Military Review

Passion around the outflow of capital from Russia. Fights for statistics

42
The first couple weeks of 2014 of the year passed, the long weekend ended - and economic experts got the first in the new year on the dynamics of capital outflows following the results of 2013. The figures presented by different economic departments vary by about 10-12%. The average indicators of the scale of the output of their economies in Russia once again make us think about the need to build effective barriers to such a large-scale outflow.


Guided by the calculations of the Ministry of Economic Development (MED), the net outflow of capital from the Russian economy over the past year amounted to about 57 billion dollars. This turned out to be lower than the forecast presented by the same agency at the beginning of last year, by about 15%.

It should be noted here that the data provided by Russian economic experts differ significantly from those given by foreign experts. For example, in 2011, the outflow of capital from Russia, estimated by specialists of the Russian Central Bank, differed from the calculations made by World Bank economists by $ 48,2 billion dollars. The Central Bank presented the results on the 80,5-billion-dollar capital outflow from Russia abroad, the World Bank issued a value of 32,3 billion dollars. If we compare the figures of the crisis period, then the difference is even more significant. So, following the results of 2008, the Russian Central Bank reported a huge capital outflow in the amount of 133,7 billion, the World Bank recorded an outflow of $ 16 billion. As they say, feel the difference ...



Where does such a difference come from, and which experts in this situation can they trust - Russian or international? It is immediately worth saying that the data on the volume of capital outflows abroad are not just “bare” numbers, which even can be obtained on the basis of the use of very sophisticated economic and statistical formulas. These are the values ​​that can have an impact - the influence is not only economic, but also political. For example, the rate of national currency and, accordingly, the competitiveness of the economy depends on the rate of outflow of capital abroad. As a result, manipulations with figures may cause one or another scale of exchange tectonics, which, in the end, is quite capable of hitting the political situation in the country.

According to Andrei Klepach (Deputy Minister of Economic Development), if the outflow is sufficiently high, it can affect the rate of the Russian ruble, and this will affect that the rate will gradually decline in relation to the leading world currencies. In principle, this is what we see today - the ruble rate over the past few months has been falling both in relation to the US dollar and in relation to the single European currency. Andrei Klepach calls such dynamics for the Russian ruble negative. However, is it negative on the scale of the entire Russian economy? Strangely enough, but a controlled process of weakening the Russian ruble can stimulate the competitiveness of domestic production. In other words, a rather weak (but, if I may say so, controllable weak) ruble makes it possible to make Russian goods cheaper in comparison with foreign-made goods both inside Russia and beyond its observable limits.

By the way, roughly the same scenario has recently been developing the Chinese economy, which Western economists and politicians (primarily, of course, the US) criticize for relying on artificially (according to American "partners") the undervalued yuan against the dollar. True, we must admit that the volumes of Russian production and Russian exports are far from the corresponding Chinese volumes, and therefore the relatively low rate of the national currency still needs to be able to properly dispose of.

It turns out that the same to the West (and the headquarters of the World Bank is located in the United States, the president of the World Bank is an American citizen) it is advantageous that the ruble exchange rate be high enough against the dollar (first of all against the dollar). How to achieve this without any technical effort? As an option - to publish data that the volume of capital outflows from Russia are very small (in the scale of the entire economy). As a result, the following logical chain appears: publication of data on low rates of capital outflow abroad - strengthening of the ruble against the same US dollar - rise in the cost of Russian goods relative to foreign goods - reducing the competitiveness of the Russian manufacturing sector - new subsidence of the economy.

Based on this, it becomes clear why Western economic experts give out figures that are often an order of magnitude lower than the figures published by Russian economic experts. Of course, in this case, you can think for a long time on the topic of the strangeness of subordination of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, but this is already from a conspiracy class. That is why we will not discuss the topic that the Central Bank of the Russian Federation and the World Bank are one berry field. In the end, data on capital outflows from Russia abroad are presented not only by Central Bank specialists, but also by other Russian economists (including, as they call themselves, independent), and these data, as already noted, differ by 10 -12% - no more than that (not many times, like the World Bank and the Central Bank of the Russian Federation).

