Military Review

Sergey Glazyev. Tips in the void?

206
A few days before the moment when the whole country suddenly found out that “the peak of the crisis was left behind,” well-known Russian economist Sergei Glazyev gave an interview "BUSINESS Online"in which, as they say, distributed to all the sisters on the earrings. Before we consider the essence of those statements about the state of affairs in the Russian economy, it is worthwhile to introduce Sergei Glazyev’s phrase as a prologue, reflecting the essence of the effectiveness of managers managing the economy of the Russian Federation:


If our would-be liberals and monetarists ruled Germany after the war, it would still be in ruins, they would wait for people from 60 brands to accumulate 6 millions.


Sergey Glazyev. Tips in the void?


Sergei Glazyev, who, for a moment, is an adviser to the Russian president on regional economic integration, noted during an interview that, given the economic paradigm that is being implemented today, Russia will at best shine zero growth or growth within the limits of statistical error. At the same time, Glazyev proposes a whole range of measures, which, according to him, can disperse the country's economy to 8-9% annual growth in the short term. About the proposals below. For now, the rhetorical question:

if there are proposals to increase the efficiency of the Russian economy, but they are not being implemented by the authorities, then it turns out that either adviser Sergei Glazyev is somehow modest in approaching the Russian president with the councils, or the Russian president ignores the advice of Sergei Glazyev, or doesn’t their implementation is reduced to zero, being lost in other power margins.

Everyone for himself is free to answer this question independently, and therefore it’s time to touch on the very proposals that come from Sergey Yuryevich, who is positioning himself an obvious opponent of economic “gurus” entrenched in the Ministry of Economic Development, the Ministry of Finance and the Central Bank.

So, the first sentence, coming from Sergey Glazyev, is to stop by all means and forces holding onto inflation rates, actually killing the real sector of the economy - the production sector. According to the economist, today government agencies should take all measures to ensure that the interest rate for business and production activities is minimized. Glazyev is sure that it is “cheap and long-term” money that will allow to stimulate the production process, create new jobs, attract significant investments and make Russian goods really competitive and aimed at full import substitution. On import substitution, and not on applications for import substitution ...

According to the doctor of economic sciences Sergey Glazyev, who is an academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, cheap loans for the domestic production sector will spur development and many other industries. From an interview with Glazyev for the publication of Business Online:
And although our monetarists understand money as gold coins and have no idea about the role of credit in the economy, in Europe, in America, in Japan, in China, and in Korea, it is the creation of cheap credit resources and the management of mechanisms for bringing these resources to innovative sectors of the economy in order to support investment activity is the main direction of macroeconomic policy. For example, in the USA after the beginning of the financial crisis, the money supply has grown four times, in Japan - twice, in England - more than four times, in China the growth is even more rapid. This is a consequence of the fact that the monetary authorities of the advanced countries use lending to the economy, cheap and diverse, as the main tool to support the transition to a new technological structure and output to the new Kondratieff growth wave.


At the same time, Glazyev notes that without cheap and long-term money for the real sector of the economy, Russia will be focused exclusively on the commodity segment, which, as practice shows, is actually a tool of influence on Russia. Even Western experts do not deny the speculative nature of the sharp fall in oil prices, who believe that there is no objective reason for the oil price to collapse almost three times over a year and continues to “look for the bottom” in the absence of unsolvable economic problems. world economies.

The presidential adviser calls not to fear that an infusion of the money supply in order to support the real sector of the economy will lead to an increase in debt volumes. According to Glazyev, it is now generally foolish to pay attention to odergivaniya from the side, for example, the IMF, whose tasks include everything, but not the real economic growth in Russia. Really. It is difficult to say that it is necessary to fulfill reinforced concrete obligations to the same IMF, which essentially undermined the entire economic basis of the modern world, deciding on the possibility of lending to the Ukrainian economy even if this economy comes on the basis of non-payment of credit to default. By the way, Sergey Glazyev said about the need not to react to the requirements of the IMF regarding the economic principles of Russia even before the Board of Directors of the Fund made its "landmark" decision on Ukraine.

