Military Review

Food security of the Russian Federation. Successes and failures. Part of 3. Dry residue

25
We will complete the analysis of the situation in the CX RF, namely, we consider food security Based on the above facts and additional information from Rosstat.


Food security of the Russian Federation. Successes and failures. Part of 3. Dry residue


The first thing you want to pay attention to is how this issue is usually raised on the forums. The first comment usually has the following content (swearing and insults filtered): "Russia cannot feed itself!", then someone disagrees, pointing out that there are no 15 years for problems with products in the country, after which the thesis changes, and a message follows: "Go to the store, there is one import, nothing domestic !!!", which usually follows an answer like: "Well, I went, I hardly found Italian pasta, several varieties of imported cheese, beer, fruits, sweets, etc., and for each product there was a domestic equivalent of the same or lower price (sometimes higher)" and here comes the killer argument from the point of view of the all-proppoler: "Russia imports 50% (in different editions of 60%, 65%, 70%) food", after this discussion falls into demagogy on the topic: "And in Soviet times ... !!" or "Here in Europe ... !!!"

Let's argue.

Usually, the problem on forums, in agitation or interviews is intensified by creating in the citizen’s head one big inscription: "IF ANYTHING WHAT, WE WILL ALL BE DIE WITH HUNGER !!!" But, forgive me, if this is not about some kind of global conflict such as the Second World War or the wild crop failure of everything and everything (which, of course, it’s possible to imagine in the territory of the Russian Federation, it’s still difficult), it’s not possible to talk about hunger. I do not deny the fact that, if possible, if not all, then at least the greatest possible amount of products should be produced in ourselves and by ourselves, but in many articles we will inevitably lose to the warm countries of Central Asia, America and Europe, from importing the same bananas we will never refuse, unless one of the tropical countries wants to become part of the Russian Federation.

Another idea that is actively promoted in society by "certain forces" is that, say, our products are methodically squeezed out of the Russian market, imported goods have already replaced them, which gives reason to say that Russia is excessively dependent on the will West and forced to clean his boots, simultaneously appeasing all the beneficiaries of this position. In other words, the picture in the eyes of Russians should look like this:



If you look at things from the man in the street, and stupidly scan product barcodes in a supermarket or read the manufacturer’s address, you can discover the fact that almost all sneakers, mayonnaise, soda, pasta, ketchup, chicken, dumplings and t .d produced somewhere in the Moscow region, in Nizhny Novgorod, in Krasnodar, in short, in one of the cities (districts) in the territory of the Russian Federation. Accordingly, we need to analyze not the percentage of foreign companies' products on the shelves, but the total volumes of raw materials for the manufacture of the same ravioli. True, the FedStat does not agree with me and says that the share of imports in the commodity resources of food retail in recent years has been fluctuating around 33 percent.



In the previous notes, they often shouted about meat consumption per capita, and on forums they constantly try to compare convenient “them” figures with tsarist Russia or the early / late USSR. True, no one takes into account that the culture of consumption of a particular product changes over the years, though not so much, but in the 60-100 section of years — quite noticeably. And about the export / import conjuncture in general is not necessary. All this can be seen in the picture below.



Another important point is the quality of imported products. We all remember the "Bush legs" or Chinese cucumbers, which are appetizing in appearance, and in terms of utility - exactly the opposite. And since domestic production is easier to control, even with a decrease in the share of imports, product quality should increase.

To begin, I suggest you familiarize yourself with the basic provisions. "Doctrines of food security of the Russian Federation"because they know better there what Russia needs and how much so that there are no “surprises”:
"To assess the state of food security, the criterion is determined by the share of domestic agricultural, fishery products and food in the total volume of commodity resources (taking into account the carryover stocks) of the domestic market of relevant products, which has threshold values ​​for:
grains - at least 95 percent;
sugar - at least 80 percent;
vegetable oil - at least 80 percent;
meat and meat products (in terms of meat) - not less than 85 percent;
milk and dairy products (in terms of milk) - at least 90 percent;
fish products - at least 80 percent;
potatoes - at least 95 percent;
salt food - at least 85 percent. "


Before starting a direct analysis of the food security of our country, I suggest looking at how we ate, starting with the 1990 year. Below is a graph of the consumption of basic foodstuffs in Russia per capita, the level of 1990 consumption of the year is taken as 100%. (Source: Federal State Statistics Service, http://www.gks.ru/).