Interestingly, just over a year ago, Forbes issued material under the heading “Myths about capital outflow: how much money is really being withdrawn from Russia”, in which the idea that no one in Russia is able to correctly calculate the scale of the outflow is actively promoted, everyone operates with some kind of wrong formulas, forcing the situation - they say, you need to trust foreign data (especially the World Bank) - and you (that is, us) will be happy ...

But if the substantial scale of the outflow of capital from the country can weaken the national currency, adding to the competitiveness of the Russian economy, then maybe in that case we should not be so active in reflecting on the multi-digit numbers of the outflow in dollars? No, not in vain. Figures of capital outflow are only one of the components that affect the competitiveness of the Russian economy. Therefore, trying to build on this kind of positive economic base is simply naive. The fact is that “runaway capital” is also a kind of diagnosis of the effectiveness of regulatory bodies - some equivalent of the scale of internal corruption and the ability to fight it. But if so, then it turns out that the same Western experts, artificially lowering the scale of capital outflow from Russia, for some reason, hide the true scale of corruption in our country. These experts, of course, would not like to hide anything in the information plan, but it does not come out ...

Is this possible? It turns out, even as you can. After all, if the same World Bank gives out real figures of the volumes of “runaway capital” from Russia, then this is another reason to talk about the need to return money to Russia. - To return funds laundered in foreign financial structures acquired by Russian “businessmen” in dirty ways and brought out of the Russian economic and criminal jurisdiction. Will Western economic and law enforcement institutions want to do this? Of course not. As a proof: these very institutions did not shy away from pocketing the Russian “dirty” billions placed in Cypriot banks — in fact, having once again laundered the laundered money — in their own, of course, in favor ...

In this regard, it is interesting to know what the Russian structures are doing in order to return the funds leaked from the Russian economy, obtained by certain individuals and legal entities, to put it mildly, not in the most transparent way. On this occasion, a few days ago, the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation Yuri Chaika spoke in his interview Rossiyskaya Gazeta journalists, telling about how the process of asset recovery is going.

Yuri Chaika said that the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation is taking a series of measures aimed at ensuring that finances return to the Russian economy. In particular, we are talking about submitting requests to different countries of the world and territorial associations (Cyprus, the Bahamas, France, Latvia, Ukraine, Serbia, and the United Kingdom), according to which Russia can recover a substantial amount of funds withdrawn by certain individuals. In particular, we are talking about the assets of Ashot Egiazaryan (ex-deputy of the State Duma), Alexei Kuznetsov (ex-finance minister of the government of the Moscow region), Andrey Borodin (ex-head of the Bank of Moscow), Boris Berezovsky and other fairly well-known people.

According to Chaika, Ukraine immediately after a request from the Russian Prosecutor General’s Office seized Berezovsky’s property, as well as stakes in Ukrainian enterprises owned by the oligarch’s family (inherited by the family). Latvia has arrested Borodin’s elite housing, a case is being heard in a Serbian court arresting the arrest of all the same Berezovsky’s 8 companies. There are precedents for the return of funds that left Russia.

The main problem so far is that far from all countries are ready to sign agreements with Russia on joint work on the return of laundered money. Not all countries are willing to part with the fact that Russian embezzlers have withdrawn from the Russian economy, leading to quiet financial havens. If the borders of Russian contacts at the law enforcement level could be expanded, the return of capital obtained in Russia by criminal and semi-criminal means and taken abroad would be a technical matter.
Author:
42 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. mirag2
    mirag2 14 January 2014 09: 32
    -3
    I read an interview with such a Mau (Mavu, maybe I won't get my last name, see) - a good economist said that "deoffshorization" would not affect our economy, only in the long term, and about the loan to Ukraine, all Putin's advisers were against issuing a loan , and he says that this is better than investing them in the implementation of some global projects in Russia, because this will cause an influx of foreign labor (ours is not enough), and since our industry is working at the limit of its capabilities, we will have to load foreign firms, and it will also cause a rise in prices for us then.
    1. 31231
      31231 14 January 2014 09: 40
      +7
      Well, as usual, Putin doesn’t speak for himself, but advisers speak for him, and then some sort of Mava conveys his words. Not funny?
      Does VVP itself know what he "said"?
      1. vyatom
        vyatom 14 January 2014 15: 35
        +6
        Latvia has arrested the elite housing of Borodin, a case is being heard in a Serbian court for the arrest of 8 companies of the same Berezovsky. There are precedents for the return of funds that have left Russia.
        It is amazing that there are countries where international laws apply and return stolen goods. Brazilian at one time !!! Interpol wrapped Berezovsky with his millions. Huge respect.
        1. sledgehammer102
          sledgehammer102 14 January 2014 16: 24
          +5
          It turns out that the same to the West (and the headquarters of the World Bank is located in the United States, the president of the World Bank is an American citizen) it is advantageous that the ruble exchange rate be high enough against the dollar (first of all against the dollar). How to achieve this without any technical effort? As an option - to publish data that the volume of capital outflows from Russia are very small (in the scale of the entire economy). As a result, the following logical chain appears: publication of data on low rates of capital outflow abroad - strengthening of the ruble against the same US dollar - rise in the cost of Russian goods relative to foreign goods - reducing the competitiveness of the Russian manufacturing sector - new subsidence of the economy.


