We note, by the way, that the reduction of the expanded money supply below a certain scale (approximately 70% of the country's GDP) does not lead to a decrease, but to an increase in inflation, was strictly shown in an official document in the autumn of 1996 of the year economy, prepared for the Ministry Board). Of course, many people understood this before, but there was no official document, and therefore liberal officials could pretend that they were working “according to world standards”. But after the appearance of the official document, it became clear that the liberal policy was a criminal act aimed at destroying the country - because the liberal leadership of the ministry decided to pretend that such a report simply did not exist. The board was canceled (the only case in my memory), the report was withdrawn from the participants in the discussion and destroyed.
To reduce the money supply, different mechanisms are used - and not quite correct methods of calculating risks, which increase rates, and the abandonment of the ruble refinancing of the banking system, and forcing banks to refinance in foreign currency, which increases currency risks. As a result, the economic system is constantly hungry, and long-term investments are simply impossible. The only bright moment was the 1999 – 2002 period, when the Central Bank was headed by Viktor Vladimirovich Gerashchenko, who increased the money supply 4 times relative to 10 (from 4 to 40% of GDP) over 2002, of course, inflation only decreased. But after the arrival of Ignatiev at the end of 2004, the growth of the money supply and its approach to the scale adequate to the economy ceased, as a result of which inflation again went up. Only following the results of 14, industrial inflation jumped twice - from 28 to XNUMX%, after which the State Statistics Committee (Rosstat) actively began to engage in its falsification. In the direction of decline, of course.
Accordingly, the main development mechanism in the framework of the liberal model is the attraction of foreign investments. Actually, this was openly spoken of since Gaidar, who built a brilliant “logical” chain: since the “only” factor that ensures the inflow of investments is low inflation, then this very inflation should be reduced at any cost, see above. Note that the delusional nature of this construction has become clear for a long time and to everyone (even foreign consultants somehow shunned such a revelation in the economy), therefore modern liberals have adapted it somewhat, replacing it with such a thing as a “good investment climate”. An integral part of which, however, is low inflation. And here lies one of the most clever manipulative techniques of the liberals.
Well, in fact, consider, for example, the city of Detroit. The investment climate in it is excellent, simply because it is located in the United States, that is, the “Mecca” of the liberals. There, the Sun rises, and the dates erect, and the investment is blooming. But the question is - why don't they bloom in Detroit? The answer is very simple. Because an investor who thinks about where to invest money, first of all, asks whether it is possible in principle to return this money. If "no" - everything else is not considered (as in the case of Detroit). If the answer is yes, then other issues can be considered, including which one to claim the return margin. And it is here that the “investment climate” begins to play its role - the better it is, that is, the lower the risks, the lower the percentage the investor is ready to receive. But if there is no return at all, then the climate itself can be perfect ... As in Detroit.
So, if investments in the Russian economy are foreign (foreign), that is, in foreign currency, then the return should be in foreign currency. That is, the total amount of investments taken by the country should not exceed a certain amount determined by foreign exchange earnings. Of course, there are some subtleties; for example, for exporters everything is somewhat simpler, well, so they and there are no particular problems with investors, which is clearly seen on the famous BP deal - Rosneft. But in the whole of the Russian economy, the situation is unequivocal.
All 2000-s foreign exchange earnings of the country grew (we will not quibble over trifles). But after 2008, the global crisis began, and the total foreign exchange earnings gradually began to decline, this year the decline has become particularly noticeable. Russia’s accession to the WTO also had a serious impact on it, which removed tariff protection from a number of industries, respectively, as soon as information about this became available (sometime since spring 2012), investors began to draw conclusions. Very simple: the volume of foreign exchange earnings coming into the country is decreasing, which means that it will not be missed not only for servicing new investments, but even for a full refund of the investments already made. That is, you need to start withdrawing money!
This process began with the spring of the year 2012 - the outflow of capital from the country! The liberals cried for a long time that the process “is about to end” and will be replaced by growth - without mentioning that this process fully corresponds to economic realities! At the same time, all the arguments about the fact that, taking into account the reserves of the Central Bank and the government, currency “above the roof,” do not correspond to reality, since all these reserves have already been taken into account - they are necessary to repay direct loans to the corporate sector.
In other words, the liberal model of development came to its logical conclusion: it was workable only in a situation of constant growth in commodity exports against the background of economic growth throughout the world! In other words, the liberals not only purposefully planted us on the “raw needle”, they even could not make this “needle” more or less stable, since it categorically requires constant economic growth in the outside world. Which for a very long time will not be.
Accordingly, the future of the Russian economy in the event of a continuation of the liberal model is sad. The economic downturn has lasted for more than a year and will only increase. God forbid that next year there would be a collapse in oil prices (which, given the entry to world markets of Iran’s oil, is not at all obvious) or a bubble collapse in the US stock market (which will still sooner or later collapse). In other words, the liberal future looks like this: the inevitable slow decline, with the constant risk of its acceleration. Pleasant prospect, do not say anything.
Although there is an alternative. Namely - import substitution. That is, the remaining on the territory of the country of the money that today goes to the direct purchase of imported goods. True, for this it is necessary, first, to abandon liberal principles, in particular, in monetary policy. And to make so that production became at least minimum profitable. And, secondly, to deprive the “Western partners” of our liberals of the hundreds of billions of dollars a year that they receive from us today. Here, as is clear, the liberals will face a wall, because without the support of these very "partners" they cannot remain in their places. However, they will also resist in terms of canceling their principles - again, the “partners” will be offended, tea, the principles did not come from the sky, but from the Washington Consensus!
So the general conclusion that can be drawn from the above: today the economic situation in Russia is determined by one banal point. There are liberals at the mercy - there is no economic growth. Expel the liberals - he will appear. And that's all.