Glazyev spoke in the course of the interview and about Ukraine:
Let's talk frankly. Ukraine today is not a country, it is not a state, it is an occupied territory. There is even no Constitution. It was canceled in the last edition by Yanukovych, and the new one was not accepted. In Ukraine, there is American power, and the decision-making center is the US embassy and Washington, as we could see from the recent visit of Biden, who came as a Führer to the territory under his jurisdiction. All Ukrainian power is formed by the personnel of the Americans - and the ministers, and lists of political parties, and political leaders, everything is coordinated with the US ambassador and the State Department. SBU, in fact, is a kind of Gestapo.


But back to Russia ... Sergei Glazyev says that the policy of the Central Bank to bring down the ruble exchange rate as a tool to "stabilize" the economy for many years postpones the prospect of the transition of the Russian ruble to the status of a reserve currency in the EEU space. According to the economist, the countries of the EAEU have lost confidence in the ruble, which the Central Bank has brought to a state that does not reflect the potential of the Eurasian Economic Union. Eyes says that the ruble stopped believing. When asked about the fever of the ruble, Sergei Yuryevich answers:

All stockbrokers and brokers know that the ruble exchange rate is being manipulated. Everyone knows who is manipulating. For these things in the United States would give life and not one, in England - fines of tens of billions of pounds, in China - would be shot. And here these people allow themselves to teach everyone else to live ...


But they really teach ... They say that the dark people, they say, little people, including Glazyev, do not understand anything in the economy, which should not be guided by the demands of the real sector, but should burn reserves in the hope of increasing the price of an oil barrel, which will again bring “Saving” petrodollars are empty pieces of paper that are flooded with the most diverse economies in the world by a printing press that serves the trillions of debts of the States themselves.

According to Glazyev, only real sovereignty of the national financial system will provide an opportunity to push the economy and give it an impulse for sustainable growth. And this requires at least that the government did not sleep at the time of a decline in GDP.

In addition to cheap business loans, for high-tech industries, Glazyev proposes to implement a public-private partnership in practice. So far, this kind of partnership is more like a get-together, when, on the basis of kickbacks, one or another affiliated private owner receives a sum from state institutions, after which, at best, half of it goes towards the implementation of the project. In the worst case, immediately after receiving the money by the company and rolling back by certain officials, the project remains only on paper, and the company suddenly turns out to be a bankrupt, “not calculating its economic forces”. Glazyev proposes to create a transparent system in which public-private partnership will be implemented in the following form:

"If you are ready to work on the development of the economy, you get credit resources and stable macroeconomic conditions."
And now, nevertheless, it is worth going to the question that was raised in the material above: why, it would seem, obviously, the positive initiatives of Sergei Glazyev do not pass? Yes, everything is very simple: if they pass (at least the same transparent public-private partnership), then the whole tower, which has been built for many years under various presidents and prime ministers, will collapse. The very principle of a corruption-liberal economy, the main attribute of which was the withdrawal of funds abroad, and which, by the way, is given for some investment by some external projects, will collapse. If this is an investment, then why do Russian money in most cases float offshore somewhere in the British Virgin Islands instead of returning to Russia for a profit? ..

There is an opinion that the initiatives of Sergey Glazyev will continue to be frankly ignored, if only for the reason that the economic rudder of the state has people called by the well-known Mr. Khodorkovsky people “with whom it would be possible to work fully in the new Russia”. New, according to Khodorkovsky, is “post-revolutionary”, “otmaydannoy” in the image and likeness of neighboring Ukraine.

By the way, it would be interesting to know the opinion of the Russian “economic bloc” about why Sergei Glazyev’s proposals are so bad for him ...
Author:
Photos used:
www.vsesovetnik.ru
206 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Igor39
    Igor39 24 December 2015 07: 14
    12
    Also news, in Russia every second person knows what to do, and on the site almost all experts in the economic bloc, so many talented economists disappear laughing
    1. Same lech
      Same lech 24 December 2015 07: 22
      20
      According to the economist, the countries included in the EAEU have lost confidence in the ruble, which the Central Bank itself has brought to a state that does not reflect the potential of the Eurasian Economic Union.


