instead of dispelling all these suspicions
                I did not engage in dispelling your suspicions - I got tired of delusional tales about attempts to nationalize the Central Bank which was not there, which I proved.

                I'm reading just a set of some numbers
                You drop these numbers in a search engine and read the full text (for that they are given)

                unintelligible letters
                These, I agree that incomprehensible, letters "Kommersant" called "amendments for the purpose of nationalization" laughing - from these letters and articles in "Kommersant" just delirium about the alleged nationalization and went.

                And here's to you about sarcasm laughing
              4. viborzanami
                viborzanami 12 November 2013 01: 42
                +1
                It is a pity that Aksakalu can put only 1 plus.
          2. viborzanami
            viborzanami 11 November 2013 21: 57
            0
            You are absolutely right.
          3. Nick
            Nick 11 November 2013 22: 32
            +5
            Quote: Botanologist
            The Bank of Russia is a very sophisticated entity; the author did not reveal the topic at all. Apparently, he didn’t write for that.

            The question does not own, or deliberately misleads. Most likely the guarantor is trying to kick.
          4. SSR
            SSR 11 November 2013 22: 39
            +2
            Quote: Botanologist


            A personal attitude to Putin or someone else is not a reason to pull quotes into an article, blabbering the gist of the issue. The Bank of Russia is a very sophisticated entity; the author did not reveal the topic at all. Apparently, he didn’t write for that.

            And hammer, people don't even notice that on our current den signs there is an eagle with lowered wings and, in fact, the coat of arms of "Kerenka", while on the coat of arms of Russia there is an eagle with spread wings and that it is the Bank of Russia and an eagle with spread wings that are written on the anniversary coins of Sochi. with wings and not a wet crow, especially "I recommend for the gifted to fill Sochi coins and then get any other coin out of your pocket and feel the difference."
        2. The comment was deleted.
      5. alekseyal
        alekseyal 11 November 2013 18: 13
        13
        I have already written about the fact that the Bank of Russia does not obey the leadership of Russia more than once. http://nstarikov.ru/blog/20210 I even wrote a book on this topic - “Nationalization of the ruble. The path to the freedom of Russia. "
        http://nstarikov.ru/books/7199
        Every day, the harmfulness and unnaturalness of the situation when the body issuing the national currency (CB) is separated from Russia and does not obey it becomes more and more obvious.

        And the actions of the Bank of Russia clearly demonstrate who our Central Bank is working for and the economy of which country it is helping.
        http://nstarikov.ru/blog/20595

        Bill No. 130800-6
        On amendments to the Federal Law "On the Central Bank of the Russian Federation (Bank of Russia)"
        http://asozd2.duma.gov.ru/main.nsf/%28SpravkaNew%29?OpenAgent&RN=130800-6&02

        Vote for the law
        http://национальныйзакон.рф/petit1.php
        1. Alexander Romanov
          Alexander Romanov 11 November 2013 18: 36
          11
          Quote: alekseyal

          And the actions of the Bank of Russia clearly demonstrate who our Central Bank is working for, the economy of which country it is helping

          Yes, it works 24 hours in the USA laughing
        2. Yarosvet
          11 November 2013 19: 16
          -5
          Quote: alekseyal
          And the actions of the Bank of Russia clearly demonstrate who our Central Bank is working for and the economy of which country it is helping.
        3. Viking
          Viking 11 November 2013 19: 23
          +4
          Quote: alekseyal
          I have already written about the fact that the Bank of Russia does not obey the leadership of Russia more than once.

          Article 14. "Law on the Central Bank" The Chairman of the Bank of Russia is appointed to office by the State Duma for a period of five years by a majority vote of the total number of State Duma deputies.
          The candidacy for appointment to the post of Chairman of the Bank of Russia is represented by the President of the Russian Federation not later than three months before the expiration of the powers of the acting Chairman of the Bank of Russia.

          Article 15. The Board of Directors includes the Chairman of the Bank of Russia and 14 members of the Board of Directors.
          Members of the Board of Directors work on an ongoing basis at the Bank of Russia.
          Members of the Board of Directors are appointed by the State Duma for a term of five years on the proposal of the Chairman of the Bank of Russia, agreed with the President of the Russian Federation.


          Now explain HOW is the Central Bank not subordinate to the leadership of Russia? To the Government of the Russian Federation - does not obey, yes. They have no direct subordination
          1. Onyx
            Onyx 11 November 2013 20: 10
            13
            You know, of course, the Central Bank is formally independent of the government and the president. And the head of the Central Bank cannot simply be fired. All this is expressly stated in the Constitution. But, in my opinion, of course, Putin could put his man there and he would do what Putin would say even under such laws. But here the matter is completely different. Okay, someone may suspect Putin that he is deliberately pursuing such a policy when the Central Bank does not work for the development of Russia, but for US funding. But! Look at China. The largest buyer of US government bonds is China. Are the Chinese authorities also compradors? Yes, the whole world lives like this, financing the countries of the West. So a change in the Central Bank’s policy is a challenge to the West. Are we ready for him today? Even China is not ready. Despite the fact that in the power of China there are no agents of influence of the West and it has sufficiently powerful armed forces. So first you need to create a powerful army, bring to the people all this information, expel Western agents from power (in general, restore sovereignty), and then challenge it. And actually in this direction everything goes. The West sees it all. Hence the Swamps and the terrorist attacks, and such articles like this one.
          2. viborzanami
            viborzanami 11 November 2013 22: 05
            +2
            Now explain HOW is the Central Bank not subordinate to the leadership of Russia?
            -----------------------------------------
            From the background: Since 1995, the Bank of Russia has stopped using direct loans for the federal budget deficit and has ceased to provide targeted centralized loans to economic sectors.
            Consequence: non-payment of salaries and pensions by 75% of the population for six months> borrowing from the IMF> default in August 1998.
        4. alekseyal
          alekseyal 11 November 2013 19: 52
          11
          1. What is depicted on the money? On the money of the Soviet Union - Coat of arms of the Soviet Union. What is depicted on the money of Russia? Emblem of the Central Bank of Russia. The State Emblem of the Provisional Government is used as an emblem. What is written on the money of the Russian Empire. State - credit card. Provided with gold or silver. What is written on the money of the USSR. Ticket of the State Bank of the USSR. Provided with gold, precious metals and other assets. The word “state” on modern money is nowhere to be found. There are no state symbols of Russia.
          Our money is not provided by anything. Section 28 of the Central Bank Law.
          Unlike money of the Russian Empire and the USSR.
          1. alekseyal
            alekseyal 11 November 2013 19: 55
            +5
            2. The Central Bank is not a state structure.
            Article 19 of the Federal Law clearly separates the Bank of Russia from state authorities:
            Article 19. Members of the Board of Directors of the Central Bank cannot be deputies of the State Duma and members of the Council of the Federation, deputies of bodies of constituent entities of Russia, deputies of local governments, civil servants, as well as members of the Government.
            Bank of Russia employees are not government officials. Their status is regulated not by the law “On Civil Service”, but by the law “On the Central Bank”, in which there is a special chapter XIV, which is called “Employees of the Bank of Russia”.
            1. alekseyal
              alekseyal 11 November 2013 19: 58
              +4
              3. Who controls the Central Bank
              Article 1 of the law is quite clear: “Functions and powers, the Bank of Russia exercises independently of other public authorities.”

              The opportunity to dismiss the chairman of the Bank of Russia from his post for the president and the Duma is purely theoretical.
              “The Chairman of the Bank of Russia may be removed from office only in the following cases: 1) expiration of the term of office; 2) the impossibility of performance of official duties, confirmed by the conclusion of the state medical commission; 3) a personal resignation letter; 4) the commission of a criminal offense established by a court verdict that has entered into legal force; 5) violations of federal laws that govern issues related to the activities of the Bank of Russia. ”
              If the chairman of the Central Bank: 1) is healthy as a bull, 2) his authority has not expired, 3) he is not going to leave, 4) he doesn’t steal wallets from old women, 5) he complies with federal law (that is, he does not give loans to his country) - then withdraw its impossible. And the President of Russia and the Duma can not do anything.
              “Article 13. Members of the Board of Directors are dismissed: upon the expiration of their term of office, by the Chairman of the Bank of Russia; before the expiration of the term of office - by the State Duma on the proposal of the Chairman of the Bank of Russia. ”
              Without the permission of the Chairman of the Bank of Russia, a member of the Board of Directors of the Central Bank, the Duma itself cannot withdraw. So how can we say that the Central Bank is accountable to the State Duma?
              1. alekseyal
                alekseyal 11 November 2013 19: 59
                +7
                4. Who owns the gold reserves of the Bank of Russia (not Russia)
                Gold and foreign exchange reserves - external highly liquid assets represented in the form of foreign currency and gold. - as of March 1, 2013 amounted to $ 526 billion. Gold accounts for 9,5% of Russia's total reserves - 957,8 tons. This amounts to $ 50 billion. At the end of the year 12, the foreign exchange part of the reserves included 46,5% of the dollar part, 40,5% of the euro, and 9% of pounds.
                “Article 2. The authorized capital and other property of the Bank of Russia are federal property. The Bank of Russia exercises authority over owning, use and disposal of the property of the Bank of Russia, including the gold and currency reserves of the Bank of Russia.
                “Withdrawal and encumbrance of obligations of the specified property without the consent of the Bank of Russia are not allowed. The state is not liable for the obligations of the Bank of Russia, and the Bank of Russia for the obligations of the state. ”
                Formally being a federal property, the Central Bank, at the same time, does not bear any obligations in relation to the state. Yes, gold reserves - federal property, BUT it is such property that the owner cannot dispose of without the permission of the Central Bank. Is it possible to call property what you do not have the right to dispose of?
                Please note: credentials for owning. In a public institution, the powers of a civil servant are exhausted, “using and disposing of property”. There can be no possession.
                1. alekseyal
                  alekseyal 11 November 2013 20: 01
                  +8
                  5. Lending to foreign economies (our lending is prohibited)
                  And most importantly: the gold reserves of the Bank of Russia are not in Russia. With the exception of gold stored in Russia, all other “reserves” of our Central Bank are computer “zeros”. Lying in computers of other states. After all, the gold and foreign exchange reserves of our Central Bank are invested in government bonds of other countries. Mostly in US government bonds.
                  “Article 22. The Bank of Russia is not entitled to provide loans to the Government of the Russian Federation to finance the federal budget deficit, to buy government securities at their initial placement.”
                  The Central Bank of the so-called "developed countries" lend their budget precisely by purchasing government bonds. The Central Bank of Russia has the right to buy bonds of only ALIEN countries, government bonds of Russia can not be bought, which means that by law it is obliged to lend to the economies of other countries. This is a hidden form of paying tribute.
                  1. alekseyal
                    alekseyal 11 November 2013 20: 02
                    +4
                    6. Courts
                    If the state wants to use the foreign exchange reserves of the Central Bank for the construction of new factories and roads. The Central Bank of Russia may complain to a foreign court!
                    "Article 6. The Bank of Russia has the right to apply for the protection of its interests to international courts, courts of foreign states and arbitration courts."
                    The Bank of Russia and the state themselves cannot resolve their dispute. Stockholm arbitration will decide. If the Central Bank appeals to some “Hague court”, then it will definitely win this process, and Russia will lose. Because the Central Bank is part of a system of similar central banks, which, in turn, are included in the system of the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
                    1. alekseyal
                      alekseyal 11 November 2013 20: 03
                      +4
                      7. Currency exchanger
                      How does the ruble issue?
                      Russia is obliged to ensure the exchange of all national currency for dollars, pounds, euros from its foreign exchange reserves. This is an IMF requirement. The Central Bank carries out the issue of the ruble in the currency board mode - in the transfer of the “Currency Committee”
                      This mode of operation of central banks has been known since the colonial institutions created by Britain in the XNUMXth century and is an element of its colonial policy. Its essence is that the issue of national currency goes against the reserves of another - the currency of the mother country. The national currency is secured by the currency of another country, which is stored in reserves, which can only be spent to support the national currency. In an economic sense, such a system is similar to a system using foreign currency instead of national currency. Printing your money against someone else’s security looks like a simple replacement of banknotes with some fixed ratio.
                      At the same time, the central bank of the colony loses the opportunity to issue money for lending to its own economy. The central bank of the colony country is only a branch of the central bank of the metropolis, performing exchange functions.
                      1. alekseyal
                        alekseyal 11 November 2013 20: 04
                        +4
                        8. Comparison with the State Bank in the USSR.
                        In the USSR, the finance system was built on the principles of common sense. The financial sector was managed by the Council of Ministers - the Government. The body implementing all the instructions of the Government on managing the monetary system was the State Bank, which issued money. He complied with the orders of the Government, there was no need to ask the permission of the State Bank, his leaders were appointed by decision of the Council of Ministers and removed as well. The State Bank did not have the right to sue a foreign court. The amount, amount of money needed for the economy was determined by the Council of Ministers, and the State Bank only issued them.
                      2. alekseyal
                        alekseyal 11 November 2013 20: 06
                        +5
                        9. Refinancing rate.
                        The Central Bank website has a sign - “Refinancing rate of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation”. This is the amount of interest under which the Central Bank should issue loans to commercial banks. This is a key indicator that all banks are targeting.
                        Now the rate is 8,25%. There were periods in history when the only issuer of rubles issued them at 210% per annum. It was just forgotten, but it was just that. From 1993 to 1996, almost three years, the rate was expressed in a three-digit number. Try to borrow at 210% per annum. What kind of business can be profitable with such a percentage?
                        The central bank should regulate monetary circulation so that the country breathes and develops freely. And already on his actions in many respects the level of inflation depends.
                        That is, inflation was colossal because the Central Bank kept such a high rate.
                        55% per annum was the refinancing rate when Putin became President in 2000. And after that, the percentage decreased until it reached the current 8,25%. The economy was able to somehow breathe. After all, the Central Bank consciously strangled her, absolutely consciously and purposefully.
                      3. Botanologist
                        Botanologist 11 November 2013 20: 25
                        +7
                        Quote: alekseyal
                        Printing your money against someone else’s security looks like a simple replacement of banknotes with some fixed ratio.


                        + to you. The essence is stated in detail and clearly.
                        Yarosvet, in my opinion, just decided to sleep on the topic - what a bad president, without completely understanding the topic.
                      4. Asan Ata
                        Asan Ata 12 November 2013 00: 07
                        +2
                        But he raised the topic! We will understand now what is happening in Kazakhstan.
                      5. aksakal
                        aksakal 12 November 2013 00: 51
                        +1
                        Quote: Asan Ata
                        But he raised the topic! We will understand now what is happening in Kazakhstan.
                        - the same thing, Asan Ata. Identical, except that the amount is 8-9 times less - just as much less the economy and population. Marchenko, when he was the head of the National Bank of the Republic of Kazakhstan, loved to play with tolerance, once a press conference was held on one of the financial sites, and I was just trying to ask these questions there - the moderator carefully deleted them, then a warning from this moderator came to me, my "destructive behavior and unhealthy curiosity" ... To be honest, a familiar feeling arose in me, this is probably innate or from childhood, when "for the bad about Lenin it was bad" - I did not understand myself, but I realized that it was impossible more ask stupid questions, but it is better to turn around and leave the site, let him talk about the idea of ​​the pension reform and other boring things .... So we have the same thing. Only we do not have Fedorov and Starikov to at least report this.
                  2. Yarosvet
                    11 November 2013 23: 12
                    -6
                    Quote: alekseyal
                    Lesha, my dear, replacing concepts is extremely ugly. laughing
                    Quote: Botanologist
                    Yarosvet, in my opinion, just decided to sleep on the topic
                    Botanologist, dear - ugly substitute concepts laughing

                    A question for both of you: Putin tried to nationalize the Central Bank? laughing
                  3. steel_balls
                    steel_balls 12 November 2013 01: 42
                    +2
                    I apologize, I do not really understand all the intricacies and would like to restore knowledge gaps. If I understand correctly, you blame merit for lowering the refinancing rate to Putin, but if the Central Bank is not a state. structure and is not subordinate to the president and the government, how is the reduction in the rate of refinancing from 55% per annum to 8,25% related to the period of Putin's presidency? What suddenly changed, and why did the central bank suddenly decide to lower the rate? And then Putin, if our Central Bank does not obey him? And if nevertheless it is his merit, then why the rate does not decrease further? After all, no one argues that it is still too big and fatal for the economy?
                    Everything doesn’t add up somehow .. Or do I don’t know something?
                  4. alekseyal
                    alekseyal 12 November 2013 05: 35
                    0
                    October 11, 2000: “Around the new Central Bank law, passions have been boiling for a long time. But until recently, the president did not intervene in them. In late September, Vladimir Putin introduced his amendments - the meaning of the presidential amendments is the nationalization of the Central Bank. ”

                    October 18, 2000: “Nationalization of the Central Bank is postponed. The State Duma working group decided not to change the status of the Bank of Russia. ” In the wake of euphoria, the new government tried to solve the most difficult task with a run. Immediately rushed to the "Koshcheev egg." The cavalry attack did not succeed. After all, this is a key link not of the Russian, but of the global “koshchei”. And therefore, the Duma parties, which vied with each other to support Putin when he was first elected president, “suddenly” refused to accept his amendments to the Central Bank law. Why did Putin come to power and immediately try to raise the question of changing the status of the Central Bank? As long as the Central Bank is “independent” from the country, while its gold reserves are just a “guarantee” for printing rubles, there will be no development in Russia.

                    Maybe Putin accidentally tried to nationalize the Central Bank? Having become president, you can go into the course of what is happening for a very long time - there is a lot to do in a crumbling power. There is a war in Chechnya. But for some reason, the new president is showing interest in the Central Bank.

                    What should be done if there is an understanding of the importance of the task, but there is no strength to solve it? Proceed to a planned siege. Break one task into several smaller ones. To change the legislation on the Central Bank, you need a vote in the Duma. The creators of the Bank of Russia perfectly understood its key importance. And so they tried to put several degrees of protection. The first degree is the law on the Central Bank. It contains, for example, such amusing moments as Article 7: “Draft federal laws, as well as regulatory acts of federal executive bodies relating to the fulfillment by the Bank of Russia of its functions, are sent to the conclusion of the Bank of Russia.” If you want to remove and fire bankers by changing the laws, please, send them a draft in advance. And then they will file a lawsuit in your state of Delaware for your lawlessness ...