          Then why bald do they put China in first place and write him a huge pile of billions of texas from the country? Is it beneficial for them to weaken the renminbi? But after all, he has the same situation with the ruble, the more RMB they will give for the dollar, the better for him. And yes, why the hell does capital flee from Germany and Japan?

          Conclusion: The article was originally based on a false statement, since "theory of deliberate underreporting of the IMF numbers" does not work in other countries with a similar situation.

          And oh yes without denying the real flight of money to offshore and foreign accounts, I want to remind you, if our country is engaged in technical re-equipment and buys machine tools abroad, then this money goes to the outflow column, but in Ukraine there will now be an influx of 15 billion. The question is what in this case it is better? Outflow or inflow?
          1. CTEPX
            CTEPX 15 January 2014 07: 14
            +1
            Quote: sledgehammer102
            Do they put China in first place and write him a huge pile of billions of texas from the country?

            And on the basis of what did you decide that with China there is a different situation and did not lower the outflow to it either?
            Quote: sledgehammer102
            if our country is engaged in technical re-equipment and buys machine tools abroad, then this money goes to the outflow column, but in Ukraine there will now be an influx of 15 billion.

            If the machines we bought with our money remain abroad, it will be an outflow. If we return to us, this is - we bought something for our money)). If we buy machines for ourselves with borrowed money, this is an influx.
            And in Ukraine - yes, an influx of investment. They will buy something for themselves outside money)).
        2. mirag2
          mirag2 15 January 2014 07: 12
          0
          This is not deoffshorization, but quite another.
    2. Letterksi
      Letterksi 14 January 2014 11: 26
      +5
      Not so long ago, the former chairman of the Central Bank, Ignatiev, after his resignation, betrayed that in Russia there is an influential group of people involved in the withdrawal of capital from Russia. And of course no one knows who they are
      1. alone
        alone 14 January 2014 20: 31
        0
        Quote: LetterKsi
        And of course no one knows who they are

        This is generally absurd. They know that there is an influential group, but they do not know who they are))) Ignatiev is a joker. Or he remembers the aphorism: "I knew too much!"
      2. CTEPX
        CTEPX 15 January 2014 07: 26
        0
        Quote: LetterKsi
        in Russia there is an influential group of people involved in the withdrawal of capital from Russia.
        He meant that some of the officials who straddled the budget flows and legalized the wrongly acquired)). But a much larger unaccounted amount is the withdrawal of dividends legally received by foreign shareholders in the enterprises of mining, energy complexes and housing and communal services)). It is here, having brought prices to the level "above world", they have "nishtyaks", at the same time preventing us from rising)).
    3. Pancho
      Pancho 14 January 2014 21: 31
      0
      How is this our workforce lacking? In Soviet times, it was enough when the prom. production was higher at times, but not now? Where did the people go?
      1. Russ69
        Russ69 15 January 2014 02: 33
        +1
        Quote: Pancho
        In Soviet times, it was enough when the prom. production was higher at times, but not now? Where did the people go?