      And I myself do not believe in the ruble as a stable currency.

      Here, you don’t need to be an economist to understand what you bought yesterday for one ruble tomorrow you will buy for three rubles,
      the same thing happens with savings in rubles among the people ... they depreciate in proportion to the fall in the value of the ruble.

      I still remember the Gaidar times when the ruble could be glued to the walls of the toilet ... these times may well come back.
      1. Hon
        Hon 24 December 2015 13: 58
        10
        Quote: The same LYOKHA
        Here, you don’t need to be an economist to understand what you bought yesterday for one ruble tomorrow you will buy for three rubles,
        the same thing happens with savings in rubles among the people ... they depreciate in proportion to the fall in the value of the ruble.

        Well, I don’t know, I went to the Rosstat website and there it’s not really that much and everything has risen in price wassat
        1. shultc
          shultc 25 December 2015 09: 57
          +9
          I went to the site of Rosstat and there it is not really that much and everything has risen in price

          And they didn’t try to go to the store and look at the prices! Especially now in the New Year rush.
        2. NordUral
          NordUral 25 December 2015 10: 23
          +5
          Have you tried to stop by the grocery store?
        3. There are a lot of us
          There are a lot of us 25 December 2015 12: 40
          +3
          ROSSTAT, he is so ...
      2. varov14
        varov14 24 December 2015 21: 46
        +7
        The funny thing is that in Gaidar times I lived exactly the same as now, although I went with a million for a loaf of bread. The point is not how many zeros are drawn on banknotes, but how much you can buy to earn. Although I remember that saigas and flounder paid too.
        1. mihasik
          mihasik 25 December 2015 00: 38
          22
          Quote: varov14
          The funny thing is that in Gaidar times I lived exactly the same as now, although I went with a million for a loaf of bread. The point is not how many zeros are drawn on banknotes, but how much you can buy to earn. Although I remember that saigas and flounder paid too.

          The problem is that I again fell for the exhortations of our government, and specifically the GDP, when he said that it is better to keep the savings in rubles in an unstable market. Well, what can you do, I'm a sucker in life! laughing Well, I’m not getting used to the fact that one cannot believe our government (any)!
          The thing is:
          He earned a certain amount of money with blood and sweat (he spent 13 years without taking out), with his own hands and believed that they would be enough for a quiet old age. But no! The people were again robbed in the most shameless way, and all my earnings were zeroed by exactly 50%, due to the rise in prices and the collapse of the ruble. Who is smarter in time bought up the bucks and euros and is not "buzzing" now! Well, I believed Putin! He's kind of like an authority! It turns out "authority", only in the style of the 90s! Now what? And now hands are lowered. Hrenyachil again on "uncle"? Fuck them, these krakhobory, bloodsuckers and mediocrity, sitting at the people's feeder! angry
          I would say it better, but the censor will not miss it! am
          1. mihasik
            mihasik 25 December 2015 01: 08
            15
            Quote: mihasik
            I would say it better, but the censor will not miss it!

            (I didn’t have time to finish it!)
            Cattle! Bring back the USSR! I want to live with a deficit, but in a stable country and with guaranteed employment of the population with a stable salary and zero inflation rate !!!
            Let me remind you that in social time the state exchange rate ruble / dollar was 0.6 rubles. = 1 dollar. Rubles saved up and hid in three-liter jars! Do you know why ?!
            And because in those days any Soviet person could not even imagine that his savings could at one moment turn into a "pumpkin", into zero, into the place of a "carriage"! And the state bank was not put on the book, because at any time they could check the "legal" income and block the account! And now? Fighting corruption? laughing Do not tell my old slippers !!!
            1. PHANTOM-AS
              PHANTOM-AS 25 December 2015 01: 21
              14
              Quote: mihasik
              I want to live with a deficit, but in a stable country and with guaranteed employment of the population with a stable salary and zero inflation rate !!!