                    The second degree of protection is the Constitution. Indeed, in order to be safe, the “young reformers” put words about the Central Bank and its status even into it. Article 75 (paragraphs 1 and 2) states that “the monetary unit in the Russian Federation is the ruble”, and “the monetary issue is carried out exclusively by the Central Bank of the Russian Federation”, “which it carries out independently of other public authorities”. If you want to be surprised, read the Soviet constitutions. Read the US Constitution. Nowhere will you find mention of a bank that independently issues money. Because such articles have nothing to do in the basic law. Who issues the currency is a technical issue, not a fundamental one for the people and the country. For the people, of course, it is, but for the enslavement of the country, the question is key. Therefore, he was hastily dragged into the Constitution. And now this technical issue coexists there with the fundamental rights of Russian citizens.

                    All subsequent steps of the Russian government will become logical if you count yourselves from the failed cavalry attack on the Central Bank.
                  5. alekseyal
                    alekseyal 12 November 2013 05: 37
                    0
                    Does Russia work badly? Nonsense. This is the same as explaining anemia by the fact that the patient works little and poorly, forgetting that doctors simply forget how to feed him. The Central Bank deliberately demonetized the Russian economy. Just as a certain amount of blood is required for the normal life of the human body, so a certain amount of money is needed for the normal functioning of the economy. The amount of money in the Russian economy was sharply reduced, which immediately led to the absence of “long” money for economic growth and the inhibition of economic growth. And the volume of the “krovushka” released from the economy is from 1,3 to 2 trillion dollars. For such a policy, the Central Bank of Russia will rightly call the Central Bank of Russia.

                    The demonetization of the Russian economy has been carried out since the beginning of the 1990s during the period of the active introduction of the development of American experts into the Russian macroeconomic and financial policy. Monetization still not restored.

                    What made the Central Bank gradually lower its high interest rate? Or maybe not what, but who made them weaken the interest stranglehold tightened on the neck of our economy?

                    What to do if the Central Bank is not under control, and the economy needs to be raised? You can’t take control of the structure - create its understudy. That is, a development bank and foreign economic activity. This organization is known to the general public under the name Vnesheconombank. In fact, it is the successor of the Soviet “Bank for Foreign Economic Activity of the USSR” (Vnesheconombank of the USSR). With the collapse of the USSR, this bank, which had previously financed all foreign trade in the Soviet Union, lost its significance and gave way to the Central Bank of Russia under the financial sun. Because the first was state, and the second only mimics under the state. In the first years after the death of the USSR, Vnesheconombank was engaged almost exclusively in negotiations on the principles and terms of payment of its external debt, which completely fell on the shoulders of Russia alone. And in 2001, “suddenly” a revival begins: “In the period from 2001 to 2003, Vnesheconombank, on behalf of the Government, provided funding for a number of social projects.” And then even more interesting: “2002, Reorganization of Vnesheconombank’s activities, strengthening its role as a state financial institution. In accordance with the decision of the Government, a set of measures was taken to reorganize the activities of Vnesheconombank. In the same year, Vnesheconombank began to deal with the money of the Pension Fund. And in 2003, by a government decree, VEB was appointed the State Management Company for the Investment of Pension Savings of Citizens.

                    You can’t take control of the structure - create an understudy. This is what caused the unexpected “revival” of Vnesheconombank. In 2007, the form changed - the state-owned corporation Bank for Development and Foreign Economic Affairs (Vnesheconombank) was created. In the next year, 2008, VEB is involved in financing more than seventy investment projects with a total value of about 750 billion rubles. He gives long-term loans to legal entities for periods of more than five to ten years. That is, it does what the Central Bank does not want to do.

                    “Since October 2008 ... Vnesheconombank has been carrying out additional functions, which include refinancing the debts of Russian companies and banks to foreign creditors, providing subordinated loans, and also supporting the stock market.”
                  6. alekseyal
                    alekseyal 12 November 2013 05: 38
                    0
                    In August 2009, a federal law came into force that vests Vnesheconombank with the right to invest in corporate, sub-federal, mortgage bonds, bonds of international financial organizations and deposits in credit institutions. That is, to buy not only US government bonds, but also bonds of their own country and its companies. Please note: Vnesheconombank MAY buy mortgage bonds of the notorious “Fanny May” and “Freddy Mack”, but the most Russian mortgage bonds. There is another feature - the development bank, unlike other banks, is not subordinate to the Central Bank, being an agent of the government, which alone can control it.

                    Confrontation goes on behind the scenes, the battle for financial sovereignty is being fought in the silence of classrooms. What remains in this situation of the Central Bank? Reduce the refinancing rate and listen to the Russian authorities.

                    And if you still have doubts that the Central Bank's huge gold and foreign exchange reserves do not belong to Russia, just ask yourself: why is the government going to sell packages of different companies? Why, with more than 450 billion dollars in gold reserves, sell the shares of Rosneft and VTB? To get the money. Why sell liquid assets to get money, if that money is already full?
              2. alekseyal
                alekseyal 12 November 2013 06: 25
                0
                I advise you to read the book "Nationalization of the ruble. The path to freedom of Russia"
                http://nstarikov.ru/books/7199

                Unlimited release of unsecured money was the century-old dream of bankers and money lenders. This is the shortest path to world domination. Today, all this has become a reality.

                As a result of the defeat in the Cold War, Russia is deprived of a significant part of its sovereignty. The Russian ruble no longer belongs to its people. The way out of the impasse for our country is to change the existing model for issuing money.

                After reading this book, you will learn:

                - What are the gold and foreign exchange reserves of Russia and why do they not belong to the Russian state?
                - Who was Stalin's “Chubais” and how did the leader of the peoples deal with him?
                - How is the death of American presidents related to different types of the same American dollars?
                “How did Benito Mussolini collaborate with British intelligence, and what came of it?”
                - Why did the USSR refuse to join the IMF and sign the Bretton Woods agreement?
                - Who and why received the knighthood for the death of Stalin?
                - What constitution did Academician Sakharov propose to his country?

                The history of the creation of the Bank of England, the reasons for the assassination of Joseph Stalin, unknown snipers on the roofs of Moscow in October 93, the Central Bank of Russia, independent of Russia, are all parts of one whole. The roots of one tree.

                Table of contents

                Chapter 1. About lost state sovereignty
                Chapter 2. About the Fed and the Central Bank of Russia
                http://nstarikov.ru/new/books/nr1.doc
                Chapter 3. About the Bank of England and the painful relatives of the “sun king”
                Chapter 4. Six stories about spies, or The Incredible Adventures of Ribbentrop in Russia
                Chapter 5. Why Stalin did not sign the Bretton Woods Agreement
                Chapter 6. How Winston Churchill lost the Second World War and how he recouped
                Chapter 7. How Peace Fighter Benito Mussolini Supposed for War
                Chapter 8. How bankers conquered the United States, or What disappeared from a dollar bill
                Chapter 9. How Comrade Stalin appreciated and loved his “Chubais” and what came of it
                Chapter 10. Why is the name of the square in Washington named after Academician Sakharov
                Chapter 11. Greetings from the Queen of England, or Why Canada Did Not Have a Constitution
                Chapter 12. On the role of snipers in world history
              3. Yarosvet
                12 November 2013 13: 23
                0
                Quote: steel_balls
                Everything doesn’t add up somehow .. Or do I don’t know something?

                You correctly noted the connection between rates and Putin, and the answer about independence lies in the answer to the question: "How independent is the one who is appointed from the one who appoints, provided that the latter remains the boss of the former?"
              4. Alexander Romanov
                Alexander Romanov 12 November 2013 13: 26
                +2
                Quote: Yarosvet
                "How independent is the one who is appointed from the one who appoints, provided that the latter remains the boss of the former?"

                You would tie Yarosvet with grass.
              5. Yarosvet
                12 November 2013 14: 26
                0
                Quote: Alexander Romanov
                You would tie Yarosvet with grass.

                What - do not want others to repeat your sad experience? laughing
              6. Alexander Romanov
                Alexander Romanov 12 November 2013 15: 13
                0
                Quote: Yarosvet
                What - do not want others to repeat your sad experience?

                Well, I see you already repeated and even surpassed me greatly wassat
              7. Yarosvet
                12 November 2013 15: 42
                +1
                Quote: Alexander Romanov
                Well, I see you already repeated and even surpassed me greatly

                drinks
  • Normal
    Normal 11 November 2013 22: 16
    -3
    Quote: alekseyal
    The opportunity to dismiss the chairman of the Bank of Russia from his post for the president and the Duma is purely theoretical.

    Defining provisions:

    Constitution of the Russian Federation (RF)

    Article 83. The President of the Russian Federation:
    .........
    d) submits to the State Duma a candidate for appointment to the post of Chairman of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation; puts before the State Duma the issue of dismissal of the Chairman of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation;
    .........

    Article 103

    1. The jurisdiction of the State Duma includes:

    .........
    d) appointment and dismissal of the Chairman of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation;


    Practice:
    Ignatiev, Sergey Mikhailovich

    In 1991-1992 - Deputy Minister of Economics and Finance of Russia, [1]included in the "team" of Yegor Gaidar.
    In 1992 - Deputy Minister of Finance of Russia.
    In 1992-1993 - Deputy Chairman of the Central Bank of Russia.
    In 1993-1996 - Deputy Minister of Economy of Russia.
    In 1996-1997 - Assistant to the President of Russia on economic issues.
    In 1997-2002 - First Deputy Minister of Finance of Russia.
    Since March 20, 2002 - Chairman of the Central Bank of Russia.
    Since 2002, at the same time, has been Chairman of the Supervisory Board of Sberbank of Russia.
    November 16, 2005 approved by the Chairman of the Central Bank of Russia for a second term.
    June 24, 2009 approved by the Chairman of the Central Bank of Russia for the third term (for the first time in the history of post-Soviet Russia).


    Quote: alekseyal
    If the chairman of the Central Bank: ....... - then it is impossible to remove it. And the President of Russia and the Duma can not do anything.

    So neither the President nor the Duma can do anything?
    Well, on the other hand, they can propose and approve the same person again and again as the chairman of the Central Bank.
    So the President and the Duma arrange the actions of the Central Bank under the leadership of this person. Is not it?
    And of course, you need to recall that:


    Chapter 4. President of Russian Federation

    Article 80

    1. The President of the Russian Federation is the head of state.

    2. The President of the Russian Federation is the guarantor of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the rights and freedoms of man and citizen. In accordance with the procedure established by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, he takes measures to protect the sovereignty of the Russian Federation, its independence and state integrity, ensures the coordinated functioning and interaction of state authorities

    3. President of the Russian Federation in accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation and federal laws defines the main directions of domestic and foreign policy of the state.
    ........
  • SSR
    SSR 11 November 2013 22: 53
    0
    So them! And they’re talking about what they don’t have an idea about, the main thing for them is louder and taller and specific questions about the eagle on the coat of arms and the eagle on den signs are lowered into the water.
  • SSR
    SSR 11 November 2013 22: 56
    +1
    For the gifted. Bank of Russia and Bank of Russia
    Here is a comb
    Feel the difference finally.
  • Botanologist
    Botanologist 11 November 2013 19: 50
    10
    Quote: baltika-18
    Yarosvet laid out specifically


    Let me ask you what exactly Yarosvet laid out specifically? What is the Bank of the Russian Federation the Bank of the Russian Federation? Captain Evidence in action.
    And why the other problem, which is the main one, that the Bank of the Russian Federation is a structure, is not covered, issuing? And that it is his activity that leads to expensive loans, the dollar peg of the ruble and much more.
    And for some reason, the author did not indicate that the Bank of the Russian Federation is on self-sufficiency. Really great? It’s the same as transferring self-sufficiency to the police, army, courts, etc.
    Minus.
    1. Yarosvet
      11 November 2013 23: 15
      -4
      Quote: Botanologist
      And why another problem is not covered

      Because the article is called: "... about how the good king nationalized the central bank of the state ...." laughing
  • varov14
    varov14 11 November 2013 20: 38
    +3
    Somehow it’s not unambiguous, it turns out that a state body can put sticks in the wheels of the same state. Those. if the board of directors is 5 columns, then they can pursue an anti-state policy and quite legally (the body is independent of anyone), they can’t even be involved, unless they are quietly destroyed.
  • orek
    orek 11 November 2013 21: 49
    +4
    Interest rates on certain types of consumer loans in the USSR are differentiated as follows:

    Loans for industrial goods (consumer lending) - 2%
    Loans for the construction of individual residential buildings - from 1 to 2,7%
    Loans to members of housing cooperatives
    for payment of shares - 2,7%
    Loans for the purchase of goods
    durable use - 5 - 6%
    Loans with state subsidies to young spouses:
    for the purchase of an apartment - 1% '
    for apartment equipment - 2,5%
    Personal loans (without specifying the purpose of use) - 8%
    Loans for construction and purchase of summer cottages - 8% '

    K N I G A
    "Consumer loan in the USSR"
    (Publishing house "Knowledge", Moscow, 1983)

    That's about how I wanted to answer baltika-18, so as not to write on 8 comments.
  • Alexander Romanov
    Alexander Romanov 11 November 2013 16: 19
    20
    I read up to half of the article and drew attention to the many "revelations". The first one I remembered was our Yarosvet, I scrolled down and the article turned out to be him. With his love for Putin, everything is clear, but what is missing in the article is DUMM pictures and demotivators that Yarosvet shoves into most of his comments.
    Everything has been said about the Central Bank without Komersant
    1. Ribwort
      Ribwort 11 November 2013 21: 39
      0
      Quote: Alexander Romanov
      but what’s missing in the article is Dumb pictures and demotivators

      Oh, that's not a problem, I have a lot of them. Want to put in a couple wink
  • IRBIS
    IRBIS 11 November 2013 15: 27
    24
    Frankly, I didn’t understand who was holding whom and for what? Either the President of the Duma, or vice versa. Or did both the President and the Duma take the people for the peep? Or are they all holding us for suckers? So tricky and not entirely clear, but was there, in fact, a boy?
    Maybe there is a simpler and more understandable explanation? I do not understand the subject of discussion. After all, if the Central Bank of the Russian Federation belongs to someone other than the state, then to hell with us such a state, working in the interests of a handful of gay people?
    1. smile
      smile 11 November 2013 16: 22
      +3
      IRBIS
      Yes, the fact is that the author of the article indicated that. that the tales of grandfather Mazay, oh, sorry, Fedorov and, unfortunately, the good writer Starikov, but the worthless politician Starikov that the Central Bank is a private shop is a common lie. Moreover, lies, which only people can believe in, who are eager to believe in some bad acts of power, whose mind is not enough to grasp the meaning of what they are bringing in.

      Abstracting from the fact that our power is good or bad, I want to note that such tales objectively work only for the benefit of Putin’s opponents. - His supporters suspect that Putin is not taking such an important step as the alleged nationalization of the Central Bank allegedly in private hands, and Putin, therefore, is some inconsistent muddy guy. Opponents of Putin, who believed in this foolishness, are just laughing, saying, of course, the tsar is not in the know, and bad boyars are trying to add him up. :))) In their opinion, the evil Putin specifically turned the Central Bank into a private shop for himself and his minions ... yeah, and at night he takes out bags of money from the Central Bank. :)))

      As a result, the fairy tale, on the one hand, represents Fedorov as a patriot who cares for the Russian state, and not as a liar, which he turns out to be. And on the other hand is a lie, slander on Putin.
      Putin and his politics are already full of shortcomings and real mistakes and mistakes, and generally inexplicable for me personally outbreaks (just like merit and success) - well, we need to criticize him in the case. When someone tries to prove with the help of impudent lies that he is a bad head of state, and at the same time, with the help of this populist lies to earn a political capitalist and rise in the power ladder, it only causes me contempt.

      Many thanks to the author. I did not expect such an article from you, to be honest.
      1. Ivan_Ivanov
        Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 16: 45
        +6
        Imagine that you can take a person to work, but you can’t fire him, you can’t deprive him of a bonus, you can’t give him any order, you can’t forbid him anything, you can’t change anything that he did ... Does this mean that you manage, manage? ...

        What about ?! You took him to work!
        1. smile
          smile 11 November 2013 17: 12
          -2
          Ivan_Ivanov
          Do not exaggerate the untouchability of the head of the Central Bank. You can remove anyone with completely legitimate methods. By the way, do you know that we, for example, have all the judges? You know. that our deputies are almost the same? Therefore, please ponder the meaning of specific proposals of Comrade Fedorov, rejecting his populist good wishes. You will be unpleasantly surprised if you analyze them with a specialist.

          By the way, I’m not saying that I like the policy of our Central Bank, its leadership or that nothing needs to be changed there. I discuss only the main topic, that politician Fedorov uses the demagogic lie as the foundation of his political platform, which, in my opinion, is unacceptable. What can he build on a foundation of lies?
          1. Ivan_Ivanov
            Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 17: 28
            +7
            You can remove anyone with completely legitimate methods.

            Federal Law "On the Central Bank N 86-FZ (nke of the Russian Federation (Bank of Russia)"
            Chapter 3

            The Chairman of the Bank of Russia may be dismissed only in the following cases:
            expiration of the term of office;
            the impossibility of performing official duties, confirmed by the conclusion of the state medical commission;
            submitting a personal resignation letter;
            the commission of a criminal offense established by a court verdict that has entered into legal force;
            violations of federal laws that govern issues related to the activities of the Bank of Russia;
            failure to take measures to prevent or resolve a conflict of interest to which he is a party, failure to submit or provide incomplete or inaccurate information about his income, expenses, property and property obligations, or failure to submit or submit knowingly incomplete or inaccurate information about income, expenses, property and obligations of the property nature of their spouse (spouse) and minor children in cases ...

            So, your statement does not concern the head of the Central Bank.
            1. smile
              smile 11 November 2013 18: 45
              -2
              Ivan_Ivanov
              Tell me. you really don't understand. what are you talking about. Or are you trying to juggle the facts?
              Okay. I will admit. I don’t understand, I quote from the Central Bank Law:
              1.st 12 - on the National Banking Council. who makes all decisions, and not the head of the Central Bank
              "The National Banking Council is a collegial body of the Bank of Russia.
              The number of the National Banking Council is 12, of which two are sent by the Federation Council of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation from among the members of the Federation Council, three by the State Duma from among the deputies of the State Duma, three by the President of the Russian Federation, three by the Government of the Russian Federation. The National Banking Council also includes the Chairman of the Bank of Russia.
              The recall of members of the National Banking Council is carried out by the state authority that sent them to the National Banking Council.
              Members of the National Banking Council, with the exception of the Chairman of the Bank of Russia, do not work at the Bank of Russia on an ongoing basis and do not receive payment for this activity.
              The Chairman of the National Banking Council is elected by the members of the National Banking Council from among them by a majority of votes of the total number of members of the National Banking Council.
              The Chairman of the National Banking Council carries out general management of its activities, presides over its meetings. In the absence of the Chairman of the National Banking Council, his functions shall be performed by a deputy elected from among the members of the National Banking Council by a majority of votes of the total number of members of the National Banking Council.
              Decisions of the National Banking Council are adopted by a majority vote of the number of members of the National Banking Council present with a quorum of seven people.
              When decisions are taken by the National Banking Council, the opinions of members of the National Banking Council who are in the minority are recorded at their request in the minutes of the meeting of the National Banking Council ..... well, etc. I hope the meaning of this article is clear?