        The people became smaller, there were crowds of white collars and other designers, lawyers and other things ...
    4. CTEPX
      CTEPX 15 January 2014 06: 56
      +1
      Quote: mirag2
      I read an interview with such Mau (Mavu, maybe I won’t get my last name, see) - a good economist

      From Wiki: Vladimir Alexandrovich Mau (born December 29, 1959, Moscow, RSFSR, USSR) is a Russian scientist-economist, politician close to E. T. Gaidar [1] [2] and A. B. Chubais [3])).
      With Ukraine, Putin is a song)). Pull out 15 watermelons of gold and gold reserves from the Americans, who were not going to give them to anyone, and place them in Ukraine ... There’s nothing else to do with the lock)). According to international treaties signed in the 90s, which, according to our constitution, are higher than our domestic laws, we are obliged to place gold and foreign currency reserves abroad and cannot invest in our economy. And who said that Ukraine is not abroad?))
    5. mirag2
      mirag2 15 January 2014 09: 12
      0
      Well then, oh!
      I really didn’t know that he hatched from the Chubais-Gaidar cesspool. fool
  2. 31231
    31231 14 January 2014 09: 38
    0
    In general, it is interesting to see the methodology for calculating these figures.
    Is this an account migration? Does the purchase of currency in Russia and its export abroad take into account.
  3. calocha
    calocha 14 January 2014 10: 37
    +6
    True Katasonov verb-colonial economy of.
    1. 31231
      31231 14 January 2014 10: 57
      +4
      Is that Katasonov who sang odes to democratic values ​​and the European capitalist economy in the 90s? And now repainted and chatting about the rationalization of most enterprises ?!
  4. ramin_serg
    ramin_serg 14 January 2014 10: 44
    +9
    As one smart person said, the leading elite take the most money out of any country
    1. vyatom
      vyatom 14 January 2014 15: 41
      +3
      Quote: ramin_serg
      As one smart person said, the leading elite take the most money out of any country


      Ordinary people feel sorry. Senior citizens especially. They plowed their whole lives, and now they are forced to look at the full faces of their children and grandchildren who have robbed them and the future of their leaders, who have the audacity to teach everyone how to live and earn money on TV screens.
  5. Yeraz
    Yeraz 14 January 2014 11: 46
    +3
    In short, do not calculate how much money is withdrawn)
  6. Insectid
    Insectid 14 January 2014 12: 49
    +8
    And by what right did the editors of the site post a picture of my chumadan?
    I’m not sorry, but suddenly my wife will see ...
    I’m only hiding from her in the garage.
  7. Russ69
    Russ69 14 January 2014 13: 02
    +3
    Not all countries want to part with what the Russian embezzlers stole from the Russian economy, leading to quiet financial harbors.

    To do this, Russia must sign the 20th Convention on combating corruption. And yet, alas ....
    1. cdrt
      cdrt 15 January 2014 02: 06
      +2
      Quote: Russ69
      Not all countries want to part with what the Russian embezzlers stole from the Russian economy, leading to quiet financial harbors.

      To do this, Russia must sign the 20th Convention on combating corruption. And yet, alas ....


      That's actually +100500
      The Anti-Corruption Convention is a good litmus test.
      Well it was created as a synthesis of successful experience.
      Until they signed and ratified it, did not implement it in law enforcement - they do not fight corruption, i.e. face propaganda, not struggle.
      1. igor.borov775
        igor.borov775 15 January 2014 09: 25
        -1
        It was necessary to listen to the main lawyer, he was broadcasting the box before the New Year to the New Year, this article was written not by lawyers but by specialists from other professions. Listening to what is said and presented on the air, I was very tormented by doubts, Really, there weren’t a single competent lawyer in the UN who knew how to do it to state that the majority agreed with this, I’m talking about representatives of countries that are in the UN because it’s not always the case, the other question is, who ratified this article, the Prime Minister considers article 20 to be unsuccessful, he then said for a long time that our laws are much better, It's a pity then about OBORONSERVICE no one asked how it happened, No and no answer
  8. AVV
    AVV 14 January 2014 14: 05
    +1
    Quote: LetterKsi
    Not so long ago, the former chairman of the Central Bank, Ignatiev, after his resignation, betrayed that in Russia there is an influential group of people involved in the withdrawal of capital from Russia. And of course no one knows who they are