The failure of the nineties of the last century is clearly visible. In relation to 1990, meat consumption decreased by 40%; 54,4% fish; eggs on 30%; milk on 44,7%; vegetables on 23,6%; fruit on 22,9%; vegetable oil on 34,3%; sugar on 36,2%. And only the consumption of bread with pasta practically did not change, the consumption of potatoes even increased by 19,8%: people tried to somehow compensate for the lack of more expensive foods in the diet.

But by the year 2000, negative trends began to slow down, after which growth began. For many positions, very serious changes are now visible. The consumption of fruits and berries increased the most - by 71,4% relative to the level of 1990 of the year, and it reached 2011 kg per person per year in 60. The consumption of vegetable oil in comparison with 1990 increased by 32,4%; vegetables on 19,1% (106 kg per person per year), and the consumption of vegetables in absolute figures was almost equal to the consumption of potatoes, the difference is less than 4%. The consumption of potatoes and pasta bread remained at the level of 1990 of the year.

The level of consumption of meat and meat products (in terms of meat) reached 2012 in the year 98,7% of the indicator 1990 of the year and is equal to 74 kg per capita. Egg consumption corresponds to 91,2% of the year’s 1990 level, and sugar is 85,1% or 40 kg per person per year. However, due to the dubious benefits of consuming large amounts of sugar, I do not see any negative in this. The product that suffered the greatest damage in the nineties, namely fish and fish products, reached 2011 in the year 16,6 kg per person per year, which is 81,4% of the 1990 indicator. Milk and dairy consumption recovered worst of all, in 2012 year it reached 71,2% of the 1990 level of the year, but in absolute figures it is 276 L (kg) per person per year or 23 L (kg) per month, in my opinion, not so little.

We now turn directly to the analysis of our dependence on imports. Below is a graph of% of imports in total consumption of products, negative figures for grain show% of exports of total grain production. (The Goskomstat website has available balances of food resources only for grain, meat, milk, eggs, potatoes and vegetables).



From grain importers in 2001, we became exporters. Russia is steadily (as far as possible in crop production) increasing net grain exports, which amounted to 2012 mln. Tons in 21 year.

During the entire period under consideration, the share of net egg imports never exceeded 2,5%, while the maximum share of potato imports was 4,7%.
The share of net imports of vegetables and melons from the 2008 year floats in the range from 11,7% to 16,5%. The share of net imports of milk and dairy products has stabilized in the area of ​​16,6% - 19,5%; I would like less, but not critical.

Since the largest share of imports in our meat, consider it in more detail. The maximum share of meat imports for the period under review was in 1997 and amounted to 38%, 2005 reached 37,8% very close to this figure, after which the share of imports declined and decreased in 2012 to 24,8%. Below is a graph of production and net imports of meat and meat products in terms of meat in absolute terms.



It is clearly seen that meat imports are stagnating, and its own production has been growing since 2000. For greater clarity, below is a graph of growth in the production and import of meat, where the level of 2000 of the year is taken as 100%:



No economic crisis prevented us from increasing our own production, from 2000 to 2012 it increased (production) by 79,6%! Finally, the last graph, which shows the per capita consumption of meat with and without imports:



Looking at this chart, you can see that in 2009, the per capita consumption level only due to own meat production exceeded the total consumption level of the year, along with import, of meat. In the 2000 year, the level of consumption per person per year only due to own production exceeded the total level of consumption of the year 2012 along with import. Does anyone remember the “tension” with meat in 2005 year? Me not. And now we produce as much meat as we consumed in all at 2005. The number of “mouths” during this time has changed, but only slightly. Accordingly, if all imports are cut off at once, then nothing terrible will happen - we will roll back to the level of consumption of the 2005 of the year ... How prices will behave in this case is another question, but the fact that we will not die of hunger is a fact. It would not be superfluous to point out that no one here is going to cut off meat imports like this, exactly like our import partners do not want to do this.