              Next.
              You quoted from article 14 of the law. Forgot to mention that the chapter is elected for 5 years. He cannot reverse the decision of the banking council.

              Under the clause you mentioned "failure to take measures to prevent or resolve a conflict of interest to which he is a party" can be summed up ANY wrong action of the head of the Central Bank, when he did not obey the order of the country's authorities. You just don't understand what this paragraph means.
              And the fact that for five years is right is that they should not be turned around as you want, just like any deputy. But some judges, so generally lifelong to be independent.

              The bottom line remains, you are operating with those concepts, the essence of which, alas, do not understand.
              1. Ivan_Ivanov
                Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 18: 59
                +2
                Where are the powers of this council described in the law ???
                Can they cancel the decisions of the head of the Central Bank, can they force him to execute their orders? Can they finally fire him?

                NO. Can not.

                "failure to take measures to prevent or resolve a conflict of interest to which he is a party"

                Any measures of the head of the Central Bank can be interpreted as measures taken. Nowhere in the law does it say that these measures must be effective. I wrote a couple of letters - everything took action ...
                1. smile
                  smile 11 November 2013 20: 13
                  -5
                  Ivan_Ivanov
                  So you still don’t understand, but you are rigging the facts, excuse me.
                  So, "failure to take measures to prevent or resolve a conflict of interest to which he is a party" "Nowhere in the law is it written that these measures must be effective" ... correct - therefore, the assessment of whether or not measures were taken, whether they are necessary and sufficient, remain entirely at the discretion of the State Duma, which has the right in this case to dismiss him, with a whistle! :))). What is not clear?:)))


                  And about where the powers of the council are stated :)))) Yes, in your favorite law :))) I even indicated the article, I just didn’t cite the article completely-too ​​long:))) .... maybe you can study it anyway, huh ... :)))) And this is exactly the advice that decides how the Central Bank works. And their position is determined by those who delegated them to the Central Bank. Elementary Watson.:))))
            2. Yarosvet
              11 November 2013 20: 12
              0
              Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
              So, your statement does not concern the head of the Central Bank.

              In your opinion, the law on the Central Bank should stipulate that in case of violation of the legislation of the Russian Federation, the head of the Central Bank will be subjected to criminal prosecution?
              Isn't that a fact for granted?
          2. Asgard
            Asgard 11 November 2013 17: 33
            0
            Volodya, today is Discovery Day ... People)))))))
            You see at the root ...
            The veil falls from the eyes))))
            I AM PLEASED TO
            1. smile
              smile 11 November 2013 18: 23
              -3
              Asgard
              Hello! Volodya himself! :)))
              C'mon, I always thought so, I didn’t have any shroud in this regard. If I do not criticize, this does not mean that I like everything. :)))
              1. Ruslan67
                Ruslan67 11 November 2013 18: 49
                +4
                Quote: smile
                . If I do not criticize, this does not mean that I like everything. :)))

                Now please list what you don’t like, I’m writing down bully Hello myself Toothy drinks laughing
                1. smile
                  smile 11 November 2013 19: 10
                  0
                  Ruslan67
                  Hi!!!!
                  Yeah, just give me a claw - then later on this list at every opportunity ... yes, in a brazen red face ... :))))
                  1. Ruslan67
                    Ruslan67 11 November 2013 20: 29
                    +2
                    Quote: smile
                    .da on the impudent red face ... :)))))

                    Also under the tail a prickly broom wassat I have had such toothy ones since the year 84 of the last century, exactly 27 pieces, from the Chinese crested to the classic German shepherd trained on the ZKS So ... laughing hi
                    1. smile
                      smile 11 November 2013 21: 37
                      0
                      Ruslan67
                      Wow experience ... a whole menagerie ... and crested, why? She’s terrible, like my personal life and useless, like politician Fedorov. :))) And her character is like a mad crocodile. :))) Or for wife-children?

                      And about "so" - we'll see it! :))) Why do you think the big and clawed ones live there in their settlements? They are afraid of us, toothy ones! :)))
                      I just looked at my avatar and realized that she reminds me of someone from "Mowgli" ... such redheads :)))
                      1. Ruslan67
                        Ruslan67 11 November 2013 23: 43
                        +2
                        Quote: smile
                        ..a crested, why?

                        Inherited from his wife’s sister request
                        Quote: smile
                        And her character is like a mad crocodile.

                        Just scum negative
                        Quote: smile
                        why big and clawed live there in their settlements? They are afraid of us, toothy! :)))

                        That would not upset the balance in nature, one clawed on ... what There is a number that moderators do not miss wassat
                        Quote: smile
                        I looked at my profile picture now and realized that she reminds me of someone

                        Better late than no one tongue drinks
          3. Botanologist
            Botanologist 11 November 2013 20: 37
            +3
            Quote: smile
            You can remove anyone with completely legitimate methods.


            What's the point? In general, in this system, personalities do not matter. Just imagine - you have been appointed a judge. And you, in your personal opinion, think that a murder should be given a life sentence. And in your law it is written before 15 - and that’s it. And what will you do? Give life? You are regulated by the LAW.
            The same with the Central Bank - at least put a horse, and the refinancing rate will be determined by the IMF.
            You simply personify the problem, without delving into the essence of the processes.
            1. smile
              smile 11 November 2013 21: 46
              -1
              Botanologist
              Personally, I did not go beyond the scope of the topic of the article. Intentionally. Because otherwise it is necessary to write entire articles, not comments, and seriously go into the law.

              And the topic of the article is Fedorov a liar and a populist. This is the author proved. I object to the fans of Fedorov, in view of the fact that their attempts to justify the correctness of Fedorov with the help of the above norms of law failed. It turned out that they themselves do not understand the meaning of the law with which they are trying to operate.
              I treat Fyodorov badly only because the basis of his platform is a false statement. Demagogue, and terry. To discuss the rest, to be honest, there is no desire. Excuse me, okay?
              1. Botanologist
                Botanologist 11 November 2013 22: 06
                0
                Quote: smile
                And the topic of the article is Fedorov a liar and a populist.


                Some of us did not understand something.
                Topic of the article: Fairy tales of new Russia: the tale of how the good king of the central bank of the state nationalized, and the evil boyars prevented him

                Quote: smile
                I treat Fyodorov badly only because the basis of his platform is a false statement.


                Actually, I do not belong to Fedorov at all. If we discuss every political pug here - there will not be enough time, and the site will be ... dirty.
                I’m more about the fact that the article raises the Bank of Russia question upside down. And according to Fedorov or Chubais - these are already details.
                1. smile
                  smile 11 November 2013 23: 40
                  -2
                  Botanologist
                  The name really is, but the author proved that the battle cry of Fedorov is a dummy, a fairy tale. I believe that this dummy is used mainly against Putin.
                  The author is known as an ardent opponent of Putin, it makes no difference to me, because in this article, in my opinion, he is right, and perhaps not wanting to, he at this moment became my like-minded person :))). I repeat, the article was considered in the narrow sense.
              2. Yarosvet
                11 November 2013 23: 18
                -3
                Quote: smile
                And the topic of the article is Fedorov a liar and a populist. This is the author proved.
                Excuse me, Vladimir - could not resist, set + drinks
      2. Normal
        Normal 11 November 2013 17: 23
        -1
        Quote: smile
        Yes, the fact is that the author of the article indicated that. that the tales of grandfather Mazay, oh, sorry, Fedorov and, unfortunately, the good writer Starikov, but the worthless politician Starikov that the Central Bank is a private shop is a common lie.

        Quote: smile
        Many thanks to the author. I did not expect such an article from you, to be honest.

        And I did not expect from you, the namesake, such a comment. Apparently today is such a day for me, then the elder surprises me, then you.
        To be honest - a plus.
        1. smile
          smile 11 November 2013 18: 51
          -2
          Normal
          Guys ... I even re-read my comment. :))) I did not find anything in it that would contradict what I wrote earlier ... I'm sorry, I didn’t get it, what are you and Asgard saying so to my words reacted ... :))) But in any case, agreeing is much nicer than swearing. :)))
          1. Ruslan67
            Ruslan67 12 November 2013 00: 17
            +2
            Quote: smile
            Normal

            Toothy! And that you have already been released from a madhouse? whatMr. Normal told me that you are in his emergency? it was before you brought me into it request
      3. rolik
        rolik 11 November 2013 19: 06
        0
        Quote: smile
        Putin and his politics are already full of shortcomings and real mistakes and mistakes, and generally inexplicable for me personally outbreaks (just like merit and success) - well, you need to criticize him in the case.

        There is no perfect car, perfect plane, perfect state, perfect mechanism. Everywhere there are disadvantages and advantages. So here, there is no good king, there was not and never will be. And in the article, I apologize in advance, sawdust is sawed. The activity, in principle, is useless, but it lets others know that you are still, sort of, in business. Not exhausted, not impotent, but sort of like a male. But this is only an illusion. The dependence of our Central Bank on the Fed has long been known; no America is open here. I just don’t understand why the article is not mentioned. Article 22 The Government of the Russian Federation, in accordance with paragraph d of Article 114 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, in order to increase the efficiency of use of federal property:
        1. Approves a mechanism for issuing cash based solely on lending to banks at established interest rates.
        2. establishes the interest rates specified in paragraph 1 of this article;
        3. establishes criteria for the efficient use of the Bank of Russia gold and currency reserves: determines foreign currencies based on their profitability, proportional ratio of foreign currencies, and the possibility of investing in the economy of the Russian Federation.
        Note Government, not anyone else. The Central Bank of the Russian Federation becomes a part of the executive branch represented by the Government of the Russian Federation, issuing cash and non-cash money as directed and in amounts agreed by the Government of the Russian Federation at a statutory fixed interest rate. Since 1995, the Central Bank of the Russian Federation stopped lending to the federal budget deficit and targeted lending to industry, which means that the Government of the Russian Federation cannot use gold and foreign exchange reserves for purposes other than increasing the capitalization of commercial banks. Consequently, in order to fulfill the social functions of the budget, the Government will have to nationalize the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, making it the State Bank of the Russian Federation. Today, the budget revenues of the Russian Federation are: 35% of VAT, 33% of customs duties, 16% of the mineral extraction tax and 16% of the income tax, that is, budget revenues are directly related to the sale of energy resources abroad and trade within the country. From here comes.
        1. The social burden of the budget has more than doubled, which characterizes the increase in the number of pensioners relative to 1990, as well as the inefficient use of funds when the federal budget is responsible for the entire social policy of the territories and regions of the Russian Federation,
        2. An increase in the budget load on public administration and law enforcement and an equal decrease in the financing of health care, education and science creates an unacceptable bias in the formation of budget expenditures, since such financing significantly reduces the contribution to the future development of the country,
        3. A halving in relation to the GDP of the budget indicates a reduction in spending on investment in the economy, and defense spending, in fact, also by a factor of two, while maintaining social security, which government agencies must do to prevent a social explosion. At the same time, an increase in financing of law enforcement activities by a factor of 6 and a 30-fold increase in public administration costs testify to the creation of a police, totalitarian state and the inefficiency of economic management, in contrast to the “crisis” of 1990.
        1. rolik
          rolik 11 November 2013 19: 24
          +2
          Quote: rolik
          in contrast to the "crisis" of 1990.

          I will continue, perhaps.
          The current budget does not allow for the growth of the country's economy, is dependent on the external environment of energy prices and produces a huge number of “eaters” that are not connected in any way with production. With a decrease in external energy consumption, budget revenues will be greatly reduced, and the use of foreign exchange reserves received from rising oil and gas prices. With the nationalization of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, such problems will begin that the initiators (Fedorov and K) of the bill apparently did not suspect or humbly ignored, preferring not to wake the sleeping bear.
          1. Monetary reform, since sovereign monetary policy involves a different budget, a different definition of the monetary base and a different development of credit and money relations in Russia. Today's practice of creating money supply by commercial banks and a low money multiplier should remain in the past, otherwise a complete nationalization of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation will not work.
          2. Nationalization of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation will inevitably lead to the nationalization of the oil and gas industry, since at the initial stage of forming the budget of Russia and creating the initial monetary base, it is necessary to develop a basis for its value in addition to legislative support for the ruble, and to do this without taking into account the subsoil and recoverable natural resources not allowed. Thus, all natural resources, oil and gas companies, transporting and port facilities should become state-owned.
          3. The amount of cash money supply should be made up of the total cost of goods and services, supporting the activities of banking departments of Sberbank of Russia, namely, its network should become a credit institution for cash turnover. At the same time, the cash turnover should be strictly taken into account, and the issue can only be carried out by the State Bank of Russia on the basis of annual money supply growth plans, in line with the growth of commodity production and services.
          4. Consequently, all enterprises and organizations without fail to surrender the entire amount of cash revenue, but also make up the need for cash in development plans that take into account the growth of industrial production and the volume of services. Such planning conditions imply the creation of the State Planning Commission, since the enterprises themselves cannot coordinate each other's work to increase the growth of industrial production and consumption of raw materials. Consequently, the vast majority of strategic and city-forming enterprises should be nationalized as soon as possible and included in the system of state planning and ensuring credit and monetary relations.
          1. rolik
            rolik 11 November 2013 19: 28
            +3
            Quote: rolik
            securing credit and monetary relations.

            Not everything fit)))) I complete.
            5. At the same time, the volume of non-cash money supply will be formed based on the needs of the development of industrial production, and the money multiplier as the ratio of the monetary base of the State Bank to the volume of industrial loans issued will become a criterion for assessing the effectiveness of the economy. To reduce inflation, it is necessary in no case to direct non-cash money supply to private consumption, so as not to increase the cash money supply, but strive to lower prices to reduce costs, thereby increasing the purchasing power of the ruble and its competitiveness in world markets.
            6. Agricultural production, due to its current disruption and insufficient development of private farms, in a planned economy, it is necessary to transfer to the formation in the image of industrial production, with the creation of separate specialized units within a single production. Lending to such industries is no different about industry, but can be divided by season and degree of agricultural production.
            7. Thus, land and mineral resources, following minerals and industrial enterprises, are also subject to nationalization, where all means of production become the object of state management, state lending and state planning, without which the State Bank of Russia cannot exist.
            And now let us ask ourselves whether our Government will be able to do this. I give 100% will not be able and will not want, considering who is there now. First of all, for the "nationalization" of the Central Bank, it is necessary to expel the entire chamber, headed by the DAM, in a lock. For this, at least for now, the GDP is not going. What are the reasons for this, no one knows. Even if he says he knows, he still doesn't know))))
            Now compare the GDP, Yeltsin, Gorbachev, Zyuganov, Zhirinovsky. Who would you like to see at the head of state at this stage of time. Ivashov does not offer, he will not pull, in any case.
            And remember how you lived in the period from 1990 to 2000. I remember miners pounding helmets on asphalt, half a year of unpaid pension, officers firing from hopelessness, barter, offsets, etc., etc., etc. I remember - and you?
            1. viborzanami
              viborzanami 11 November 2013 22: 58
              +1
              Anecdote in the topic:
              - Why are you not happy with Putin?
              - It is difficult to find work without experience, prices are rising, rents are rising ...
              - Was it better in 90?
              - No problem. In the kindergarten I had breakfast, played and sleep! ..
      4. Viking
        Viking 11 November 2013 19: 26
        +2
        Quote: smile
        Moreover, lies, which only people can believe in, who are eager to believe in some bad acts of power, whose mind is not enough to grasp the meaning of what they are bringing in.

        Yeah, out of habit, by all means they want to put an equal sign between the Central Bank of the Russian Federation and the US Federal Reserve.
      5. Yarosvet
        11 November 2013 20: 05
        -7
        Quote: smile
        Many thanks to the author. I did not expect such an article from you, to be honest.

        Please Vladimir, but the trouble is that you are again replacing the concepts of trying to bleach a black male.

        Fedorov is a member of EP, the party of the president, and it is unlikely that such tales would be broadcast from the bulldozer.

        The fact is that there were no attempts at nationalization, but there is a need to convince society of their reality - to make a giant out of a dwarf.
        And these tales play into the hands of the president.

        Putin really has a lot of stocks, but there really is no merit or success: you once wrote that you can’t divide everything into black and white - and here I agree with you. And therefore it is all the more surprising for me that in this case you are promoting dualism: You see, Vladimir, in addition to the pros (overfulfillment of your duties) and the minuses (underfulfillment and nonfulfillment) there is also a middle - a norm that is the fulfillment of its duties in accordance with the law, which is neither fully nor predominantly ever observed.
      6. varov14
        varov14 11 November 2013 20: 55
        +3
        Dear, you did not catch the essence of the issue - a state body can work contrary to the needs and requirements of the state.
    2. bolonenkov
      bolonenkov 11 November 2013 17: 33
      +3
      Quote: IRBIS
      Frankly, I didn’t understand who was holding whom and for what? Either the President of the Duma, or vice versa. Or did both the President and the Duma take the people for the peep? Or are they all holding us for suckers?

      Don’t worry, it’s such a style in Yarosvet, they sort out a lot of beech and nehai, but it looks very diligently, and whoever starts to argue is easy to drown in demagogy.
      He is talking about the fact that more and more Russian citizens are being driven abroad, that is, there is money, but he is talking about the number of passports, it seems that the topics are related, but in fact the thesis is changed, and it turns out that everything is bad with us ...

      Same thing here
    3. Yarosvet
      11 November 2013 19: 21
      -2
      Quote: IRBIS
      After all, if the Central Bank of the Russian Federation belongs to someone other than the state, then to hell with us such a state, working in the interests of a handful of gay people?

      So the joke is that the Central Bank is a state institution that was previously controlled by the State Duma, and now, after the adoption of the Banking Council Act, the de facto president.