              I fully support you! There are at least two of us!
              Only no one will return the USSR to us, we have to fight.
              1. mpzss
                mpzss 25 December 2015 07: 41
                +8
                arrived in your regiment! There are three of us! I also want the USSR!
                And about the article:
                1-Why is this person not the Minister of Finance, but only an adviser to the president !? the answer is one of two, either assigned by pull, or simply will not pull and this is his interview, then, only the empty tales that occur at each table, after the second bottle of vodka!
                2-Yes, I agree, we give loans for enterprises under HUGE interest, and now they have ceased to give at all (I know from my factory), but after all in the government, though not the smartest people, they are far from fools!
                1. PHANTOM-AS
                  PHANTOM-AS 25 December 2015 07: 44
                  +5
                  Quote: mpzss
                  There are three of us!

                  Already POWER! good
                  Just for some reason, we have already thrust cons request
                  1. afdjhbn67
                    afdjhbn67 25 December 2015 07: 51
                    +3
                    Quote: PHANTOM-AS
                    Just for some reason, we have already thrust cons

                    Maybe they don’t want to -
                    Back in the USSR request
                    1. mihasik
                      mihasik 26 December 2015 06: 23
                      +2
                      Quote: afdjhbn67
                      Maybe they don’t want to -
                      Back in the USSR request

                      Yes, no one forces! But the goals are voiced, and this scares many: "I want to live with a deficit, but in a stable country and with guaranteed employment of the population with a stable salary and zero inflation rate!"
                    2. yehat
                      yehat 26 December 2015 16: 04
                      +2
                      I would like to recall that the USSR was different. For example, no matter how they criticized the Khrushchev period for the cause, he took great care of life in the village and the life of the lower classes. Under Brezhnev, we saw what it means to be prosperous; under Stalin, people learned to do great things. I want to tell young deer who do not understand anything: when people want to go to the USSR, this does not mean that they choose lines or sausage from paper or the opportunity to ride a tank in Czechoslovakia, they choose the real movement towards a dream, with human mistakes, limitations or other problems, but movement. And consumerism is doomed. This is an obvious fact. And the sooner this is accepted, the less painful the changes will be.
                      1. little man
                        little man 26 December 2015 20: 23
                        -1
                        in our country, no matter how power is, there will always be dissatisfied.
                  2. mihasik
                    mihasik 26 December 2015 06: 18
                    +1
                    Quote: PHANTOM-AS
                    Already POWER!
                    Just for some reason, we have already thrust cons

                    This is a normal situation. laughing
                    Friends of the United States do not sleep!)
                2. k1995
                  k1995 25 December 2015 08: 37
                  +4
                  Yes, they stopped giving loans 2 years ago. They just said that we are no longer lending in my case, woodworking. But the tax pleases requests for the need to clarify in connection with the reduction of the tax burden by 0,03%.
                  1. mihasik
                    mihasik 26 December 2015 06: 28
                    +4
                    Quote: k1995
                    Yes, they stopped giving loans 2 years ago. They just said that we are no longer lending in my case, woodworking. But the tax pleases requests for the need to clarify in connection with the reduction of the tax burden by 0,03%.

                    And there are also letters of recommendation: What is the salary for workers in this industry in the region. The hell that a monopolist is equated with "small" and "stunted"! And if you do not "match" under the "recommendations", they will come to you with a "check"! And we * at them on the circumstances and the economic situation, which was created by the Government of the Russian Federation, headed by GDP! There are all their own and they "care" for corporate interests! And they are laws, they are for those who are not korefans!
                    There is only one question: What kind of x * yam, small business are they talking about ?!
                    1. pesny2006
                      pesny2006 26 December 2015 09: 42
                      +2
                      Well, actually with Medvedev at the head. This is the main brake.
                    2. Yuyuka
                      Yuyuka 26 December 2015 11: 40
                      +3
                      There is only one question: What kind of x * yam, small business are they talking about ?!
                      about which one can only speak with ellipses with a beep to everyone who is still holding on and trying to do something for their family and country ... Now everything is aimed at replenishing the budget by "punishing" everyone and everyone who is doing their job! How is Nekrasov doing? "Go out to the Volga - whose groan is heard?" Only now, not a groan is heard, but a selective Russian swearing ... there are not enough literary words to express what you think ...
                3. NordUral
                  NordUral 25 December 2015 10: 28
                  +4
                  Have you listened to Putin? That is why the adviser, who is listened to in public (so that we do not buzz), but are done as liberalists.
                  1. vladimir_krm
                    vladimir_krm 25 December 2015 20: 56
                    +1
                    ... either adviser Sergei Glazyev somehow modestly approaches the president of Russia with advice, or the president of Russia neglects the advice of Sergei Glazyev, or the president does not neglect the advice, but their implementation is reduced to zero, lost on other power sidelines.