Based on the above, we can safely say: "Whatever all the pro-fighters would shout, we certainly will not die of hunger. On the contrary, how could we not become fat with such tendencies!"

Conclusions:

1) In the Russian Federation there is a dependence on food imports, but its share in recent years has been steadily decreasing or stagnating with an increase in consumption.

2) Of the main indicators mentioned in the "Doctrine of Food Security of the Russian Federation", only the share of meat products imports does not substantially correspond to the parameters, otherwise the situation looks very good, although there is much to strive, for example, to increase domestic production of dairy products and vegetables.

3) The average share of imported food as of 2012 year is approximately 15-20%.


PS Since the article consisted of three parts, then, accordingly, please leave all comments here. I am very important constructive criticism of my work. Readers can also suggest a topic from this area for further discussion. Thank.
Author:
Articles from this series:
Food security of the Russian Federation. Successes and failures. Part of 1. Battle of the harvest
Food security of the Russian Federation. Successes and failures. Part of 2. A lot of bread is good, a lot of meat is better
Food security of the Russian Federation. Successes and failures. Part of 3. Dry residue
25 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. kaktus
    kaktus 14 December 2013 07: 38
    0
    The findings are encouraging. smile You can add 4. There is still much work, you should not relax.
    Possible topics: 1. Agricultural cooperatives 2. Social development of rural areas 3. Do Chinese agrarians need? what
    1. vladimirZ
      vladimirZ 14 December 2013 16: 30
      0
      The author is wrong. The comparison criteria for the agricultural sector were chosen by him incorrectly.
      To get an objective picture of changes in the agricultural sector, it is necessary to compare not with 1990 with the already collapsed economy of Gorbachev, but with the prosperous 1985. Those. to compare the collective and state farm management system with the "farmer" one.
      Then we will understand what we had then and what we have now.
      1. sledgehammer102
        14 December 2013 17: 19
        +2
        Quote: vladimirZ
        The author is wrong. The comparison criteria for the agricultural sector were chosen by him incorrectly.
        To get an objective picture of changes in the agricultural sector, it is necessary to compare not with 1990 with the already collapsed economy of Gorbachev, but with the prosperous 1985. Those. to compare the collective and state farm management system with the "farmer" one.


        The 1990 year is taken only to understand how much the industry has sunk over the 10 years.
        The purpose of the article is not to compare the USSR and the Russian Federation, but to show how events have developed in dynamics over the past 12 years. The 90 data of the year allow us to assess the situation in the first 10 years of New Russia. I did not want to draw a sharply falling chart.
        1. vladimirZ
          vladimirZ 14 December 2013 18: 12
          -1
          sledgehammer102
          I did not want to draw a sharply falling chart.


          And this must be done! Everyone needs to know the objective picture in Russian agriculture.
          Urgent measures are needed to rectify the situation to ensure food security in Russia, to save rural workers and citizens of Russia.
          1. sledgehammer102
            14 December 2013 19: 02
            +3
            Quote: vladimirZ
            And this must be done! Everyone needs to know the objective picture in Russian agriculture.

            Urgent measures are needed to rectify the situation to ensure food security in Russia, to save rural workers and citizens of Russia.