      And all the howls about nationalization are nothing more than the formation of public opinion with the aim of changing the 75th article of the Committee and taking control of the printing press (in the tube, find the topic "Demur about Fedorov")
    4. Botanologist
      Botanologist 11 November 2013 20: 28
      +2
      Quote: IRBIS
      After all, if the Central Bank of the Russian Federation belongs to someone other than the state, then to hell with us such a state


      Just imagine, just like that. The Central Bank does not belong to the state.
    5. viborzanami
      viborzanami 11 November 2013 22: 37
      +2
      After all, if the Central Bank of the Russian Federation belongs to someone other than the state, then to hell with us such a state, working in the interests of a handful of gay people?
      -------------------------------------------------- ------------
      In 1991, they reasoned in exactly the same way: And to hell with us, a state that cannot provide security is the flight of Matthias Rust. And to hell with us such a state that does not even provide citizens with food - the store shelves were at that time pristine clean. There are still plenty of similar examples. Therefore, no one began to oppose the destruction of the USSR. Further:
      Products appeared, but most of the citizens could not afford them
      Due to the uncompetitiveness of enterprises, most of the citizens were left without work
      The chaos of the new brothers and bulls followed
      Russia began to drink too much, vodka became cheaper than soap, is available everywhere and 24 hours a day
      Mortality has risen, fertility has fallen — the birth rate in the 90s is similar only to the period of World War II — Russia began to die out almost a million people a year
      Privatization and Semibankirism
      Defeat in Chechnya and Khasavyurt surrender on the destruction of Russia
      Poverty and hopelessness, and patriotism has become - the last refuge of the villain
      Default
      Separatism in all regions of Russia - the whole world already considered Russia not a state, but a territory that was about to disintegrate into many small "Switzerland"
      Learn at least from your own mistakes and never again ask the question: "What the hell is such a state to us?" otherwise, next time there will probably be no one to ask such a question.
  • major071
    major071 11 November 2013 15: 27
    +4
    Journalists write - people read. Many people still believe in everything that is written in the newspapers. If in the USSR periodicals could still be read, now the majority of newspapers are sliding towards the "yellow press". If only you can raise your rating and get some money, but nobody cares about what they wrote. But the people believe what they have written, especially the older generation, which is accustomed to the fact that the newspapers write the truth. fool
    1. alexng
      alexng 11 November 2013 16: 17
      +2
      And this is how the human psyche is arranged, he believes in what is printed and many crooks use this.
      1. nickname 1 and 2
        nickname 1 and 2 11 November 2013 17: 09
        +4
        Quote: alexneg
        And this is how the human psyche is arranged, he believes in what is printed and many crooks use this.



        And among them - YAROSVET?

        I did not find the answer to the question posed.

        La la, poplars!

        But let Fedorov put it out!

        And what is the lie - the answer is false?
    2. The comment was deleted.
  • neri73-r
    neri73-r 11 November 2013 15: 27
    27
    Tovarisch Yarosvet clings to the specific meaning of the word "nationalization", and here he is of course right, but the same Fedorov is talking in a broader sense of the word "nationalization" - the work of the state bank for the interests of the country, the people, and not for the interests of the Fed and its founders! !! And these, excuse me, are different things !!! wassat
    1. Zabvo
      Zabvo 11 November 2013 15: 33
      +1
      Here I am about the same.
    2. baltika-18
      baltika-18 11 November 2013 16: 29
      -1
      Quote: neri73-r
      the same Fedorov speaks in a broader sense of the word "nationalization" - the work of the state bank for the interests of the country, the people,

      Fedorov’s concept of nationalization in applying it to enterprises generally makes an amazing sense. According to him, this is transferring enterprises to private patriotic hands. The question of how to evaluate patriotism in transferring Mr. Fedorov unanswered.
    3. smile
      smile 11 November 2013 16: 31
      -3
      neri73-r
      You see. when the pivotal thesis of a politician, on the basis of which this politician builds his program, is a blatant lie, it is somehow hard to believe in his "broad meanings". In addition to his good wishes, which Fedorov does not skimp on, if you start to delve into the essence of some of his specific proposals, it becomes dreary ... after all, pure nonsense .... This applies. eg. Togo. that he proposes to allow the Central Bank to acquire government bonds.
      Do you understand what this means? How can such a person babble, calling himself not just a patriot? but in general a sane citizen? Such an impression. that Fedorov himself did not understand. what program his creators wrote to him.
    4. Yarosvet
      11 November 2013 20: 20
      -3
      Quote: neri73-r
      but the same Fedorov is talking in a broader sense of the word "nationalization"
      That is, Fedorov created a new conceptual apparatus, but forgot to report it? laughing

      the work of the state bank on the interests of the country, the people, and not on the interest of the Fed and its creators !!!
      The facts of the Central Bank's work at the Fed and the document number obliging the Central Bank to do this in the studio.
      1. Normal
        Normal 11 November 2013 22: 48
        -1
        Quote: Yarosvet
        Yarosvet (5) Today, 20:20 ↑

        Quote: neri73-r
        but the same Fedorov is talking in a broader sense of the word "nationalization"

        That is, Fedorov created a new conceptual apparatus, but forgot to report it?


        Well, of course! Fedorov's "nationalization" is special. Just like Fedorov's "occupation"

        OCCUPATION, and, g. 1. Temporary rejection, seizure of foreign territory by military force. 2. The period of such capture and stay of the civilian population in the captured territory (colloquial). During the occupation. Staying alive in the occupation. || adj. occupation, th, th (to 1 value). Occupation troops. O. mode.

        www.vedu.ru/expdic/19910/

        OCCUPATION (from lat. Occupatio - seizure) in military affairs, in international law temporary occupation of enemy territory by the armed forces ... The regime of military occupation is regulated by the 4th Hague Convention of 1907, the Geneva Convention of 1949 "For the Protection of Civilian Population", and the Hague Convention of 1954 "For the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict".

        www.classes.ru/all-russian/russian-dictionary-encycl-term-40427.htm



        If we approach Fedorov's "occupation" with these definitions, it turns out that Russia is occupied .... The Russian Armed Forces, and the authorities of the Russian Federation (in one of which Fedorov himself is located) is the occupation administration. laughing

        By the way - the topic for the article. I give it. drinks
    5. viborzanami
      viborzanami 11 November 2013 23: 04
      -1
      neri73-r
      To the very point.
  • Zabvo
    Zabvo 11 November 2013 15: 31
    17
    The essence of the problem is important, not how it is interpreted ... The fact that today the Central Bank is not in the hands of the government is a fact, the fact that the Central Bank is "dancing" to the "buck" is the same fact that the Central Bank began to "dance" to the "tune" "bucks" after 1998. the same fact ... The question is to restore the country's sovereignty in the economic - domestic sphere. winked
    1. Andrey57
      Andrey57 11 November 2013 15: 53
      13
      I agree with you, only one correction - the Central Bank of the Russian Federation has been dancing to the tune of the Washington Regional Committee from the moment of writing and adoption of the law on the Central Bank, written by the CIA staff personnel under the head of EBN hi Since then, the Central Bank of the Russian Federation has been working to destroy the country's economy, with rare exceptions, when Gerashchenko headed it, but the results of this period were so impressive that the mattresses lifted everyone up to their ears.
      1. Alexander Romanov
        Alexander Romanov 11 November 2013 16: 25
        -8
        Quote: Andrey57
        , only one correction - the Central Bank of the Russian Federation dances to the tune of the Washington Regional Committee

        Brad!
        Quote: Andrey57
        Since then, the CBR has been working to destroy the country's economy,

        Now we are destroying your country lol
        Quote: Andrey57
        with rare exceptions, when he was headed by Gerashchenko

        But weren’t the famous Chechen advice notes with him? Gerashchenko for this should sit 10 life.
        Quote: Andrey57
        but the results of this period were so impressive that the mattresses were lifted to their ears in order to displace it.

        Need a snack!
      2. Yarosvet
        11 November 2013 20: 47
        -4
        Quote: Andrey57
        The Central Bank of the Russian Federation has been dancing to the tune of the Washington Regional Committee from the moment of writing and adoption of the law on the Central Bank, written by the staff of the CIA with the drunk EBN
        Evidence in the studio

        with rare exceptions, when he was headed by Gerashchenko

        It was Gerashchenko who upheld the independence of the Central Bank - wasn’t you tired of logically contradicting yourself?
    2. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 11 November 2013 16: 22
      -7
      Quote: ZABVO
      The fact that today the Central Bank is not in the hands of the government is a fact, the fact that the Central Bank is "dancing" to the "buck" is the same fact,

      Given that the dollar is the world currency, not one financial institution can work otherwise hi
      1. Botanologist
        Botanologist 11 November 2013 20: 42
        +3
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        Given that the dollar is the world currency, not one financial institution can work otherwise


        Really? Does China live on another planet and in another system?
    3. GrayL
      GrayL 11 November 2013 16: 34
      +3
      The Central Bank is not in the hands of the government ....., it is ridiculously said, but a government like bucks does not dance ?!
    4. Yarosvet
      11 November 2013 20: 35
      -1
      Quote: ZABVO
      You see ... When you talk about something - at least you need to understand what exactly you are talking about ...

      The fact that today the Central Bank is not in the hands of the government is a fact
      Clause d of Article 83 of the Constitution, Articles 5, 12, 14, 15 of the 86th Federal Law.
      Who told you that the Central Bank should be controlled by the government? The whole point is that it is uncontrollable (it is especially touching upon the Central Bank’s control over the control of the CURRENT government, which 90% of the population wants to shoot laughing )

      the fact that the Central Bank "dances" to the "buck" the same fact
      Not at all: think about how you will trade (80% of any goods consumed in the Russian Federation are imported) if the Central Bank scores for a dollar (any country with which the Russian Federation trades wants to receive exactly dollars in exchange for its goods)

      the fact that the Central Bank began to "dance" to the "tune" of "bucks" after 1998. the same fact
      Partly - it was after the artificially caused crisis that production (with the exception of the mineral water and everything connected with it) began to decline.

      The question is to regain the sovereignty of the country in the economic - domestic sphere.
      Look in the dictionary - finally find out the meaning of the term "sovereignty"
      1. Onyx
        Onyx 11 November 2013 20: 40
        +3
        Quote: Yarosvet
        Who told you that the Central Bank should be controlled by the government? The whole point is that it is uncontrollable

        Maybe so. But then we must admit that the Central Bank should bear responsibility for the state of the economy, and not the Government and the President.
        1. Normal
          Normal 11 November 2013 23: 01
          -2
          Quote: Onyx
          But then we must admit that the Central Bank should bear responsibility for the state of the economy, and not the Government and the President.

          Once again
          Constitution of the Russian Federation

          Chapter 4. President of Russian Federation

          Article 80

          1. The President of the Russian Federation is the head of state.

          2. The President of the Russian Federation is the guarantor of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the rights and freedoms of man and citizen. In accordance with the procedure established by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, it takes measures to protect the sovereignty of the Russian Federation, its independence and state integrity, ensures the coordinated functioning and interaction of government bodies.

          3. President of the Russian Federation in accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation and federal laws defines the main directions of domestic and foreign policy of the state.

          Chapter 6. The Government of the Russian Federation

          Article 114

          1. Government of the Russian Federation:

          a) develops and submits to the State Duma the federal budget and ensures its implementation; submits to the State Duma a report on the implementation of the federal budget; submits to the State Duma annual reports on the results of its activities, including on issues raised by the State Duma;

          b)ensures the implementation in the Russian Federation of a unified financial, credit and monetary policy;

          c) ensures the implementation in the Russian Federation of a unified state policy in the field of culture, science, education, health care, social security, ecology;

          d) manages federal property;

          e) takes measures to ensure the defense of the country, state security, the implementation of the foreign policy of the Russian Federation;

          e) takes measures to ensure the rule of law, the rights and freedoms of citizens, the protection of property and public order, the fight against crime;

          g) exercise other powers vested in him by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, federal laws, decrees of the President of the Russian Federation.

          2. The procedure for the activities of the Government of the Russian Federation shall be determined by federal constitutional law.


          And in your opinion, it turns out that the Central Bank should be responsible for the state of the economy, while the president and the government seem to be out of business.
          1. Onyx
            Onyx 12 November 2013 00: 02
            0
            Quote: Normal
            President of the Russian Federation in accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation and federal laws defines the main directions of domestic and foreign policy of the state.

            Yes, there is one. But! You forgot to bold this:
            Quote: Normal
            President of Russian Federation in accordance with the Constitution of the Russian Federation and federal laws defines the main directions of domestic and foreign policy of the state.

            And here is what we have in accordance with this very Constitution of the Russian Federation: Protection and ensuring the stability of the ruble - The main function of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, which he carries out independently of other public authorities.
            That is, do you think that it is possible to determine the main directions of the state’s domestic and foreign policy without such an instrument for economic development as the Central Bank should be?
            1. Normal
              Normal 12 November 2013 00: 55
              -1
              Quote: Onyx
              That is, do you think that it is possible to determine the main directions of the state’s domestic and foreign policy without such an instrument for economic development as the Central Bank should be?

              That's it!
              I think.
              And not only me, but also the President of the Russian Federation. And his party, the Duma, which, together with the LDPR and other satellites, has a CONSTITUTIONAL majority, which allows changing ANY provision of the Constitution. Not only that, according to the Central Election Commission, the majority of the population of Russia, since it votes for GDP and EP.
              Consequently, the President manages to determine domestic policy with the current status of the Central Bank quite successfully and for quite some time.
              1. Onyx
                Onyx 12 November 2013 01: 02
                +1
                Quote: Normal
                That's it!
                I think.
                And not only me, but also the President of the Russian Federation. And his party, the Duma, which, together with the LDPR and other satellites, has a CONSTITUTIONAL majority, which allows changing ANY provision of the Constitution.

                laughing But what, in fact, is said in Yarosvet's article, to which you put a "plus"? That nothing needs to be done with the Central Bank, the President rules everything, including the Central Bank, and Fedorov is talking nonsense. And it turns out that this is not nonsense and the Central Bank needs to be subordinated to the Government and the President (no matter how). So you admit that Fedorov's proposals are correct?
                1. Normal
                  Normal 12 November 2013 02: 15
                  0
                  Quote: Onyx
                  So you acknowledge that Fedorov’s proposals are correct?

                  Do not distort. I made it clear enough that I consider Fedorov a liar, and his theory is continuous demagogy
                  1. Onyx
                    Onyx 12 November 2013 02: 52
                    +1
                    Quote: Normal
                    Do not distort. I made it clear enough that I consider Fedorov a liar, and his theory is continuous demagogy

                    You contradict yourself.
                    1. The comment was deleted.
  • Grandson of Veteran
    Grandson of Veteran 11 November 2013 15: 31
    -7
    "Nationalization of the Central Bank" ..... Oil oil. This makes no sense. Article minus.
  • Ivan_Ivanov
    Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 15: 32
    +9
    1. Who controls the Central Bank?

    2. Does the president, parliament, prime minister have the right to remove the head of the Central Bank, or cancel any decree / order / decree of the Central Bank that is binding on the entire financial and banking system of the country?

    3. Are the decrees / decrees / orders of the president, cabinet of ministers binding on the Central Bank? Is it possible to force the Central Bank to comply with decrees / decrees / orders of the President and the Cabinet of Ministers ?.

    And if the Central Bank is not subordinate to state bodies / structures / heads, is it a state institution?
    1. Ivan_Ivanov
      Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 15: 50
      15
      as well as they cannot explain what exactly in their understanding means the nationalization of the Central Bank.

      The author of the article frankly lies.
      Nationalization of the Central Bank means - changing the law and constitution in order to give the president and / or parliament the opportunity to remove the head of the Central Bank (which the state does not have the right to do now), give them the opportunity to revoke decrees / resolutions / orders of the Central Bank, to give them the opportunity and leverage to implementation of decrees / orders of the president, KM, parliament.

      Now the president, parliament, KM can’t do any of this, they have no right. The Central Bank is not subordinate to state bodies.
      1. Russ69
        Russ69 11 November 2013 16: 23
        0
        Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
        Now the president, parliament, KM can’t do any of this, they have no right. The Central Bank is not subordinate to state bodies.

        Appoints the president of the bank by the president, with the consent of the Duma. Appointed, for a certain period, like the chairman of the supreme court.
        Or who appoints the chairman of the Central Bank? Fed what?
        1. Ivan_Ivanov
          Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 16: 41
          +8
          Imagine that neither the plant director (president), nor its shareholders (people through parliamentary deputies) can influence the Finance Director in any way: they cannot remove him from his post, they cannot cancel his orders, they cannot force him to issue the order that the plant needs.

          So with the Central Bank.

          Appointing is not even half the battle. What does it mean to "assign" if you can not remove. Any fear will lose. And such a figure as the head of the Central Bank is a compromise with many forces.

          Have you ever run a team of at least a few people. Even having full authority over the workers (you can give an order, you can deprive you of your salary, you can even fire you), the workers will love to do everything their own way. Now imagine that you have no power over the workers ... wink
          1. Yarosvet
            11 November 2013 20: 58
            -2
            Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
            Any fear will lose.

            That is why Ignatiev was appointed 3 times in a row (no alternative) laughing
        2. GrayL
          GrayL 11 November 2013 16: 44
          +3
          Finally, a bright thought !!!
      2. GrayL
        GrayL 11 November 2013 16: 43
        -3
        The court’s decision, like neither the president, nor the government, etc., can’t be canceled, what a nightmare - it’s also a private shop ... Maybe it's just an independent authority, like a thought, president, courts ... and most importantly, who steers .. . and he dances her;)
        1. Ivan_Ivanov
          Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 16: 50
          +5
          Judges appointed (and most importantly shoots!) collegial body. Nobody can remove the head of the Central Bank.

          The court decision can be appealed. Central Bank decisions cannot be appealed.

          In addition, the court makes a decision on the fact of what happened. Decisions of the Central Bank are managerial in nature.
          1. Yarosvet
            11 November 2013 21: 00
            0
            Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
            Judges appointed (and most importantly shoots!) collegial body.

            Read the 4th chapter of the Constitution of the Russian Federation (so as not to drive the blizzard) wink
      3. Gordeich
        Gordeich 11 November 2013 19: 12
        +4
        Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
        Now the president, parliament, KM can’t do any of this, they have no right. The Central Bank is not subordinate to state bodies.


        And what prevents Putin from making amendments restricting the unlimited power of the head of the Central Bank? Our president, with a stroke of the pen, cancels and re-introduces the election of governors, the necessary laws, according to Putin's proposal, the State Duma takes in 1,5-2 weeks.
      4. Yarosvet
        11 November 2013 20: 55
        -3
        Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
        1. Who controls the Central Bank?
        2. Does the president, parliament, prime minister have the right to remove the head of the Central Bank, or cancel any decree / order / decree of the Central Bank that is binding on the entire financial and banking system of the country?
        3. Are the decrees / decrees / orders of the president, cabinet of ministers binding on the Central Bank? Is it possible to force the Central Bank to comply with decrees / decrees / orders of the President and the Cabinet of Ministers ?.
        And if the Central Bank is not subordinate to state bodies / structures / heads, is it a state institution?
        86-FZ - forward and with the song.

        Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
        Nationalization of the Central Bank means - changing the law and constitution in order to give the president and / or parliament the opportunity to remove the head of the Central Bank (which the state does not have the right to do now), give them the opportunity to revoke decrees / resolutions / orders of the Central Bank, to give them the opportunity and leverage to implementation of decrees / orders of the president, KM, parliament.
        Now the president, parliament, KM can’t do any of this, they have no right. The Central Bank is not subordinate to state bodies.
        1. Normal
          Normal 11 November 2013 23: 06
          -2
          Quote: Yarosvet
          Yarosvet (5) Today, 20:55 ↑

          The picture with the text is just "bull's-eye" good
    2. Hleb
      Hleb 11 November 2013 15: 50
      +4
      But what if the country's budget is built without the Central Bank?
      1. Ivan_Ivanov
        Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 16: 02
        +3
        You want to say that the Central Bank affects the formation of the budget of Russia despite the fact that no government agency can influence the Central Bank itself? I completely agree with that!

        The Central Bank will tell you that the refinancing rate will be 8%, and not like in Europe about 0,5 and that's it. This cannot be undone. And a budget is being developed based on this.
        1. Hleb
          Hleb 11 November 2013 16: 05
          +4
          Yes, I don’t really understand this at all. I want to hear explanations. But in fact, I think he’s under control
          1. Ivan_Ivanov
            Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 16: 23
            +2
            The whole question: Under whose control.
            The Fed, for example, does not hide the fact that it is a private shop. In the Yellow Pages directory, her phone number and other details are not in the "Government agencies" section.

            Imagine that neither the plant director (president), nor its shareholders (people through parliamentary deputies) can influence the Finance Director in any way: they cannot remove him from his post, they cannot cancel his orders, they cannot force him to issue the order that the plant needs.

            So with the Central Bank.
        2. Yarosvet
          11 November 2013 21: 04
          -3
          Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
          no government agency can influence the CB itself

          Which state body of Ukraine can influence the actions of a citizen of Ukraine carried out under the current legislation?
          Formally, no.

          What state body of Ukraine can influence the actions of a citizen of Ukraine that violates the current legislation?
          ..................................................
    3. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 11 November 2013 16: 26
      0
      Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
      Ivan_Ivanov Today, 15:32 PM New
      1. Who controls the Central Bank?

      2. Does the president, parliament, prime minister have the right to remove the head of the Central Bank,

      Enough, and who put Nabiulina as the chairman of the Central Bank of Russia, did the president or the State Department send? That is the whole answer to your question.
      1. Ivan_Ivanov
        Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 16: 28
        0
        Imagine that neither the plant director (president), nor its shareholders (people through parliamentary deputies) can influence the Finance Director in any way: they cannot remove him from his post, they cannot cancel his orders, they cannot force him to issue the order that the plant needs.

        So with the Central Bank.
        1. GrayL
          GrayL 11 November 2013 16: 47
          +1
          And on all the rest (the Duma, etc.), the people simply command ... :)
          1. Ivan_Ivanov
            Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 16: 53
            +1
            That is, you agree that the Central Bank of Russia is not subordinate to the Russian state ...
        2. Alexander Romanov
          Alexander Romanov 11 November 2013 18: 03
          0
          Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
          So with the Central Bank.

          Putin put Nabiulina, and now he can’t take her off laughing
          1. Botanologist
            Botanologist 11 November 2013 20: 04
            +4
            Quote: Alexander Romanov
            Putin put Nabiulina, and now he can’t take her off


            Person Nabiullina does not affect anything. Elvira Sahipzadovna works on the bank regulations, not on Putin’s instructions. And in the situation a lot of things.
            You giggle that the Fed is a non-governmental body, and you don’t believe that its analogue was created in Russia. Why?
    4. teleset
      teleset 11 November 2013 16: 54
      +6
      Does the president, parliament, prime minister have the right to remove the head of the Central Bank, or cancel any decree / order / decree of the Central Bank, binding on the entire financial and banking system of the country?
      ARTICLE 14 LAW ON THE CB.Only if the person is in bad health or a criminal case is opened, or on his own or the authority has expired no more.
      1. Ivan_Ivanov
        Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 17: 02
        +1
        Here I am about the same ... wink
        1. Normal
          Normal 11 November 2013 23: 20
          -1
          Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
          2. Does the president have the right ......... to remove the head of the Central Bank,

          Quote: teleset
          ARTICLE 14 LAW ON THE CB.Only if poor health or a criminal case is opened or on their own or expired no more.

          Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
          Here I am about the same ...


          Elementary!
          The chairman of the Central Bank is called .... not even to Putin, but to the head of the presidential administration ... and that’s it!
          After a short conversation, which took place in a constructive manner and in a warm, friendly atmosphere, ANY Russian official, the Central Bank chairman, including urgently, resigns due to a sharp deterioration in health or simply of his own free will.

          And do not pretend to be naive Chukchi youth.
      2. Yarosvet
        11 November 2013 21: 08
        0
        Quote: teleset
        or open a criminal case
        the main thing in which cases is opened - what? laughing
  • Sewer
    Sewer 11 November 2013 15: 33
    -18 qualifying.
    Pure water Kremlin order for vegetables! negative
    1. Ivan_Ivanov
      Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 15: 38
      +4
      Correctly! Read the order of the State Department!
      1. Sewer
        Sewer 11 November 2013 16: 00
        -5
        So already read at the top? Or is there still?
    2. WIN969
      WIN969 11 November 2013 15: 39
      +8
      vegetables in the swamp bowl are sutured.
    3. Hleb
      Hleb 11 November 2013 15: 42
      +5
      Well, so protest in fact, with facts. For example, I would with interest read all the arguments on this subject
      1. Sewer
        Sewer 11 November 2013 16: 01
        -4
        I see what is happening in the country! Life is much more effective than some statues!
    4. viborzanami
      viborzanami 11 November 2013 23: 19
      +1
      Vegetables - green cabbage on the State Department and everyone knows what animals from the Swamp like to taste these vegetables.
  • WIN969
    WIN969 11 November 2013 15: 35
    +7
    Putin is doing everything to restore sovereignty to the country, and what journalists write in Russian media has always been nonsense by order of foreign states.
    1. Sewer
      Sewer 11 November 2013 15: 41
      -5
      For a long time he is returning something! And on business it is clear that he is simply selling everything openly! Or have you not heard of privatization until 2016?
      1. WIN969
        WIN969 11 November 2013 17: 13
        +2
        Breaking is always simple and easy, but building again. Present all your claims to Gorbachev and the grave of Yeltsin.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. viborzanami
        viborzanami 11 November 2013 23: 30
        +3
        And on business, it’s clear that he (Putin) is simply selling everything openly
        -------------------------------------------------
        This is when he bought up the shares of Gazprom, thereby turning a private Gazprom into a state?
        Or when the pre-defaulted state-owned Rosneft turned into the largest oil company in the world, nationalizing Yukos Khodorkovsky and buying TNK_VR?
        If Putin sold everything, then why:
        The Russian economy at the end of 2012 took first place in Europe?
        The level of economic development per capita relative to the United States has become the highest in the history of Russia? (RI - 30%, USSR - 40%, Civil War - 15%, 1999, in just 8 years of Gaidar’s rule - 18%, 2012, after 13 Putin years - 50%)
        The Russian budget has grown 21 times from $ 19 billion to $ 400 billion?
  • old rocket man
    old rocket man 11 November 2013 16: 06
    +8
    To be honest, the meaning of the article is not entirely clear. Also, the meaning of the expression "nationalization in a broad sense" is not clear.
    It seems to me that there is a confusion and substitution of the concepts of the Central Bank and the State Treasury, and at the same time a confusion of functions. As I understand it (and as it used to be, under the tsar-priest and the Soviet regime) the Central Bank is a purely financial institution that distributes and controls budget funds, as well as control over the country's commercial banks. The State Treasury is an institution engaged in the issue of banknotes and the storage of state gold and foreign exchange reserves. Both are controlled by the president through the Ministry of Finance, as well as the Duma. If this is not so, but judging by the article it is not, then the president’s gestures are understandable, and everything else is verbiage around terminology
    1. Botanologist
      Botanologist 11 November 2013 20: 07
      +2
      Quote: Old Rocketman
      Both are controlled by the president through the Ministry of Finance, as well as the Duma.


      Here you are a little mistaken. Controlled, but not in everything.
      Who sets the refinancing rate? Neither the Duma, nor the government are at work here. And what can they control after that? How does Nabiullina color her eyebrows?
      1. old rocket man
        old rocket man 12 November 2013 11: 41
        0
        Quote: Botanologist
        Here you are a little mistaken. Controlled, but not in everything

        The meaning of my statement is how it should be, not how it is hi
  • Peaceful military
    Peaceful military 11 November 2013 16: 07
    +5
    Lierestical delirium (IMHO). fool
    Read and watch N. Starikov.
    1. old rocket man
      old rocket man 11 November 2013 16: 11
      +2
      Quote: Peaceful military


      Hi Andrey, "liberal nonsense" - as always, you see at the root drinks
      1. Peaceful military
        Peaceful military 11 November 2013 23: 33
        +1
        Quote: old rocket
        Quote: Peaceful military


        Hi Andrey, "liberal nonsense" - as always, you see at the root drinks

        soldier drinks
  • calocha
    calocha 11 November 2013 16: 13
    -6
    Well, do not tear Eagle with two heads! Where is one head (Putin) and the other (Medvedev). So this Miracle of the Siamese Eagle lives looking in different directions. Putin needs to become from the eagle - BEAR, or he - balabol, I will say nothing about DAM.
  • Genry
    Genry 11 November 2013 16: 29
    12
    C-Bank of the Russian Federation, now works in favor of the US economy (and the company).
    Example:
    Reserve money is invested in US securities at 0,7%. And then, for the development of their own industry, loans are taken (or, a separate issue, investments are requested) at 20% (roughly).
    It turns out we give them money so that they give us loans, with our same money. In doing so, we lose 19%.
    1. old rocket man
      old rocket man 11 November 2013 16: 35
      0
      Quote: Genry
      (or, a separate issue, investment is requested) at 20% (roughly).

      Investments (investment) are not made at interest, but for a share in the enterprise, and if at interest, then this is a loan
    2. Russ69
      Russ69 11 November 2013 16: 35
      0
      Quote: Genry
      And then, for the development of their own industry, loans are taken (or, a separate issue, investments are requested) at 20% (roughly).

      20%, set by our banks, and here the United States. State programs are credited separately, through VEb or Sberbank, at 3-5%. As a rule, two times lower than inflation.

      And by the way, the Charter of the Central Bank would look for a start, or something ...
      1. teleset
        teleset 11 November 2013 16: 57
        +3
        Sberbank belongs to the Central Bank. It is prescribed in the Law on the Central Bank.
    3. Oskar
      Oskar 11 November 2013 17: 20
      16
      In Russia, the thieves' type of economy is simply built.
      Its characteristic feature: any money invested in the economy, through specially created mechanisms (honed for more than 20 years) is immediately "withdrawn" for personal consumption by guys in gray suits.
      Russia can’t simply entrust its money to itself.
      State money in the United States at low interest means one thing - the state recognizes its economic, financial, monetary insolvency.
      Does the state need money to modernize the economy? Why then are they stolen in the USA? If you don’t need it, then why are loans taken from the West at crazy interest rates and try to attract foreign investment (foreigners will be co-owners of the enterprises, the uncle will take profit (or part of it).
      If you have your own money - why aren't they investing in the economy ?! If this is a “stabilization” fund, then what is it stabilizing? Further fall and collapse of the country?
      A state (with its leaders), keeping money away from its people, economy and country, deserves nothing but contempt!
      1. viborzanami
        viborzanami 11 November 2013 23: 37
        +1
        If you have your own money - why aren't they investing in the economy ?! If this is a “stabilization” fund, then what is it stabilizing?
        ---------------------------------------------------------
        Construction of the OKAD, modernization of the Trans-Siberian Railway. Did not hear?
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. studentmati
          studentmati 11 November 2013 23: 41
          +1
          Quote: viborzanami
          Construction of the OKAD, modernization of the Trans-Siberian Railway. Did not hear?


          Is the ice breaking?
          1. viborzanami
            viborzanami 12 November 2013 00: 29
            +1
            Is the ice breaking?
            Yeah, the all-fenders break the pattern.
  • Rif
    Rif 11 November 2013 16: 33
    -3
    "http://aftershock.su/?q=node/69247" - here about honest journalists of Putin's sponsored mass media.
    1. nov_tech.vrn
      nov_tech.vrn 11 November 2013 16: 58
      +2
      you surfaced in vain, here is a conversation about the central bank and the burdens placed on it by your masters during the reign of the alcoholic Boris, about bastards, look for another branch, do not stink
      1. smile
        smile 11 November 2013 20: 23
        -1
        nov_tech.vrn
        It has not surfaced ... it simply does not sink. Can not. Here it is ... it can't even dive. :))))
    2. viborzanami
      viborzanami 11 November 2013 23: 41
      +1
      And about non-worthy journalists from the Echo Matzah, who agreed before the collapse of Russia on the Ural Range (Albats), did you find a link? Who do they work for? Whose interests are advocated? Why visit the American embassy? Have a coffee?
  • Rif
    Rif 11 November 2013 16: 33
    -3
    "http://aftershock.su/?q=node/69247" - here about honest journalists of Putin's sponsored mass media.
  • alicante11
    alicante11 11 November 2013 16: 44
    +1
    The essence of the concept "Nationalization" in this bill.

    130800-6 On Amendments to the Federal Law "On the Central Bank of the Russian Federation (Bank of Russia)"


    The Central Bank is placed under the control of the Government.
    Conclusion on the bill.
    The State Duma Committee on the Financial Market recommends that the authors of the bill, in accordance with part 6 of article 112 of the Rules of Procedure of the State Duma, amend the text of draft federal law No. 130800-6 “On Amending the Federal Law“ On the Central Bank of the Russian Federation (Bank of Russia) ”(regarding the restriction independence of the Bank of Russia in the exercise of its functions by expanding the powers of the Government of the Russian Federation)


    In the adopted law on the mega-regulator, with which it is also recommended to correlate the bill, no legal changes are made in the status of the Central Bank.
  • The comment was deleted.
    1. Dmitry_2013
      Dmitry_2013 11 November 2013 16: 53
      +2
      In the first posts, hamsters saliva came out of joy. Hooray, a foreign agent put in an article warming the soul. After all, hamsters do not care about the lantern, they neither the structure nor the powers of the Central Bank know what it is. Read, hamster, materiel, about the Central Bank, emissions, gold reserves, interest rates. And then your only dried-up gyrus does not understand why the Central Bank of Russia has a refinancing rate of 8%, and in Europe the ECB 0,25%.

      Ha, so can you tell me why such a difference? Or are you again very Jewish?
      PS Yarosvet writes everything correctly, Starikov spreads suckers, on this and capital boils down
    2. alicante11
      alicante11 11 November 2013 17: 05
      +2
      Others blame that sai is pro-Putin. No need to complain that liberal or pro-Putin articles are being posted. The spectrum of opinions is important so that you can figure out what's what. After all, no one has canceled the propaganda from both sides. As for the author of the article, he gives legal calculations. But apart from legal issues, there are also factual ones. for example, why does the pyramid of US obligations hold, and the GKO pyramid collapsed? Because the Fed redeems surplus debt receipts by printing bucks, and the Central Bank of the Russian Federation refused to redeem as soon as the gold reserves were depleted, i.e. I didn’t want to print money. And the Yeltsin company could not force him.
      1. Yarosvet
        11 November 2013 21: 28
        -2
        Quote: alicante11
        Why is the pyramid of American obligations held, and the GKO pyramid collapsed?
        How is it more convenient for you to find out about this - from a comment, or from an article?

        and the CBR refused to redeem
        It does not and did not have the right.

        as soon as the gold reserves were depleted
        How were they exhausted - were you thinking?

        And the Yeltsin company could not force him.
        Who has raped most of all from the 98 redistribution of property caused by the crisis, al? laughing
        1. alicante11
          alicante11 12 November 2013 00: 51
          0
          Quote: Yarosvet
          How is it more convenient for you to find out about this - from a comment, or from an article?


          Yes, it makes no difference to me.

          It does not and did not have the right.


          Yes, I know. Just what then is the Central Bank, if it does not have the right to issue its own currency? Just do not talk about inflation. Inflation under capitalism is always present. Since no one is selling anything at cost. It’s just that the mechanism of our Central Bank’s work imports dollar inflation, which supposedly provides our supposedly sovereign rubles.

          How were they exhausted - were you thinking?


          I thought about it. But in a nutshell you can not say. An article on this subject has already been written. While hanging on the desktop, think, weigh, rule.

          Who has raped most of all from the 98 redistribution of property caused by the crisis, al?


          You will not believe. But no one. Lost everything.
          1. Yarosvet
            12 November 2013 13: 45
            +2
            Quote: alicante11
            Just do not talk about inflation. Inflation under capitalism is always present
            Yes, but the question is its level: if in most capstries inflation in 3% is considered high, then talk about ours, which from 2000 to 12 was already an average of over 40% per year (actually this is not even inflation, and administrative price increases)?

            It’s just that the mechanism of our Central Bank’s work is importing dollar inflation, which supposedly provides our supposedly sovereign rubles
            Dollar inflation within 3%.

            You will not believe. But no one. Lost everything.
            Not at all: the holders of the dollar and big capital won, having bought up almost the entire medium and small business. And who in 98 was the owner of big capital?
            1. alicante11
              alicante11 12 November 2013 14: 34
              0
              Yes, but the question is its level: if in most capstries inflation in 3% is considered high, then talk about ours, which from 2000 to 12 was already an average of over 40% per year (actually this is not even inflation, and administrative price increases)?


              This is where you dreamed something like that? At 40% per annum? And about the "administrative rise in prices" you are right. only not administrative, but monopolistic. Natural monopolies spin the inflation flywheel.

              Dollar inflation within 3%.


              No one will tell you dollar inflation. But here is another. WHY do we have to pay for amer inflation?

              Not at all: the holders of the dollar and big capital won, having bought up almost the entire medium and small business. And who in 98 was the owner of big capital?


              You just do not know. The oligarchs only managed to recapture theirs ... for the IMF money, data on the salvation of Western banks that fell into the pyramid of finance.
              1. Yarosvet
                12 November 2013 15: 09
                +2
                Quote: alicante11
                This is where you dreamed of something? At 40% per annum?
                The difference in the growth of the purchasing power of the ruble and the growth of nominal GDP for 12 years 500%.

                only not administrative, but monopolistic. Natural monopolies spin the flywheel of inflation.
                Welcome to the increase in prices gives the state, so all the same administrative.