    Everyone knows who it is supposed to be for the job! Even state corporations and banks have been noticed in the withdrawal of capital! Another thing after the announcement of the GDP, the loss by these companies of state guarantees and government orders, the problem of issuing loans to such companies from Vnesheconombank, Woz moved forward !!!
    1. cdrt
      cdrt 15 January 2014 02: 09
      0
      Quote: AVV
      Quote: LetterKsi
      Not so long ago, the former chairman of the Central Bank, Ignatiev, after his resignation, betrayed that in Russia there is an influential group of people involved in the withdrawal of capital from Russia. And of course no one knows who they are

      Everyone knows who it is supposed to be for the job! Even state corporations and banks have been noticed in the withdrawal of capital! Another thing after the announcement of the GDP, the loss by these companies of state guarantees and government orders, the problem of issuing loans to such companies from Vnesheconombank, Woz moved forward !!!


      What does even mean? Today, most of the flagships of the economy are state-owned companies, the outflow (of whatever size) is visible, and in the "terrible" 2007-2008, when most of the economy was not state-owned, there was a net inflow.
      And on the basis of what data (give links please) your conclusion that the cart has moved?
      1. Russ69
        Russ69 15 January 2014 02: 30
        +1
        Quote: cdrt
        What does it even mean? Today, most of the flagships of the state-owned company’s economy, outflow (whatever the size) on the face

        Money of state-owned companies will return to Russia. Some have already adopted an offshore withdrawal plan and deadlines. This, too, is not done in 1 day.
        Quote: cdrt
        and in the "terrible" 2007-2008 years, when more than now part of the economy was not state-owned, there was a net inflow.

        Until 2008, the influx was for economic reasons, when the economy was growing, throughout the world, and not exclusively in Russia. There was a lot of money, speculative, that is, for a short time. Large firms in all credited to foreign banks. After the crisis, Lafa ended ...
        But, the fact that there are certain problems in the economy now, I agree ...
        1. mirag2
          mirag2 15 January 2014 07: 17
          0
          That's right, our banks took loans in Europe at 3%, and inside the country they gave them at 30%.
  9. leks
    leks 14 January 2014 14: 28
    +6
    In general, it was signed by Russia in 2003. But the bureaucrats believe it is right not to ratify it at the state level, saying that at the time of signing the Convention did not mention article 20, but it reads
    Article 20. Illegal enrichment
    Subject to the observance of its constitution and the fundamental principles of its legal system, each State party shall consider adopting such legislative and other measures as may be necessary in order to criminalize, when it is intentionally committed, illegal enrichment, that is, a significant increase assets of a public official in excess of his legal income, which he cannot reasonably substantiate.
    On May 20, 2011, the Russian government did not approve a bill that would allow ratification of article 20. The meaning of the bill is to maintain a new corpus delicti in Russian law, and in particular in the Criminal Code: ILLEGAL ENRICHMENT OF OFFICERS This is a direct violation of the signed international treaty of 2003.
    You understand where the ears grow from; the tops themselves do not want to, and even if you beat your head against the wall, they will not observe it and will not introduce a new article in the UK.RF. Since you have to put many on trial and put them on trial.
    1. cdrt
      cdrt 15 January 2014 02: 10
      +2
      Quote: leks
      In general, it was signed by Russia in 2003. But the bureaucrats believe it is right not to ratify it at the state level, saying that at the time of signing the Convention did not mention article 20, but it reads
      Article 20. Illegal enrichment
      Subject to the observance of its constitution and the fundamental principles of its legal system, each State party shall consider adopting such legislative and other measures as may be necessary in order to criminalize, when it is intentionally committed, illegal enrichment, that is, a significant increase assets of a public official in excess of his legal income, which he cannot reasonably substantiate.
      On May 20, 2011, the Russian government did not approve a bill that would allow ratification of article 20. The meaning of the bill is to maintain a new corpus delicti in Russian law, and in particular in the Criminal Code: ILLEGAL ENRICHMENT OF OFFICERS This is a direct violation of the signed international treaty of 2003.
      You understand where the ears grow from; the tops themselves do not want to, and even if you beat your head against the wall, they will not observe it and will not introduce a new article in the UK.RF. Since you have to put many on trial and put them on trial.