            If you have not noticed, then with 1999 or with 2000 of the year we have a steady increase in the production of our own products and a decrease in imports. This is the objective picture.
            And the data for the 90th year shows what a cruel joke the carelessness of "effective managers" of the 90s played with us. With them, just the same, everything fell down in a corkscrew.
            The purpose of the article was not to compare the USSR with the Russian Federation, but the dynamics over the past 12 years. The rest is additional information.
  2. igorra
    igorra 14 December 2013 08: 18
    +3
    The food program of a separate family of five people with a summer cottage of 10 acres. Harvest in the cellar in the country (20 km from Ufa): 70 buckets of potatoes, three buckets of beets, four buckets of carrots, 17 three-liter cans of pickles, 12 of the same tomato, 4 cans of cabbage. Now home: a bucket of sauerkraut, 80 cans of various stewed fruit, about 100 all kinds of salads and marinades. 60 liters of apple juice, a freezer full of berries, herbs, grated carrots, etc. Processed and eaten in the process of 9 12-liter buckets of cherries, 40 apples, 2 currants and 1 gooseberry, 10 buckets of cucumbers, 22 buckets of tomato, not only deformed I had to buy onions. And we go to the dacha on the weekend (you drop 1-2 times on weekdays to water). Such a crop is certainly not every year, but plus or minus is normal. Is our crop interesting to us and are taken into account in general statistics or not? I was younger (now 43) I didn’t even think about the garden, but now there’s one beauty: I picked the apple from the tree, the cucumber from the garden, the grapes gave the first harvest, next year I will put the greenhouse.
    1. EvilLion
      EvilLion 14 December 2013 15: 54
      0
      Explain to me, you get everything growing without much hindering this very vegetation. Why do my parents, who in the summer and after work still don’t grow anything but cabbage, cucumbers and useless pumpkins, sometimes even use these damned 6 hectares? Well, even tomatoes that have zero storage and regardless of the volume of the crop end at about the same time, because in the summer you won’t get drunk with them, and they lie, and in the bucket there are always slightly rotten ones, from which the rest goes bad.
      And there are a lot of cherries, plums, as luck would have it, without a corncob with chemicals, it is often almost all worms, apples are one antonovka, which you can turn unnecessary juice into, and by winter there will be one whole bucket of apples.

      Conclusion? Kitchen gardens in the furnace, someone knows how to grow, the first person will be the agronomist on the collective farm, and if not given, then the flowers in the pot will dry out.
      1. Gluxar_
        Gluxar_ 14 December 2013 16: 26
        0
        Quote: EvilLion
        Conclusion? Kitchen gardens in the furnace, someone knows how to grow, the first person will be the agronomist on the collective farm, and if not given, then the flowers in the pot will dry out.

        I do not agree with this conclusion. He himself has a plot, but time is not always enough. However, for everything to be good, you need to invest once in full. When there is a tool and the land is well-groomed, there are no problems with the crop. When there is no time even a couple of times a week to water that planted everything will be gone.
      2. Botanologist
        Botanologist 14 December 2013 22: 18
        0
        Quote: EvilLion
        nothing but cabbage, cucumbers and useless pumpkins grows? Well, even tomatoes that have zero storage


        It all depends on the structure of the soil, climate, humidity, the sum of the effective temperatures. Well, skills, of course. My root vegetables also grow poorly in my garden; I don’t plant them. But all the rest - heaps. Especially like strawberries. Get out in the morning before work, pick a handful yes .
  3. Humpty
    Humpty 14 December 2013 08: 53
    +3
    I read it with great interest. Thanks to the author.
    1. Semurg
      Semurg 14 December 2013 09: 26
      +1
      Quote: Humpty
      I read it with great interest. Thanks to the author.

      read everything a lot. From the conclusions of the author, I realized that if there is no famine, that’s good. Hunger is a bad feeling, and I want to beat someone on an empty stomach, and ate well-fed all the people are good, and I drank a liter of beer so generally the brothers laughing As one character said "to live well and well to live is even better."
      1. sledgehammer102
        14 December 2013 10: 34
        +3
        Quote: Semurg
        From the conclusions of the author, I realized that if there is no famine, that’s good.

        The conclusions you misunderstood. If we remove all food imports, then by consumption we will roll back to 2005 year, was there hunger and tension with food? Not. Accordingly, the conclusion is that we still have a lot to work on, but the positive dynamics inspire cautious optimism
  4. ole
    ole 14 December 2013 09: 07
    0
    Yes, everything is interesting, about cattle and beef and the development of the poultry industry to a point, the backwardness of farms has not been shown, well, agricultural agricultural holdings are currently being developed, and small farms and peasant farms are being closed. And the help to farmers Toko on paper in real life is penniless. And if the state developed cooperation where every dwelling family would take milk, we would already solve the problems of the village and single-industry towns and would feed the west. And of course, why the heck to go for five thousand to work on a collective farm, it’s better to sit on unemployment. And there are milk eggs in the store.
    1. sledgehammer102
      14 December 2013 09: 18
      +1
      Quote: ole
      . And if the state developed cooperation where every dwelling family would take milk, we would already solve the problems of the village and single-industry towns and would feed the west.