                No one will tell you dollar inflation. But here is another. WHY do we have to pay for amer inflation?
                Based on the difference between the PPP GDP and the nominal, as well as the dollar exchange rate of the 97 year, it is not difficult to calculate that its inflation is within 3%.
                As for the payment of Amer’s inflation, this is nonsense: inflation can be exported only if the dollar is used when calculating it on the territory of the Russian Federation, or if the ruble is tightly linked to the dollar and its exchange rate, there is not one or two.

                You just do not know. The oligarchs only managed to recapture theirs ... for the IMF money, data on the salvation of Western banks that fell into the pyramid of finance.
                Come on: the IMF allocated money specifically to the Russian Federation, while banks belonging to oligarchic structures were full of currency.
                The scheme is this: a default is declared, the Central Bank inflates the dollar (and payments in the Russian Federation then took place including in dollars - especially more or less large transactions), medium and small businesses spend the last currency on the purchase of traded goods, there is no currency left and there’s nowhere to take it, because the exchangers either don’t sell it or sell it 4 times more expensive than before (at the same time, the business cannot raise prices - they won’t buy the goods), and since there is no currency, then buy the goods (mainly from foreign companies) ) is not possible, as a result of which the business closes, retail space is sold for nothing (to whom?), etc.
                Moreover, large capital, which usually has its own banks and, as a result, currency, safely buys everything for nothing.
                1. alicante11
                  alicante11 12 November 2013 15: 26
                  0
                  The difference in the growth of the purchasing power of the ruble and the growth of nominal GDP for 12 years 500%.


                  And detail? What does the growth in nominal GDP have to do with it? I’m somehow more old-fashionedly used to looking at prices in stores.

                  Welcome to the increase in prices gives the state, so all the same administrative.


                  Is the state to blame for everything? We generally have a market economy. The bus owners need to ask the city administration for permission to increase the fare. But the oil industry every year for as many times as the price tag is raised.


                  Based on the difference between the PPP GDP and the nominal, as well as the dollar exchange rate of the 97 year, it is not difficult to calculate that its inflation is within 3%.
                  As for the payment of Amer’s inflation, this is nonsense: inflation can be exported only if the dollar is used when calculating it on the territory of the Russian Federation, or if the ruble is tightly linked to the dollar and its exchange rate, there is not one or two.


                  A lawyer and even an economist is a complete n ... c. You for fun read something from Haley. He has a lot of price tags for the 60 years. And compare with today. maybe then it will come to pass that economic twists are intended to explain to suckers that when they are robbed, it is for the same good.

                  Come on: the IMF allocated money specifically to the Russian Federation, while banks belonging to oligarchic structures were full of currency.


                  Come on, if you don’t understand. Yes, for the money allocated to the state, the commercial women saved. They should have been saved. But not only Russian, but Western. And the Russians saved - kidalovo in 90's it was an honorable business :).

                  The scheme is this: a default is declared,


                  Transactions and even large ones were made just in rubles. In dollars, people held savings. So people hit.
                  1. Yarosvet
                    12 November 2013 15: 58
                    +1
                    Quote: alicante11
                    What does the growth in nominal GDP have to do with it?
                    Despite the fact that GDP is the total amount of transactions concluded.
                    I’m somehow more old-fashionedly used to looking at prices in stores
                    What problems? How much inflation will increase housing and utility tariffs by 16 times in 12 years, and electricity by 11 times (these are the component prices of any product)?
                    We actually have a market economy
                    1 Who builds a market economy in a social state?
                    2 Has the market long ago abolished state regulation?
                    You for fun read something from Haley
                    What do you disagree with and why (only without common phrases please)?
                    Yes, for the money allocated to the state, the commercial women saved
                    Why the heck was saving banks, if they had everything in order, what did I personally witness? laughing

                    Transactions and even large ones were made just in rubles. In dollars, people held savings. So people hit.
                    Yeah - finish ...
                    The dollar in 98 was de facto the 2-th currency, except for ordinary trade all transactions were in dollars, even with taverns and taxis paid, and you are talking about savings ... laughing
                    1. alicante11
                      alicante11 13 November 2013 03: 03
                      0
                      Despite the fact that GDP is the total amount of transactions concluded.


                      Hmm, it’s immediately obvious that a person is a lawyer and an economist. All through deals. Normal people say that the entire volume of production and services.
                      Well, then what? Intangible assets are also included in this volume of your transactions. For example, the income from the game on the stock exchange. Which do not produce anything. And if he doesn’t produce anything, but receives money, then they are pulling inflation.

                      What problems? How much inflation will increase housing and utility tariffs by 16 times in 12 years, and electricity by 11 times (these are the component prices of any product)?


                      And the numbers can be precisely for such a growth? Well, even for these figures at 40% per annum does not work. I agree, robbery, but if you take the consumer goods, then even less. That is, robbery and producers by monopolists. What I was talking about.

                      1 Who builds a market economy in a social state?
                      2 Has the market long ago abolished state regulation?


                      And who told you that we live in a social state? Or do you only believe in the constitution? And around to see the mind is not enough?
                      It has long been canceled - even with EBNe.

                      What do you disagree with and why (only without common phrases please)?


                      With your estimate of dollar inflation. Into the account of general phrases, you bring the data on inflation, and not unfoundedly 3%. And then we will not speak in common phrases.

                      Why the heck was saving banks, if they had everything in order, what did I personally witness?


                      I don’t know what you witnessed. You will study the scheme of the GKO system and then you will understand what banks were to be saved from.

                      The dollar in 98 was de facto the 2-th currency, except for ordinary trade all transactions were in dollars, even with taverns and taxis paid, and you are talking about savings ...


                      Exactly finish.
                      Yeah, in the taverns (cool), it was like that and bandits in their suitcases were passing bundles of bucks. And normal transactions between normal enterprises were concluded in rubles. Even the Americans, flying to our airports, paid in rubles for aerosynoptic services. True, at the rate.
    3. Yarosvet
      11 November 2013 21: 21
      0
      Quote: Stalin
      Yarosvet, you spread your opuses further, you have a contingent of hamsters, traitors of Russia. Won for Navalny 600 thousand traitors voted. You have many followers. There are more patriots, we will defeat you anyway. Go cheek further inflate.

      Fun laughing But essentially?

      Do you know a dictionary of terms in which the meaning of the concept of "nationalization" would be defined differently than the transfer of property from a private form to a state one?

      Can you name the numbers of Putin’s projects or amendments that would speak of the transfer of the Central Bank from a private form of ownership to a state?

      And if you can’t, then what is your talk?
      1. alicante11
        alicante11 12 November 2013 00: 59
        +3
        Can you name the numbers of Putin’s projects or amendments that would speak of the transfer of the Central Bank from a private form of ownership to a state?


        Well, I brought what? Although I did not speak about Putin's nationalization.

        Quote: Yarosvet
        Do you know a dictionary of terms in which the meaning of the concept of "nationalization" would be defined differently than the transfer of property from a private form to a state one?


        Well, replace the term "nationalization" with "increasing the control of the national government" if you are so advocating for the purity of legal formulations.

        By and large, here in the comments it has already been said that the only lever of pressure on the Central Bank from the government and the Duma is the appointment of a leader. But they cannot remove it. It is clear that you can put in a fool and put in a criminal offense and shoot with a sniper. But this takes time, and the issued money may be needed yesterday, as in 98. This is precisely what the struggle is going on. Note that Fedorov, in the salary I quoted, does not remove anything from the rule about printing rubles for dollars in principle. And only by the decision of the government, that is, when "money is needed yesterday."
        1. Yarosvet
          12 November 2013 14: 05
          0
          Quote: alicante11
          Well, I brought what?
          There was no such thing, although this is exactly what I have been trying to get from you for a week.

          Well, replace the term "nationalization" with "increasing the control of the national government" if you are so advocating for the purity of legal wording
          All legal actions are tied to the purity of legal formulations - why should I change anything? Fedorov and the singers should do this, and if they do, then the meaning of what they said will radically change.

          the only lever of pressure on the Central Bank of the government and the Duma is the appointment of a leader. But they can’t take it off
          Nonsense: the main lever of pressure is written and adopted laws.
          What is the reason for the employer to dismiss an employee who is fulfilling his job descriptions and laws? There is no such reason, but it appears as soon as the employee goes beyond the scope of his duties, instructions and legislation - for the Central Bank these instructions, etc. they can write the State Duma, the government and the president, and accept their State Duma and the Federation Council.

          But it takes time
          Sorry, time is everything, because you must comply with the rules. And if you remove the norms, everything will be fast, it will only lead to tyranny and arbitrariness.

          and issued money may be needed yesterday, as in the 98th
          Do not knock 98 here: in 98, the government, with the approval of the president, poured money to private banks at a meager percentage, and then took it at a much higher rate - the crisis was artificial.
          Situations from the category "a need yesterday" are tactical, and with normal strategic planning, for which the government and a bunch of bureaucrats partly exist, they do not arise.

          Note that Fedorov
          Can you explain why Fedorov is lying about Putin’s attempts to nationalize the Central Bank?
          1. alicante11
            alicante11 12 November 2013 14: 45
            0
            Yes, you sho? We’ll get into our eyes? Or how?

            130800-6 On Amendments to the Federal Law "On the Central Bank of the Russian Federation (Bank of Russia)"


            All legal actions are tied to the purity of legal formulations - why should I change anything? Fedorov and the singers should do this, and if they do, then the meaning of what they said will radically change.


            Hmm, so stupid - it must be able to. Nothing will change. Unless only for you and for DAM, lawyers, damn it.

            Nonsense: the main lever of pressure is written and adopted laws.


            Well, they don’t accept Fedorov’s law, after all ...

            What is the reason for the employer to dismiss an employee who is fulfilling his job descriptions and laws? There is no such reason, but it appears as soon as the employee goes beyond the scope of his duties, instructions and legislation - for the Central Bank these instructions, etc. they can write the State Duma, the government and the president, and accept their State Duma and the Federation Council.


            If the laws are inadequate, then from their observance there will be only harm.

            Sorry, time is everything, because you must comply with the rules. And if you remove the norms, everything will be fast, it will only lead to tyranny and arbitrariness.


            It is necessary to establish normal norms, then they will be respected. And for some reason they cannot be installed.

            Do not knock 98 here: in 98, the government, with the approval of the president, poured money to private banks at a meager percentage, and then took it at a much higher rate - the crisis was artificial.


            You just don’t know why this was done. You see, from 93, they turned a pyramid and nothing. And in 98, everything collapsed. And the Americans have been spinning this pyramid for a hundred years. And nothing too. In itself, nothing would collapse.

            Situations from the category "a need yesterday" are tactical, and with normal strategic planning, for which the government and a bunch of bureaucrats partly exist, they do not arise.


            No plan survived longer than the first encounter with the enemy. The Germans understood that. And it was not for nothing that all commanders had a RESERVE. What we have, due to the inability to issue our currency no.

            Can you explain why Fedorov is lying about Putin’s attempts to nationalize the Central Bank?


            He is not lying. You're just stupidly trying to tackle the topic of legal demagogy. That's all.
            1. Yarosvet
              12 November 2013 15: 35
              0
              Quote: alicante11
              Yes, you sho? We’ll get into our eyes? Or how?
              Roman, we are talking about the period from 98 to 04 years and about Putin's initiatives - what side is Fedorov’s Labuden today?

              Hmm, so stupid - it must be able to. Nothing will change. Unless only for you and for DAM, lawyers, damn it.
              You will declare this in court when you begin to be pecked there on formal grounds.

              Well, they don’t accept Fedorov’s law
              Conclusion of the relevant committee on the Fedorov project, please.

              If the laws are inadequate, then from their observance there will be only harm.
              And where did you get the idea that they are inadequate - did you think so?
              But judging by the lack of attempts by the guarantor to amend these laws, he considers them to be quite adequate (take an interest in the regulatory framework regulating the activities of the State Bank of the USSR)

              It is necessary to establish normal norms, then they will be respected. And for some reason they cannot be installed.
              So figure it out for yourself - who should install them and why it doesn’t work (for me this is obvious)

              Nothing would crash on its own
              What am I talking about?
              Could be credited at any time, but did not, they defaulted.
              Why did I write above - in the subject who lost / won from this.

              No plan survived longer than the first encounter with the enemy. The Germans understood that. And it was not for nothing that all commanders had a RESERVE. What we have, due to the inability to issue our currency no.
              We have so many of these reserves today that they don’t know where to go: summits, the Olympiad, the World Cup, have now agreed on the Universiade.
              The point is not the lack of reserves, but their use (and this is the competence of the government and the president)

              He is not lying. You're just stupidly trying to tackle the topic of legal demagogy. That's all.
              Do you understand the difference between clarification and change of status? Maybe you do not see the difference between a change in status (nationalization) and increased control over activities?
              And at the expense of demagogy: Fedorov in this case essentially claims (and you repeat it) that the Central Bank is a grandmother who has x ... but, unlike you, I know that if my grandmother has x ... - then this is not a grandmother, but a grandfather.
    4. viborzanami
      viborzanami 11 November 2013 23: 48
      -3
      Stalin for the comment +100500
    5. viborzanami
      viborzanami 12 November 2013 00: 30
      0
      Stalin for the comment +100500
  • Neighbor
    Neighbor 11 November 2013 16: 46
    -5
    I will never forget the smirk of Mr. Putin, who said that the Kursk nuclear submarine "sank".
    1. Sewer
      Sewer 11 November 2013 16: 54
      0
      And when he said that speaking Russia to Russian!
    2. Neighbor
      Neighbor 11 November 2013 17: 13
      +5
      Thanks for the minus, reacted for half a minute. So HEARD. And this is the main thing.
    3. Oskar
      Oskar 11 November 2013 17: 47
      +2
      We remember a lot of things ...
  • Grbear
    Grbear 11 November 2013 16: 49
    +1
    The Central Bank does not obey either the government or the deputies. And that's great. I will not talk about the government (at a government meeting, which is sometimes shown, they sit with a look: they would rather end up in a hole). And the deputies, judging by how and what laws they adopt, should not be allowed to the "cerebellum" of the country. To them "dotepam" Kudrin hangs cotton products and sell them, something like the 1995 Production Sharing Law.

    Now they are squealing: "The Central Bank is strangling the industry with rates." Imagine, the deputies achieved that the rates were reduced for manufacturers. Hooray! But judging by the qualifications of the "sawers" and ef.managers, we will receive gramad money (from cash credits) in the domestic market. And the laws on real responsibility for the misuse of public funds or the withdrawal of money abroad, our deputies yet not accepted. Or these loans will go to whom. banks, but not in production.

    The fact that our inflation is controlled - the merit of the Central Banksince "state corporations" buy yachts and clubs.

    Somehow hi .
    1. Ivan_Ivanov
      Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 17: 00
      +2
      not subordinate to either the government or deputies. And that is wonderful.

      Do you really think that the huckster-rastovschik can not obey anyone? And if he does not obey the local state authorities, then to whom does he obey? .. wink
  • The comment was deleted.
  • pahom54
    pahom54 11 November 2013 16: 52
    +4
    What are we breaking spears?
    After all, it has long been clear to whom the Central Bank is pouring water into the mill, it is enough to view its assets in an accessible form - they work 70 percent on the foreign economy. In addition, that pribludistika - that is, the law on the Central Bank, which states that the Central Bank is not liable for the debts of the Russian Federation, does not mean that its assets cannot be frozen. And then, legally everything is so confusing, it turns out, our money is printed by private individuals - mercenaries of the Fed and the CIA of the USA ??? This is something beyond the limits ...
    But, to be honest, I somehow had to deal with the role of the Central Bank in the Russian economy a year or two ago (I wrote a term paper to my granddaughter), well, I was intrigued and interested in something, and I independently came to the conclusion with my two higher Soviet educations that the CBR is an enemy, or an instrument in the hands of the enemies of Russia. I repeat once again, it was a year and a half or two years ago, my thoughts did not have anything to do with anything other than the role of the Central Bank, and I had no bias towards it.
    I put a plus for the article - for the work of the author, but the point is not in the king and the boyars today. Ebanu..y the king and no less than e ... The fool in their time created this parasite enemy, that is, the Central Bank, and endowed it with .. powers. But with the legal side it was so wound up that it turns out that supposedly this Central Bank cannot be taken for coca ... You can. AT DESIRE EVERYTHING IS POSSIBLE. And first of all - to change its status, but before that it is MANDATORY to withdraw HIS ASSETS from foreign banks. Securities of large foreign companies should be kept in storage facilities in Russia. Thus, at least partially, the issue of supposedly nationalization of the Central Bank will be resolved - that is, its capital will work for the country's budget.
    1. GrayL
      GrayL 11 November 2013 17: 05
      0
      and all the rest of the power in our state, from the administration of the villages to the president, of course, everyone cares for the people ... everyone thinks what to do for his good ... :) one Central Bank - shtiyon ...
    2. Yarosvet
      11 November 2013 21: 34
      -2
      Quote: pahom54
      After all, it has long been clear who the Central Bank pours water on to the mill, it is enough to view its assets in an accessible form - they work 70 percent on a foreign economy
  • Mareman Vasilich
    Mareman Vasilich 11 November 2013 16: 59
    +4
    It seems to me that the Central Bank of the Russian Federation cannot independently manage the emission of the ruble, but issues them as much as it has dollars. Where and how dollars appear I think everyone knows. And about the thought .............. So even Stalin called it "ubludnochny education", nothing has changed since then.
    1. Dmitry_2013
      Dmitry_2013 11 November 2013 17: 02
      0
      Mareman Vasilich RU Today, 16:59 New

      It seems to me that the Central Bank of the Russian Federation cannot independently control the issue of the ruble, but issues them as much as it has dollars. Where and how the dollars come from I think everyone knows.

      Where did you get this? Explain?
      1. Mareman Vasilich
        Mareman Vasilich 11 November 2013 17: 15
        0
        These are my thoughts, and nothing more. This Frsovsky tool to control us economically. Chubais is following this from the bank box. Otherwise, how to explain such a tight binding to the dollar, not only oil, but also gas, and therefore the whole economy, how to explain the collapse of the spheres of activity of the state and the reluctance to restore them. Starikov explained this somewhat, but he wrote all his books with intent different from which adheres to in books. There are many thoughts on this subject, but some are worse than the other.
  • teleset
    teleset 11 November 2013 17: 04
    +3
    private money is printing our money - mercenaries of the Fed and the US CIA ??? This is something beyond the limits ...

    Moreover, the FRS, Japan, England, Europe can lend to their government by buying their bonds, but we can’t; it is not prescribed in the law on the Central Bank. am
    1. smile
      smile 11 November 2013 19: 23
      -4
      teleset
      Government bonds are designed to raise money in the state ...