      Here is +100500
      What is called see the root.
      And who in 2011 was the head of government?
  10. Grbear
    Grbear 14 January 2014 14: 46
    0
    Passions - they are passions. Each, by inflating one or another part, not even problems, but phenomena - solves his problems.

    The movement of capital (not to be confused with exchange-traded stocks and securities) is an indicator of the country's potential in the possibilities of making profit and returning capital. From here:
    • "clean" money is protected by the respective participating States;
    • "dirty" money becomes a means of pressure on, as a rule, corrupt officials; can be "withdrawn".

    Integration into the global economy is by no means the purchase of hotels and restaurants (this is us) and the sale of concessions (we too). This is a purchase of technology, means of production and brains (but this is not us).

    And so - this is a normal process.
  11. Kyrgyz
    Kyrgyz 14 January 2014 15: 59
    +1
    Conclusion to conclusion, strife, you can not forbid Ford to take the proceeds from the plant he built, you can not force him to invest here if he does not want to. The money earned must be free to move, to distinguish the earned from the "acquired", NATIONAL professionals must set out understandable criteria, and these criteria must be unshakable, professionals must follow this, and today's hysteria about the outflow is a maneuver to clog the common man's brain. The ruble should be lowered to increase competitiveness, this measure is unpopular among the population for which much familiar will become expensive, and for usurers who are left without fat, in order to reassure everyone, they need to come up with "objective reasons" that the outflow is the reason, not to drop oil)), and no one will check its size, the chairman of the Central Bank is his own.
    1. invisibility
      invisibility 14 January 2014 21: 30
      -2
      Can. If the state is on the side of the people, not the foundation.
      The ruble should not be let go, but strengthened. This is not a piece of paper, but a treasury ticket of a state bank, it should be provided, roughly speaking, with goods. It should be so, but in reality the ruble is omitted. And this measure, of course, is not popular, because Russian people, by no means bad ...
      1. Gregazov
        Gregazov 14 January 2014 23: 05
        +1
        Quote: invisible
        Can. The ruble should not be let go, but strengthened.

        I agree with you. At real comparable prices, for example, the prices of McDonald's products in different countries, the dollar exchange rate is about 16 rubles.

        Can someone explain to me where instead of the flag of the Russian Federation I got this blue rag, and this is the second day.
        1. Apollo
          Apollo 14 January 2014 23: 16
          +1
          Quote: GregAzov
          Can someone explain to me where instead of the flag of the Russian Federation I got this blue rag, and this is the second day.

          Questions to your provider.
      2. cdrt
        cdrt 15 January 2014 02: 18
        +1
        Quote: invisible
        Can. If the state is on the side of the people, not the foundation.
        The ruble should not be let go, but strengthened. This is not a piece of paper, but a treasury ticket of a state bank, it should be provided, roughly speaking, with goods. It should be so, but in reality the ruble is omitted. And this measure, of course, is not popular, because Russian people, by no means bad ...


        You, my dear, are the enemy of Russia, which calls for the destruction of Russian industry for free for yourself and your own kind.
        Already, the direct costs of any production in Russia are comparable or higher with those in some European countries (Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovakia, Romania as examples). This means that products are ALREADY competitive in terms of prices (with traditionally lower quality. Having strengthened the ruble, Russia will simply kill any production on its territory. With all its disagreement with Glazyev, he is absolutely right in this.
        The ruble needs to be lowered to the level of 50-55, or even 60 R per dollar. It is clear that given the volume of food imports, consumer goods, this will cause a jump in inflation and, possibly, even a drop in the standard of living of people, but in exchange, at this rate, production growth will begin (in fact, this was the source of growth in industrial production in 1999-2003) .
        1. invisibility
          invisibility 15 January 2014 04: 54
          0
          For yourself? Freebies? Enemy of Russia? Skidded you, my friend!
          I expressed my opinion about the strengthening of the ruble through its provision of goods, and not about stupid stock speculation. Tell me, will a fall in living standards not kill Russia's labor resources? The state should deal with the economy, and not speculate on the stock market. Friend of Russia.
          1. Kyrgyz
            Kyrgyz 15 January 2014 06: 48
            +1
            Quote: invisible
            I expressed my opinion about the strengthening of the ruble through its provision of goods, and not about stupid stock speculation.