      Agriculture does not have to have many people in the village. In all highly developed countries, in terms of CX, urbanization is going through the roof. One large dairy farm will do more than three or four villages in 300 households, and 20 people will work on it.

      And sayings like, THE VILLAGE DIES, a populist slogan, since there is no such need for a rural population, again look at the experience of other countries
      1. ddmm09
        ddmm09 14 December 2013 10: 53
        +1
        Yes it is possible. But the development and maintenance of local food production in the Soviet period was dictated by strategic necessity. Now in almost all cities the main products, except for bread, are imported. Which dictates the need to maintain solid supply conditions every day, even in small cities. And if war or other serious problems? .. In the past, at the very least, even a small town could afford due to local production of meat-milk-butter-egg-poultry for at least a short time, but exist. At least in short-term emergencies this would be enough.
        With regard to "the village is dying" ... There is also another side of the village problem, that people were simply left to fend for themselves - job loss, low incomes, rather difficult living conditions in a village in the north ... it is my duty to travel to the villages in one of the districts of the Irkutsk region, in all the villages all the buildings have been built since the times of the USSR, there is nothing new, the houses are dilapidated, few can afford to make repairs, but you have to live ...
        1. sledgehammer102
          14 December 2013 11: 12
          +2
          Quote: ddmm09
          Now in almost all cities, the main products, except bread, imported


          The share of imports in retail trade is 30-35%, even if all imports are cut off, nothing terrible will happen and disaster will not happen.
          Another question is that this cannot happen in principle, unless the government itself wants it.
          A war, all the more so, in our time will not take long, we will not even get hungry
          1. EvilLion
            EvilLion 14 December 2013 15: 56
            0
            We just all will be taken out after. laughing
      2. EvilLion
        EvilLion 14 December 2013 15: 56
        0
        The USSR has already reached approximately 75% ur. urbanization of developed countries.
  5. makarov
    makarov 14 December 2013 10: 01
    +3
    I live in a city, in a private house. I enjoy all the benefits of civilization, some of the others, sometimes not available even to the inhabitants of megalopolises. Due to the fact that I do not trust the products of supermarkets (and there is a reason for that) I was forced to, and annually keep 30-40 chickens, 2 pigs, and 2 goats. The whole range of vegetables is grown in the garden, and the mass of fruits and varieties of 10 grapes. the garden itself is about 6-7 acres. the status does not allow trading, so I feed a lot of fruits and grapes to birds and "animals". There is enough for the family. The main problem was the feed. I had to sit down "at the textbooks", and to clarify, how much does the pig's body actually process? He began to "dance" precisely from this, and to give out the necessary amount of a useful product, and the bulk of it turned out to be ground straw, grass, corn stalks, etc. this approach reduced the cost of meat / lard by half. I started an economical electric dryer, dried a lot of fruits and vegetables for the winter, the price is a penny, but a significant vitamin result. Once a week for an hour and a half I hire a worker to clean the manure, the manure is processed in heaps with biological products, as a result, pure humus powder ... you can talk a lot, the main thing is to approach everything wisely, then there will be a result, and without much stress.
  6. ddmm09
    ddmm09 14 December 2013 10: 34
    0
    Thanks to the author for the work done and the data analysis. Nevertheless, I think there is a fly in the ointment in this barrel of honey ... In my opinion, this is the quality of the products. As far as I can remember the taste of the products in the era of the USSR, in comparison with the present time, their taste is not in accordance with my wishes. Meat products including. The storage conditions of many of these products outside the refrigerator have increased significantly, even if sausages, milk, etc. lay for a long time at room temperature, they do not deteriorate and there is little risk of getting foodborne poisoning. There is a positive trend in this direction, but still clearly insufficient, as we would like. I hope that in the future the situation will be corrected. It is trite, in our Irkutsk region, a local large producer of dairy products and butter, including butter, has significantly lost in quality of products since the days of the USSR. And I judge primarily by local manufacturers. They now produce butter, even on the packaging and it is indicated that the product is made from milk, but to taste it is pure margarine, although the price in the end for 1 kg is even higher than the cost of a good meat tenderloin. That is, the cost of goods is very high, the quality and nutritional value is lower than even for imported products. But before it was the other way around, their products were pleasant to eat. Ice cream was doing beautiful, now it is no longer there. And this applies to all their products, with the exception of sour-milk, which simply can not be made from plant materials. Although they will obviously try. It is desirable that all manufacturers are obligated to comply with GOSTs on food products and, preferably, Soviet GOSTs.
  7. corn
    corn 14 December 2013 10: 57
    +2
    I will do my bit
    If you make a transfer through the average salary (it can be taken from the average salaries for calculating the pension for the Soviet period and the average salary for 2012 or 2013), then the numbers will be very, very interesting.
    Ср.зарплата 1970г.-115руб,1980г.-155руб,апрель2013г.-26620.
    1970-1980 - the golden years of life in the USSR.
    26620: 155 171,7 =
    Comparison with the prices of agricultural products today.
    Meat (without bone in the market) 300 rubles: 171,7 = 1,75 rubles (before 1990, beef in the store with bones-1,90 rubles, without bone-2,70 rubles, market-3 rubles and more)
    An egg is 55 rubles per ten: 171,7 = 0,32 rubles (I do not remember the cost of a dozen eggs less than 1,00 rubles per ten in Soviet times).
    I do not want to practice arithmetic, whoever wants to calculate it himself, prices for that time can be found.
    I understand which site I am on (for those who call me back to the USSR), I want to go forward to a new and strong Russia.
  8. alone
    alone 14 December 2013 12: 06
    0
    Dreaming about the USSR and nostalgic is certainly not a crime. But with dreams and sighs alone "that's how good it was under the USSR," the country has not been lifted. It is necessary to work and work.