      If the Central Bank starts buying up Government debt, then not only will the money not be raised, but simply transferred from pocket to pocket, will the state itself still be collecting interest on itself? :)))
      Do you understand what nonsense Fedorov froze, and you repeat after him?
      This is a triviality that any competent person must understand ... regrettably, honestly ... I do not want to offend you, just think at least once on your own, otherwise you will be a victim of various demagogues all your life ...
  • teleset
    teleset 11 November 2013 17: 18
    0
    "The state is not liable for the obligations of the Bank of Russia, and the Bank of Russia - for the obligations of the state."

    Those. the state is the owner of the property of the Central Bank, its gold and foreign currency reserves, but at the same time it cannot answer with this property for its obligations. That is, on the basis of this provision of the law, the user can forbid the owner to dispose of his property.
    1. Yarosvet
      11 November 2013 21: 42
      0
      Quote: teleset
      Those. the state is the owner of the property of the Central Bank, its gold and foreign currency reserves, but at the same time it cannot answer with this property for its obligations. That is, on the basis of this provision of the law, the user can forbid the owner to dispose of his property.

      We rave, rave, rave ... laughing
  • MIKHAN
    MIKHAN 11 November 2013 17: 28
    0
    Another hit again in Russia ..? The Russian Orthodox Church was picking, picking did not work! Now they have taken up the Central Bank? The article is muddy and twofold (as usual with such a plan ..) Nationalization of privatization .. all thieves, etc. .. Ordinary puns and sprinkling salt on wounds ... Testing the reaction or preparing for another provocation against Russia ..! We read, listen .. think the main thing and then have reactions, and preferably without emotions and slogans .. That's what I think!
  • Mace
    Mace 11 November 2013 17: 41
    -1
    As I understand it, the author soberly estimated that talking about the nationalization of the Central Bank is stupid, since it is legally and de facto state and therefore there can be no nationalization.
    1. Ivan_Ivanov
      Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 17: 56
      +1
      Imagine ...

      You have an apartment. You let the tenant into the apartment and you cannot expel him under any circumstances, except if he is dead. He can do anything in the apartment: retake it, change the layout, make a mess, organize a stash, but you not only have no right to evict him, but you can’t even tell him anything. Is the analogy clear?

      Nationalization of the Central Bank is not a transfer of the Central Bank’s property to state ownership, but subordination to the state bodies (to which it does not now submit): to the president, parliament, and the CM. This is the nationalization of the Central Bank, and not the nationalization of its property, as the author of the article craftyly submits.
      1. Alexander Romanov
        Alexander Romanov 11 November 2013 18: 08
        +3
        Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
        You have an apartment. You let the tenant into the apartment and you cannot expel him under any circumstances

        Imagine you are the president, you have the GRU, the Foreign Intelligence Service, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the FSB, the Investigative Committee, the Prosecutor's Office, and you decided to remove the head of the Central Bank from the post, how long does it take for a brick to fall on the head of the Central Bank?
        1. Ruslan67
          Ruslan67 11 November 2013 18: 10
          +6
          Quote: Alexander Romanov
          how much time will it take for a brick to fall on the head of the head of the Central Bank?

          And right in the office bully
          1. Ivan_Ivanov
            Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 18: 16
            -1
            The next one will come in its place. Changing personalities without changing the system will not do anything.

            In addition, a brick on his head is an outright crime.
            1. Alexander Romanov
              Alexander Romanov 11 November 2013 18: 18
              +4
              Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
              In its place will come next

              And who appoints the head of the Central Bank ???
            2. Alexander Romanov
              Alexander Romanov 11 November 2013 18: 19
              +2
              Quote: Alexander Romanov

              In addition, a brick on his head is an outright crime.

              Ahahh, fun joking wassat Write it on the website of the State Department wink
              1. Ruslan67
                Ruslan67 11 November 2013 18: 24
                +2
                Quote: Alexander Romanov
                Write it on the website of the State Department

                You again didn’t understand anything, if the State Department drops it is a rotation of personnel And if the FSB is a crime of bloody PU wassat
                1. Alexander Romanov
                  Alexander Romanov 11 November 2013 18: 28
                  +4
                  Quote: Ruslan67
                  And if the FSB is a crime of bloody PU

                  Yes, and he appointed Nabiulin, probably right after Obama's personal call wassat
                  1. Ruslan67
                    Ruslan67 11 November 2013 18: 38
                    +2
                    Quote: Alexander Romanov
                    appointed, probably right after Obama's personal call

                    No laughing Obama Medvedev whispered in his ear at the next party so that the whole world would hear bully
                  2. Ivan_Ivanov
                    Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 18: 40
                    -2
                    Have you ever led anyone in your life?

                    Imagine that you can take a person to work, but you can’t fire him, you can’t deprive him of a bonus, you can’t give him any order, you can’t forbid him anything, you can’t change anything that he did ... Does that mean what do you manage, manage? ...

                    What about ?! You took him to work!

                    And then there are all sorts of lobbies, the pressure of all agkts, advisers, envoys, foundations, institutions ...
                    1. Ruslan67
                      Ruslan67 11 November 2013 18: 59
                      +1
                      Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
                      Have you ever led anyone in your life?

                      A large trading company Objects in security companies and some other small thing
                      Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
                      You took him to work!

                      As he took and kicked in front of his own screech
                      Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
                      you can take a person to work, but you cannot fire him, you cannot deprive him of a bonus, you cannot give him any order, you cannot forbid him anything, you cannot change anything he has done ...

                      Also came across such instances request There were no bricks, but it happened that those who recommended them wassat their own skulls and straightened
                      1. Ivan_Ivanov
                        Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 19: 06
                        0
                        It's great that you have an idea of ​​how hard it is to work with staff, how hard it is to get people to carry out your tasks exactly, even with a full set of leverage.

                        But what is it like when they are not there? ... When you can neither dismiss, nor punish, nor fix .. That's the same ...
                      2. smile
                        smile 11 November 2013 19: 32
                        -1
                        Ivan_Ivano
                        Damn, sorry. but you are already starting to take me out with your ... slow-thinking in general. You yourself cited the link from Article 14 on the Central Executive Committee of the Russian Federation, calling it the 3rd chapter. Themselves cited a line that the head of the Central Bank can be fired in the case of:

                        violations of federal laws that govern issues related to the activities of the Bank of Russia;
                        failure to take measures to prevent or resolve a conflict of interest to which he is a party
                        http://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_148999/?frame=2
                        © ConsultantPlus, 1992-2013

                        On these two points, the head of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, in case he gets into trouble, quits with a whistle ... then I don’t want to talk about your knowledge ... you are not to blame for being prone to give in to demagogy - this is such a disease ...
                      3. Ruslan67
                        Ruslan67 11 November 2013 20: 34
                        +2
                        Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
                        That's the same ...

                        You read inattentively request They are always there good Just liberals do not like such leverage because they are used against them request We must be able to use them wisely combining the whip method .. and its analogue from the sex shop tongue It’s not worth feeding gingerbread cookies — caviar will crash. By the way, the personnel issue is always the most painful. But I have some kind of education in this particular part.
                      4. Normal
                        Normal 11 November 2013 23: 59
                        0
                        Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
                        Have you ever led anyone in your life?

                        Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
                        It's great that you have an idea of ​​how hard it is to work with staff, how hard it is to get people to carry out your tasks exactly, even with a full set of leverage.

                        But what is it like when they are not there? ... When you can neither dismiss, nor punish, nor fix .. That's the same ...


                        Yes ... it’s hard for the president ... He can’t dismiss, punish, or fix it. As God manages to lead the country for the fourth consecutive term, God alone knows. He has no leverage; could not create in 15 years in power.
                        Oh, woe-grief ...
                  3. Alexander Romanov
                    Alexander Romanov 12 November 2013 04: 32
                    -1
                    Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
                    And then there are all sorts of lobbies, the pressure of all agkts, advisers, envoys, foundations, institutions ..

                    One gets the impression that a person writes about Yanukovych. Hello man is Russian sayit laughing
            3. Ivan_Ivanov
              Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 18: 29
              -2
              Do you want Russia to act by the methods of the State Department?
              1. Ruslan67
                Ruslan67 12 November 2013 02: 58
                +1
                Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
                Do you want Russia to act by the methods of the State Department?

                Why! Carefully need tongue more thoroughly bully
          2. Normal
            Normal 11 November 2013 23: 50
            -1
            Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
            The next one will come in its place. Changing personalities without changing the system will not do anything.

            So why do pro-authorities claim that there is no alternative to the Highly High? After all, nothing changes from the change of personalities? AND?
      2. teleset
        teleset 11 November 2013 18: 21
        0
        Imagine you are the president, you have the GRU, the Foreign Intelligence Service, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the FSB, the Investigative Committee, the Prosecutor's Office, and you decided to remove the head of the Central Bank from the post, how long does it take for a brick to fall on the head of the Central Bank?
        ALL THE COUNTRIES WILL BE ON THE SHITS OF THE CENTRAL BANK FUND OF THE NATIONAL BENEFIT OF STATE AND RISE ALSO THERE. THESE TACKS ON SCHOOLS WE ARE CURRENTLY THINKING ABOUT NATIONALIZATION HOW ALSO THE IMF FRS WILL BLOCK THE SHET OF THE CB.?
        1. Alexander Romanov
          Alexander Romanov 11 November 2013 18: 26
          -1
          Quote: teleset
          ALL THE COUNTRIES WILL BE ON THE SHITS OF THE CENTRAL BANK FUND OF THE NATIONAL BENEFIT OF STATE AND RISE ALSO THERE. THESE TACKS ON SCHOOLS WE ARE CURRENTLY THINKING ABOUT NATIONALIZATION HOW ALSO THE IMF FRS WILL BLOCK THE SHET OF THE CB.?

          Russia is not Iran and not North Korea, so nothing will happen to the SHITS.
          1. alekseyal
            alekseyal 11 November 2013 19: 17
            0
            In Cyprus, too, nothing happened with the accounts of Russian enterprises and citizens?
            1. Alexander Romanov
              Alexander Romanov 12 November 2013 04: 34
              0
              Quote: alekseyal
              In Cyprus, too, nothing happened with the accounts of Russian enterprises and citizens?

              There is not only Russian money, but also Europeans, and GOD, even Americans belay
          2. teleset
            teleset 11 November 2013 19: 30
            +2
            I would not mind if our Tu-95 flying over the IMF would accidentally drop a bomb laughing
      3. Ivan_Ivanov
        Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 18: 25
        +1
        Do you think that the president of Russia should engage in ordinary blackmail? And what do you think, others (Mi-6, the CIA, Massad, the NSA ...) can also blackmail with a kitrich on their heads. And the pretext is very simple: pursue a policy independent of the president of Russia and the state, which is officially provided for by the constitution and law.

        By analogy ... Are you also just so ready to hit a brick with an apartment tenant?
        1. Alexander Romanov
          Alexander Romanov 11 November 2013 18: 34
          +2
          Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
          Do you think that the president of Russia should engage in ordinary blackmail?

          He’ll blackmail some more. Sit in Ukraine and tell us in Russia what Putin can and what not. This is what Yanukovych wants but cannot. And Putin puts both Obama and the others. By the way, you didn’t answer the question is, who appoints the head of the Central Bank?
          Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
          pursue a policy independent of the president of Russia and the state, which is officially provided for by the constitution and law.

          So Nabiulina is now working for Mossad laughing laughing laughing
          Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
          You, too, are just so ready to hit a brick with an apartment tenant?

          You write Nonsense !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
          1. Ivan_Ivanov
            Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 18: 53
            0
            Sit in Ukraine and tell us in Russia what Putin can and what not.

            You accepted the American liberal point of view that Ukraine is supposedly a separate state that has nothing to do with Russia. Well, but I now believe that Ukraine and Russia are one temporarily divided state, and that without Russia, as Father Butka will all come to us completely ... c.

            So Nabiulina is now working for Mossad

            No, b .. it works in a vacuum, right? And no hostile forces exist and do not make every possible effort to influence the situation in Russia.
            1. Alexander Romanov
              Alexander Romanov 12 November 2013 04: 38
              +1
              Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
              You accepted the American-liberal point of view that Ukraine is supposedly a separate state that has nothing to do with Russia

              You would read my posts and complaints about me from Ukrainians when I write that Ukraine is Russia. I wrote to liberals laughing laughing laughing
              Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
              No, b .. it works in a vacuum, right?

              Sorry, but you are a complete 0 -zero. I'm tired of reading your garbage already.
        2. Ruslan67
          Ruslan67 11 November 2013 18: 41
          +2
          Quote: Ivan_Ivanov
          are you just ready to hit the tenant's brick with a brick?

          If he floods me the ceiling, I’ll give him a crowbar too. am
      4. smile
        smile 11 November 2013 19: 05
        0
        Alexander Romanov
        Greetings! Yes, the guy just does not understand what he’s talking about - under two points (especially the second) -

        violations of federal laws that govern issues related to the activities of the Bank of Russia;
        failure to take measures to prevent or resolve a conflict of interest to which he is a party
        http://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_148999/?frame=2
        © ConsultantPlus, 1992-2013

        you can pull up anything and without any strains LEGALLY remove any chairman of the Central Bank. Well, honestly, it’s just as funny when such guys talk about legal issues, as if, for example, a violinist talked about the tactics of combat use of attack aircraft ... :))))
        1. alekseyal
          alekseyal 11 November 2013 19: 25
          -1
          The situation with an independent Central Bank not only in Russia but also around the world. Read about Argentina, Hungary how they tried to fight it.
          http://vgil.ru/2013/03/26/borba-protiv-centralnyx-bankov-argentina-vengriya-serb
          iya /

          By the way, according to the law, the Central Bank can sue the Russian government in international courts.

          Central Bank employees are not state. employees, since their status is not regulated by the law on state. service, and the law on the Central Bank
        2. Alexander Romanov
          Alexander Romanov 12 November 2013 04: 41
          +1
          Quote: smile
          Greetings! Yes, the guy just does not understand what he is talking about

          Hi Vladimir! Let him even say well that he doesn’t understand, otherwise they would put him in charge. God forbid winked
  • smile
    smile 11 November 2013 18: 57
    -2
    Mace
    You understood correctly. Your first comment from me ++++++. With an initiative! :)))
  • Ivan_Ivanov
    Ivan_Ivanov 11 November 2013 17: 59
    +3
    Fedorov talks about the nationalization of the Central Bank, and not about the nationalization of the property of the Central Bank, as the author of the article slyly submits. That is, about the subordination of the Central Bank of Russia to Russian state bodies: the president, parliament, possibly the CM.
  • serge
    serge 11 November 2013 18: 01
    +2
    All these clarifications, whether the central bank is independent of its own state, only testify to the looseness of the executive branch. The law on the Central Bank is written in such a way that it can be interpreted from any side. As follows from Article 5 of the Law on the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, "The Bank of Russia is accountable to the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation." That is - the Central Bank is accountable to the legislative authority of the Russian Federation. If you wish, you can deduct from this that the Central Bank is not accountable to the executive branch, which is what happens in practice. On the other hand, if the executive branch is tougher, one can recall that "The authorized capital and other property of the Bank of Russia is federal property." Under the "nationalization" of the Central Bank Fedorov and others like him mean the legislatively enshrined transfer of the Central Bank under the control of the executive branch. In essence, all these gestures speak only of the weakness and ambiguity of the policy of the executive branch, which can apply such an effective thing as the criminal code to traitors from the Central Bank, while widely applying confiscation of property, but does not do it.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • aviamed90
    aviamed90 11 November 2013 18: 44
    +3
    I am by no means a financier or even an economist.
    But I have a hobby - I collect coins.

    And I am alarmed in the story with our Central Bank of the Russian Federation one moment.
    Namely: have you ever looked closely at banknotes and coins circulating in our country? Recommend! Very interesting and mysterious!

    For example, on our banknote of any denomination you will not find the name of our country and (or) its coat of arms (or their elements).
    And vice versa, you see on them the emblem of the Central Bank and the inscription "BANK OF RUSSIA TICKET" (on the coins - "BANK OF RUSSIA").

    For your information:

    "The emblem of the Bank of Russia is the image of a two-headed Russian eagle without additional elements-regalia (i.e. without crowns, order ribbons, a shield on the chest, a scepter and orb). Historically, this is the coat of arms of Russia during the time of Ivan III, which was also used as the emblem of Russia during the Provisional government in 1918, since 1992 used by the Bank of Russia. " (site "www.geraldika.ru")

    Very interesting and thought-provoking:

    "From a conversation with the Chairman of the Council of the Heraldic Council under the President of the Russian Federation G.Vilinbakhov:
    The eagle on Russian rubles differs from the eagle on the State Emblem. On the ruble he is an accurate portrait of his ancestor on "kerenkas": he dangled his wings, and the scepter, and the orb, and he has no crown. It turns out that the Central Bank is not a state structure, and rubles are not a state currency?
    - The state emblem does not have to be minted on coins. The eagle on rubles is the officially approved emblem of the Central Bank. Almost every department has its own emblem. The Central Bank began to use its sign even before the two-headed eagle was adopted as the State Emblem. As a basis, the Central Bank took Bilibin's drawing, made in 1917 for the press of the Provisional Government, which in turn was based on the image of a two-headed eagle on the seal of Ivan III, but without crowns. "(Site" www.kraeved.su ", article" A little about the emblem on modern Russian coins "dated November 26.11.2012, XNUMX)

    ... this gentleman's "comprehensive" answer!


    But even on the dollar (despite the fact that the Fed is a private shop) there is an inscription "THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA". And since the Americans do not have a coat of arms, there is an image of the Great State Seal.
    In the euro, there is a flag of the European Union. The yuan is also the emblem of the country (yuan or renminbi (in the Latin spelling Renminbi, abbreviated as RMB). Renminbi is translated as "national currency").

    Even on the banknotes of the hryvnia - the coat of arms of Ukraine, despite the fact that it says "NATIONAL BANK OF UKRAINE". And on the bills of the Moldovan leu, there are both the coat of arms and the name of the country.

    Those. we live in a country called "Bank of Russia" with the appropriate coat of arms.

    There is something to think about.

    Something like that.
  • Stalin
    Stalin 11 November 2013 19: 24
    0
    Quote: Mace
    As I understand it, the author soberly estimated that talking about the nationalization of the Central Bank is stupid, since it is legally and de facto state and therefore there can be no nationalization.