            How can you strengthen it with a product if you cannot produce a product because of weak demand for it due to the high price and insufficient quality for such a price? First you need demand for the goods, i.e. clearing the market, import becomes 100 rubles and production in the ruble zone will ensure the cost price + 75 rubles margin is already easier, and the cheaper the import price is, the ruble zone can keep the cost price the same or index more slowly, but naturally everything that is outside the price range becomes unavailable ruble zone, this scheme of China's work, gradually improving quality and forming brands, prices are compared
            1. cdrt
              cdrt 16 January 2014 15: 34
              0
              Quote: Kyrgyz
              Quote: invisible
              I expressed my opinion about the strengthening of the ruble through its provision of goods, and not about stupid stock speculation.

              How can you strengthen it with a product if you cannot produce a product because of weak demand for it due to the high price and insufficient quality for such a price? First you need demand for the goods, i.e. clearing the market, import becomes 100 rubles and production in the ruble zone will ensure the cost price + 75 rubles margin is already easier, and the cheaper the import price is, the ruble zone can keep the cost price the same or index more slowly, but naturally everything that is outside the price range becomes unavailable ruble zone, this scheme of China's work, gradually improving quality and forming brands, prices are compared


              Exactly.
              It is useless to provide anything with goods ... This is generally a strange phrase, for it is just the dollars that are provided with the goods (all goods circulating in international trade) - this is the goal of becoming the reserve currency of trade (so that the goods provide not only you, but others).
              The ruble is just secured now - for oil is sold at a high price.

              But ... this leads to the fact that a strong ruble allows people to buy imported goods cheaper than producing their own.
              The fact of the matter is that while the ruble is strong, production is not competitive.
              As soon as the ruble falls, imports rise in price.
              Because Compared to imports, their goods become cheaper - they are bought more, which causes production growth (and as a result, job growth).
              Actually, no one came up with another way.
              The phrases about the ruble secured by the goods are contradictory in itself.
          2. The comment was deleted.
  12. Strashila
    Strashila 14 January 2014 16: 01
    0
    And this is just what is in sight ... and the migrants (we have the second place in the world in the export of capital by them) and we will not forget about crime. And who will invest about this country, even without investing it is possible to get rich.
  13. PValery53
    PValery53 14 January 2014 21: 03
    -3
    In general, I am amazed how it is so easy to take such incredible means from the Russian people that are so necessary for our people themselves ?! This - what - crime on a particularly enormous scale or how to qualify it ?! - For this - right on the gallows or first on the rack? !! .. - What kind of such s..u..k..and harm our people ?? !! ..
    1. cdrt
      cdrt 16 January 2014 15: 35
      0
      Quote: PValery53
      In general, I am amazed how it is so easy to take such incredible means from the Russian people that are so necessary for our people themselves ?! This - what - crime on a particularly enormous scale or how to qualify it ?! - For this - right on the gallows or first on the rack? !! .. - What kind of such s..u..k..and harm our people ?? !! ..


      And why are they rejected by the people?
      For example, many far from richest people (pensioners) selling apartments in Moscow, St. Petersburg, buy houses or apartments in Bulgaria. Amounts are really big. They are also considered as capital outflows. Just why is it bad then?
      1. PValery53
        PValery53 20 January 2014 18: 39
        0
        Let's consider flies (owners of private apartments) separately from cutlets (managers of budget billions) ...
  14. ddd1975
    ddd1975 15 January 2014 02: 33
    +1
    Again we are treating the consequence ... The reason for almost all the problems is in the crappy legislation and its implementation. The phrase immediately comes to mind: "We are all equal, but some are a little smoother than others"; This is the problem that needs to be addressed.
  15. Semenov
    Semenov 15 January 2014 06: 46
    +1
    But who infers, is it really difficult to calculate or scary to hook? Then this is more relevant to politics than to economics.