    And yet. I almost forgot one detail. Current lovers often cite the fact that Russian wheat was exported as a very successful result and often argue that the USSR imported wheat. Do not forget that the USSR had a population of 289 millions for the 1991 year. And present Russia 143 million (according to statistics). Do you feel the difference?
    1. sledgehammer102
      14 December 2013 12: 39
      +1
      Quote: lonely
      And yet. I almost forgot one detail. Current lovers often cite the fact that Russian wheat was exported as a very successful result and often argue that the USSR imported wheat. Do not forget that the USSR had a population of 289 millions for the 1991 year. And present Russia 143 million (according to statistics). Do you feel the difference?


      The USSR was fed not only by the RSFSR, but also by a bunch of other republics, including after the "uplift" of virgin lands in Kazakhstan and black earths of Ukraine. Do not forget about Belarus and other places suitable for CX ...
  9. EvilLion
    EvilLion 14 December 2013 15: 43
    0
    But the questions are still uncomfortable, was it worth it to ruin everything, just now to creep out on par with the late Soviet Union? And where does capitalism have to do with it? It just turns out that capitalism in Russia is contraindicated, and after it every time the state is forced to come and clean up the ruins. I’m already silent about the whining about the "victims" of collectivization, when peasants were relocated in a controlled manner to cities where jobs were created for them, in contrast to the peasants kicked out by progress (ie, by a tractor) in many countries, who eventually formed entire quarters of slums. But what were the sacrifices during the transition to the market?