    Are you a bot or something? They say in Russian to you that the Central Bank is not subordinate to the state. Read already the Constitution and the charter of the Central Bank. Already even a child with a pacifier in his teeth knows that the Central Bank is a branch of the Fed, moreover, it is clearly fulfilling the plans of the IMF. The Central Bank is the main enemy of the entire Russian economy, which drains it from the very tomatoes. All free money goes to treasury, in other words, to pay for the American public debt, and even more simply, our Central Bank pays for their aircraft carriers and benefits to homeless people. Starikov puts the whole topic of the Central Bank so clearly on the shelves that anyone can understand, he always has evidence, arguments and links to official documents. Yarosvet has nothing, he is up to Starikov as to China in a wheelchair. The article is just emotions and zero arguments. All in the style of the State Department hamsters. You will never hear any evidence or arguments, only emotions in the style are all gone and Putin must leave. It’s just like in Syria, where the phrase that Assad should leave has already endured the brain for everyone. Try to refute Starikov about the Central Bank reasonably, but on the basis of regulatory documents. Go ahead, hamsters or gut thin?
  • Neil
    Neil 11 November 2013 19: 30
    +2
    Why the Russian economy does not match the country's potential and what prevents to fix the situation? Many experts believe that the fault is the credit policy of the Central Bank, which acts in the interests of ... the West.

    The Russian economy is not so bad, but it does not at all correspond to the raw material, industrial, human potential of our country. Agree, it is difficult to explain why, for example, in a country where sophisticated military aircraft are manufactured, they cannot arrange the production of much simpler civil liners in design. Russia produces space rockets - besides us only three countries can do this (and worse). But at the same time, we cannot arrange the production of televisions, cell phones, computers. But all this is much easier than rockets. What can I say about complex technology! Leather goods and clothing, agricultural machinery and plumbing - everything is entirely imported. From an engineering point of view, this simply cannot be. There are many states that have perfectly mastered the production of technologically simple products (Turkey, China, Brazil, India)


    Answering this question, we have been repeating the same phrase as a sacred mantra for more than ten years, which, they say, explains everything: “Raw curse!” As an option - "Oil needle!". Say, at such prices for energy and minerals, nobody wants to invest in other industries.

    Sorry, but this is complete nonsense! No matter how profitable the raw materials business is, there are no empty seats in this business: all deposits are assigned to large companies. In fact, this is a closed club that works with the state, with its banks, with its universities - and does not bother anyone. The big money that spins in the commodity sector does not have any depressing effect on other industries. Maybe the “curse” is that the state, receiving the main income from raw materials producers in other sectors, small and medium-sized businesses simply spit? But any leader (country, region) wants to stand at the head of a prosperous and diversified system, and not a raw materials appendage. Therefore, the accusations of deliberately clamping the economy "from above" are simply ridiculous.

    Isn't this the exact opposite? Maybe resource rents are not a curse, but a blessing? Oil money through the budget, through salaries, through orders is poured into the economy, provide demand, allow you to create savings. Saying that the wealth bestowed by nature is evil and the source of problems can only be a hermit fanatic ...

    But what criticism of the existing economic system is right for is that this blessing does not work. The more money Russia receives from exporting raw materials, the more it purchases imports. But not from laziness. But because imports are cheaper and better in quality.

    Who is to blame if not the "oil needle"?

    So who is to blame for many years of economic stagnation, if not high oil prices? We name the culprit, while not claiming pioneering. It has been called more than once by such famous people as the head of Sberbank German Gref, the owner of the Basic Element Oleg Deripaska and other representatives of big business. This culprit is the Central Bank. He is the Bank of Russia, he is the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, he is the Central Bank - the one who has always been, like Caesar's wife, above suspicion. It is the Central Bank, in the figurative expression of one of the experts, who has been sucking blood from Russia for twenty years. And - well-intentioned.




    .Link:
    http://www.nvspb.ru/tops/kreditnaya-istoriya-s-geografiey-ili-pochemu-v-rossii-t
    akie-vysokie-uchetnye-stavki-50524
  • MIKHAN
    MIKHAN 11 November 2013 19: 42
    +1
    An interesting article how many emotions ..!
    For more than ten years now, the tale of V. V. Putin’s attempt to nationalize the Central Bank of the Russian Federation has been circulating. There are many versions of this tale - from cautious hypotheses to frank delirium, but they all agree on one thing: the corrupt Duma did not allow this to be done.

    I am a little connected with this and honestly did not understand what this article is for? But if the title in capital letters is clear there .. the rest is bullshit ..! As I understand it, many in the West and in Russia are angry that we have money .. and we are trying to invest it in the economy and rearmament of the Army .. Again, in the 90s, many people want to catch fish ??? Anglo-Saxons with Jews write boiling water return the flow again (as in the 90s) to offshore banks, etc. .. (read Bismarck ..)
    1. dizelniy
      dizelniy 11 November 2013 21: 17
      +2
      Where are the results of investing in the economy?
  • Stalin
    Stalin 11 November 2013 19: 50
    0
    Quote: MIKHAN
    An interesting article how many emotions ..!
    For more than ten years now, the tale of V. V. Putin’s attempt to nationalize the Central Bank of the Russian Federation has been circulating. There are many versions of this tale - from cautious hypotheses to frank delirium, but they all agree on one thing: the corrupt Duma did not allow this to be done.

    I am a little connected with this and honestly did not understand what this article is for? But if the title in capital letters is clear there .. the rest is bullshit ..! As I understand it, many in the West and in Russia are angry that we have money .. and we are trying to invest it in the economy and rearmament of the Army .. Again, in the 90s, many people want to catch fish ??? Anglo-Saxons with Jews write boiling water return the flow again (as in the 90s) to offshore banks, etc. .. (read Bismarck ..)

    In fact of the matter. The hamster became more active. Another question is how much the people need to be rationalized so that they, after hanging mugs, believe in unproven writings. And on the other hand, this shows the quality work of the mass media; it is not in vain that they eat billions of dollars in grants.
  • Savva30
    Savva30 11 November 2013 20: 03
    +2
    without a liter can not figure it out ...
  • Stinger
    Stinger 11 November 2013 20: 11
    -4
    Something is not clear. The author, that besides the Military Review there is nowhere else to speak on this accounting and defense issue?
  • atesterev
    atesterev 11 November 2013 20: 17
    0
    Look at article article 75.2 everything is very well described there !!! For those who understand.
  • atesterev
    atesterev 11 November 2013 20: 17
    0
    Look at article article 75.2 of our constitution, everything is very well described there !!! For those who understand.
  • zasxdcfvv
    zasxdcfvv 11 November 2013 20: 18
    0
    In 1992, she graduated with honors from the Faculty of Economics of Moscow State University. M.V. Lomonosov with a degree in economics and mathematics, in 1994 - the Russian School of Economics, receiving a master's degree in economics.

    In 1998, she received a Ph.D. degree in economics from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA.

    In 1998-1999 taught at the Stockholm Institute for the Economy in Transition (Stockholm School of Economics) [4].

    In 1999–2000, he was a leading economist at the Russian-European Center for Economic Policy (RECEP).

    In 2000-2006, she served as director of application programs at the Center for Economic and Financial Development (CEFIR) [5].

    In 2006 - scientific director of the Center for Strategic Research, member of the Scientific Council of the Carnegie Moscow Center [6].

    Since March 2008 - senior adviser to the president, chief economist, head of the Center for Macroeconomic Research of Sberbank of Russia [6], created in the same 2008.

    In 2008, she was appointed deputy chairman of the expert council under the government commission to improve the efficiency of the Russian economy.

    In February 2009, she was included in the first hundred of the reserve of managerial personnel under the patronage of the President of the Russian Federation [6].

    Since 1999, she taught at the Russian School of Economics [4].

    He is co-leader of the expert group No. 3 “Reform of the pension system” for updating the “Strategy 2020”, scientific secretary of the expert group No. 10 “Development of the financial and banking sector”.

    Being the chief economist of Sberbank of the Russian Federation, she was one of the close intellectuals of the first persons of the state, participated in informal meetings with V. Putin during the work on the “Strategy 2020”, with D. Medvedev during the launch of the “open government” [7]. She regularly participated in RBC-TV analytical television programs.

    On July 13, 2012, by decree of V. Putin, she was appointed head of the Expert Directorate of the President of the Russian Federation [2]. This post has remained vacant since March 2011, when Ilya Lomakin-Rumyantsev left it. The Expert Office of the President of the Russian Federation itself has existed since 2000 [8]. The head of the Presidential Executive Office, Sergei Ivanov, described Yudaev as a brilliant financier and economist [9].

    From August 2012 to September 12, 2013, she acted as Sherpa, the representative of the President of the Russian Federation on affairs of the group of leading industrial states and relations with representatives of the leaders of the G10 member countries [11] [12] [XNUMX].

    In 2012 declared 23,6 million rubles of earnings [13].

    In June 2013, experts speculated that Yudaev would replace Alexei Ulyukaev as the first deputy chairman of the Central Bank of Russia [14].

    On September 10, 2013, she was relieved of the post of head of the Expert Office of the President of the Russian Federation [15].

    September 11, 2013 appointed first deputy chairman of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation. Monitors monetary policy issues — this is the person responsible for making decisions in the Central Bank.
  • Backfire
    Backfire 11 November 2013 20: 34
    0
    It is readily written here, in details and details, that the main function of the Bank of Russia is not at all the interests of the state of Russia, and certainly not the interests of its citizens. Read:

    http://chipstone.livejournal.com/636250.html


    Well, the "hopes" that this uncle will do something for the Russians, and not for his owners, are generally ridiculous:
  • The comment was deleted.
  • dizelniy
    dizelniy 11 November 2013 21: 13
    0
    The article is designed to measure the level of understanding by the population of this specially confusing topic. Who wants to understand, I refer to the website of the Concept of Public Security, in the lectures of General Petrov scientifically and intelligibly outlined what is actually happening. With the help of a financial and financial stranglehold, our country is held in the rank of a raw materials appendage of the West, and the Central Bank plays the main role here. Mr. Fedorov from the same team as Nabiulin, but it’s always useful to have an ardent oppositionist, a whistleblower. We recall who in what position in the country we are listed on this part. The author is a mishandled Cossack.
  • viborzanami
    viborzanami 11 November 2013 21: 16
    0
    "For some reason, citizens who believe in this fairy tale do not think that the Central Bank of the Russian Federation is precisely the Central Bank of the Russian Federation."
    -------------------------------------------------- -----------------
    And for citizens who believe in a fairy tale that the US Federal Reserve is indeed the Federal Reserve System, and not a private shop for enriching private owners, I can give a few examples that the Americans themselves publish:
    “Article I, Section 8 of the US Constitution states that only the US Congress has the power to“ mint a coin, regulate its value and the value of a foreign coin, set the units of measures and weights. ”So why is the Federal Reserve doing this?
    Over the past five years, the Fed has created around $ 2.75 trillion from the air and thrown it into the financial system. This allowed the stock market to soar to unprecedented heights, but as a result, our financial system has become extremely unstable.
    According to an official government report, during the recent financial crisis, the Fed issued secret loans to large banks at $ 16.1 trillion (NYSEARCA: XLF).
    In 1970, the five largest US banks owned 17% of all US banking assets. Today, this figure has grown to 52%.
    The Federal Reserve should “regulate” large banks, but it did nothing to stop the inflation of the derivatives bubble at interest rates of $ 441 trillion, which could completely destroy our entire financial system.
    The Fed was designed as a perpetual motion machine of debt. Bankers created this project with the goal of drawing the US government into an endless spiral of debt, which is impossible to get out of. Since the creation of the Federal Reserve about 100 years ago, US public debt has grown 5,000 times.
    This year, the US government will spend more than $ 400 billion only on interest payments on public debt
    There are many other possible financial systems, but at the moment all 187 countries that belong to the IMF have a central bank. Should this be considered an incredible coincidence? "
    What does the author of the article think about this? Especially about the last paragraph?
  • T-130
    T-130 11 November 2013 21: 22
    -2
    In this case, the question is terminology, of course there is no occupation of the central bank and it belongs to the state, but the same law says that the government cannot manage the money of the central bank, and in case of default the government can only sell property: buildings, furniture, etc. . and it will hardly be possible to return the invested money. And then the money of a foreign country spinning in our economy depreciates the ruble! Well, it goes without saying that it’s more than stupid to lend at 1% and borrow at 10%
  • Sergo1924
    Sergo1924 11 November 2013 21: 23
    +2
    The article is clearly custom-made with a shower. The author shows some sort of frank heresy, apparently pro-pay liberals !!! Pkst will then explain the growth of% on loans, inflation, etc.
  • viborzanami
    viborzanami 11 November 2013 21: 54
    +2
    "The law on the Central Bank and the Constitution already states that the Central Bank of the Russian Federation is the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, that its authorized capital and property are federal property, and this in turn means that the founder of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation is the Russian Federation."
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Let's analyze this statement:
    Federal Law "On the Central Bank of the Russian Federation":
    Article 2. The authorized capital and other property of the Bank of Russia are federal property (the author writes about this, but we read further). In accordance with the objectives and in the manner established by this Federal Law, the Bank of Russia exercises authority to own, use and dispose of the Bank of Russia property, including the Bank of Russia gold and currency reserves (ATTENTION: the gold and currency reserves are held by the Bank of Russia and it is the Central Bank that invests gold reserves in American treasuries and at a ridiculous% in Western banks). Withdrawal and encumbrance of the specified property without the consent of the Bank of Russia is not allowed (and this is IMPORTANT: without the consent of the Bank, Russia does not have the right to use its own foreign exchange reserves!
    Article 4. Clause 2) Monopoly carries out the issue of cash and organizes cash circulation.
    Article 6. The Bank of Russia is entitled to apply for protection of its interests to international courts, courts of foreign states and arbitration courts. (From whom is the Bank of Russia going to defend itself in foreign courts?)
    Article 7. Drafts of federal laws, as well as regulatory legal acts of federal executive bodies, concerning the performance by the Bank of Russia of its functions, are sent for conclusion to the Bank of Russia !!! (No comments)
    1. Yarosvet
      11 November 2013 23: 37
      -1
      Quote: viborzanami
      No comments
      Insanity was strong ...
      It’s very hard with the guys who didn’t even read the basics of Russian law.

      without the consent of the Bank, Russia does not have the right to use its own foreign exchange reserves!
      Where is that written? laughing
      The Central Bank exercises authority over the possession (and within the framework of the law), the use and disposal of the Central Bank PROPERTY, and nothing more. And what about the property of the Central Bank? laughing

      The Bank of Russia is entitled to apply for protection of its interests to international courts, courts of foreign states and arbitration courts. (From whom is the Bank of Russia going to defend itself in foreign courts?)
      Articles 8, 9 - Furstein?

      it is the Central Bank that invests gold reserves in American treasuries and at a ridiculous% in Western banks
      1. viborzanami
        viborzanami 12 November 2013 01: 12
        0
        It’s very hard with the guys who didn’t even read the basics of Russian law.
        ----------------------------------------------------------------------
        It’s really very hard with the guys who shit at home.
        -------------------------------------------------- ------------
        "Where is that written?
        The Central Bank exercises the authority to own (and within the framework of the law), use and dispose of the PROPERTY of the Central Bank, and nothing else. And what concerns the property of the Central Bank? "
        -------------------------------------------------- -----------
        I look in the book - I see a fig. We read carefully, it is possible according to the syllables:
        Article 2. The Bank of Russia exercises authority to own, use and dispose of the property of the Bank of Russia, including the Bank of Russia gold and currency reserves.
        What principles of law have you mastered if the elementary text does not reach your understanding?
        ---------------------------------------------------------

        Insanity grew stronger ... In my comment: "It is the Central Bank that invests gold reserves in American Treasuries and at a ridiculous% in Western banks" you cited articles on managing the resources of the Reserve Fund and the National Welfare Fund. For some reason, I'm not surprised.
        After your answer, I can only advise: Do not try to write articles on topics in which you are not in the topic.
  • their
    their 11 November 2013 22: 12
    0
    Putin is lobbying the interests of the Fed, not the interests of citizens of the Russian Federation. This is obvious, for 13 years it was possible to do what Hugo Chavez once turned, or how Bashar Assad treasures sovereignty. Indeed, in Syria, the bank is nationalized and works for the Syrian economy.

    What is difficult for the National Bank to enter and take away? To come up with a scheme for returning the Central Bank while saving 300-400 billion dollars a year of national money. Or is it easier to be a slave and covertly finance US military adventures? Some questions, but no answer from Comrade Putin.
    1. orek
      orek 11 November 2013 23: 55
      0
      or how Bashar Assad values ​​sovereignty. Indeed, in Syria, the bank is nationalized and works for the Syrian economy.
      Bashar al-Assad is truly the leader and patriot of his country with a capital letter.
      However, SUS have you watched the news for a long time ??? Half of Syria is a ruin, as in STALINGRAD. Every international shelupon kills children and civilians. Nichrome self independence.
      Enter and select - this is "Sharikovism". Try it. Will you go yourself, or by a group by prior arrangement?
      For 300-400 billion a year (without popular support), liberals of all countries will tear anyone into flaps.
      By the way, what do you propose to do with dollars ?? In Russia, the official currency is the ruble (for a minute).
    2. alone
      alone 12 November 2013 00: 01
      -1
      Quote: sus
      This is obvious, for 13 years it was possible to do what Hugo Chavez once turned, or how Bashar Assad treasures sovereignty. Indeed, in Syria, the bank is nationalized and works for the Syrian economy.


      so so so! As for the Syrian economy, I ask you in more detail. It was very interesting how the national bank of Syria works, where half of the territory is in the hands of militants. What kind of economy are we talking about? If Assad is forced to fight at the expense of Iranian loans?
  • podonokispodolska
    podonokispodolska 11 November 2013 22: 29
    -2
    the author of the article and those who plus him -. at least read Wikipedia about the charter of the central bank, and then criticize N. Starikov
    1. vot-te-raz
      vot-te-raz 12 November 2013 12: 25
      0
      Nikolay Viktorovich, how subtly did you advertise your book bully
  • voldmis
    voldmis 11 November 2013 23: 07
    +2
    The author of the article somehow one-sidedly revealed the essence of the issue. At first glance, there is a certain logic in his thoughts. But it is as intricate as the law on the Central Bank itself. If we consider this law as a whole, and not pull out individual phrases from it, then it becomes clear that the Central Bank was not originally meant to work in the interests of the country. I recommend that the author look at the refinancing rates from January 1, 1992 to the present and track the "real successes" of the Mega-Carrier (Mega-Regulator).
    http://www.cbr.ru/pw.aspx?file=/statistics/credit_statistics/refinancing_rates.h
    tm
  • lex fim
    lex fim 11 November 2013 23: 20
    0
    Under Yeltsin, the Central Bank was looted and privatized by classified private individuals i.e. enemies. This is a well-known fact that has been widely discussed publicly at the official level. So there is no need to drive Putin, he is not omnipotent to resolve such issues from a raid.