    And regarding agricultural machinery from the previous article, let's go back to the 30s when collective farms were just forming. Nobody was going to give equipment to either collective farms or individual peasants then, the individual farmer and land had too little for the tractor, and the brave plowmen after the horses in the tractor understood how 50-year-old aunts are now in computers (although they have been sitting behind them for 10 years) . Therefore, the tractors were in the MTS, where their trained people serviced, and as they lived on this, they cherished the equipment. And the collective farm paid for use. As the MTS Khrushchev eliminated, the end came to the iron, factories plowed 3 shifts in order to give out records for the production of equipment, and the collective farmers then ruined it, of course, they came to perestroika with a bunch of tractors with completely inadequate efficiency, and there was already a solution to the problem.
  10. alicante11
    alicante11 15 December 2013 06: 01
    0
    The review is interesting. I myself saw an imbalance between what I buy in stores and what the gentlemen "pro-salipolymers" broadcast.
    But there are two very unpleasant problems that are very worrying for the future.
    1. If we take small regional stores, then really the percentage of foreign-made goods is relatively small. But if we take large retail chains, then, unfortunately, the oil painting will differ significantly. This is especially evident in the field of meat, fish, canned fish, vegetables, not to mention fruits. By the spring, there are, in principle, no domestic fruits. A significant amount of foreign rice, sugar. Although here you can mow down nearby China and yet there is Krasnodar rice, Altai flour and, for some reason, seaside sugar. In fact, I have not heard that sugar beets or cane were grown in Primorye, so I assume that Chinese sugar is packaged in Primorye. With fruits, the problem is clear too. We basically do not have a year-round vegetative period. And such a long storage of fruit is inefficient. But at the same time, you can make compotes, among which there are a minority of domestic ones. All maid in tea, although already Russian labels. With fish, generally a complete atas. We live on the Amur River, in 80 there were no problems with fish and caviar. In 90, many survived only at the expense of fish, especially in the outback. In Nikolaevsk there are relatives, so from there we carried this fish in bales. And now in the off-season you can’t find red fish. And in retail chains it’s simply not realistic to take. Recently, nevertheless, they decided to take it, so even cats did not eat. So frozen and smack. I’m not talking about caviar anymore, I used to be on the table for holidays all the time, but now you won’t be able to buy children with such prices. About crabs, which were also eaten well in Soviet times, I am silent. What does the same situation not only in Khabarovsk, but, oddly enough, in Kamchatka. The price tag does not differ significantly, did not even take when he was in Petropavlovsk, it did not make sense. Apparently, everything is going to Japan.
    That is, why am I? To the fact that we will not die of hunger. But here and feel the taste for life with our food supply is quite difficult and expensive. Which does not give the population of Russia a reason to approve the policy of the authorities.

    2. Constant price increases. At what very, very significant. And this is perhaps the biggest problem for the food security of the state. If now over 5-6 years, for example, eggs have increased in price by 2,5-3 times, then what will happen in the case of an economic food blockade? There will be goods, but we will not be able to buy them, because sellers and suppliers will inflate prices. Considering that in 30's in the USA, when people were dying of hunger, food was destroyed so as not to sell it at low prices, it is not a fact that the same kind of famine will not befall the Russian Federation.

    3. Dealers keep a very large percentage in the price of food. Moreover, these are not percentages and not even tens of percent, but hundreds of percent. An example - watermelons from a manufacturer near Khabarovsk are purchased by "brothers-Caucasians" for 50 kop - 1 rubles / kg. Watermelons are sold during the season for 5-13 rubles / kg. The first price is for the year 2008, the second for 2013. You can calculate the markup percentage yourself. Farmers cannot enter the market, since they are banally not allowed. At the attempt, the car at the entrance to the city was burned along with the harvest. This problem complements the previous one. And it is fraught with a great danger of both a social explosion in peacetime and hunger in case of problems with the purchase of imported food.

    In principle, all of these problems are solved. But to solve them, you need to do something now and have training in case of problems. Unfortunately, neither in the first nor in the second our leadership was noticed.
  11. stayer
    stayer 15 December 2013 21: 02
    0
    sledgehammer102 plus articles, good job.
    In general, the picture is not bad. In the armed forces and navy, too, not everything is fine, but it is recovering. Food security is the same structure as an army or navy nationwide. However, there are questions (a hint of future work). The articles show the parameters of production and consumption of products, but do not show the country's reserves or capabilities in case of conflict (war). I suspect that such information is not given either by Rosstat or in any other department.
    I don’t think, of course, that we need 100% isolation from imported products, in peacetime this is neither realistic nor economically feasible. And since we eat bananas, tangerines, rice and other maracou, then let them be. I don’t know what percentage should be, maybe 10-12 of the total.
    And if we draw conclusions on consumption, then everyone can buy products manufactured in their country in the store. We, as consumers, do not build tanks or planes, but we are able to buy Russian-made products.
    For myself personally (and my family) I have long established the rule, I buy only Russian products. Exception - tropical fruits, wine.