                    I don’t want to say anything bad about Academician Glazyev, but the author missed one option: ... either these proposals cannot be implemented now for reasons far from economics: geopolitics, the reaction of external and internal enemies, etc. Also an option.
                    1. mihasik
                      mihasik 26 December 2015 07: 15
                      +2
                      Quote: vladimir_krm
                      I don’t want to say anything bad about Academician Glazyev, but the author missed one option: ... either these proposals cannot be implemented now for reasons far from economics: geopolitics, the reaction of external and internal enemies, etc. Also an option.

                      Yes, option! It turns out that our government has a "point" that is not iron in front of the United States?)
                      1. vladimir_krm
                        vladimir_krm 26 December 2015 11: 15
                        0
                        The task of the authorities is not to climb on the rampage, but to maneuver to ensure the maximum of nyashoks to their native country :)
                      2. Goga101
                        Goga101 26 December 2015 17: 21
                        +2
                        vladimir_krm - there is nowhere to hide from their "nyasheks"! Name at least one gesture of the government over the past five years that would benefit ordinary people - eh? but we are the "country" - the "nyashki" go to the Chubais, and it is at our expense angry
                  2. little man
                    little man 26 December 2015 20: 24
                    0
                    for twenty years Glazyev has been reading and the whole moment will not come wink
              2. goose
                goose 25 December 2015 12: 41
                +2
                Quote: mpzss
                Yes, and now AT ALL ceased to give (I know from my factory)

                YES no one in their right mind will take on such%. No one will pull 80% per annum, only the most desperate speculators on the exchange.
              3. pesny2006
                pesny2006 26 December 2015 09: 39
                0
                And indeed it is. It's a shame.
              4. EvgNik
                EvgNik 26 December 2015 13: 58
                +2
                Quote: mpzss
                arrived in your regiment! There are three of us! I also want the USSR!

                Judging by the pros, we are much more.
                Quote: mpzss
                but in the government, though not the smartest people, they are far from being fools!

                They are not fools. They are worse - Western liberals.
                Who cares about their pocket (here they hoo how they know how to count money!), And the people ... but they wanted to spit on him.
              5. yehat
                yehat 26 December 2015 15: 59
                +1
                the situation with the USSR as with a snake thrown off the skin: I want it back, but the skin will not fit. The destruction of the USSR gave us a chance to correct past mistakes, but this did not happen, the Russian Federation again went the way of subsidies and bribes for loyalty - like in Ukraine or Chechnya, this is not true friendship or partnership. And until this stops, we are doomed to live in a world of scarcity, just now the scarcity of goods has been replaced by other deficits.
              6. Prophetic
                Prophetic 26 December 2015 16: 46
                +2
                My dear, there really are no fools. But just where did you get the idea that they spend their minds for the benefit of the motherland, and not for their loved ones? That is the whole point. The problem is not a lack of mind, but a lack of morality. The problem is in personal interests.
            2. Nick
              Nick 25 December 2015 09: 08
              +8
              Quote: PHANTOM-AS
              Quote: mihasik
              I want to live with a deficit, but in a stable country and with guaranteed employment of the population with a stable salary and zero inflation rate !!!

              I fully support you! There are at least two of us!
              Only no one will return the USSR to us, we have to fight.

              And in which USSR do you want to live? The USSR was also different. In Gorbachev, I definitely would not want to. No money in pockets, no goods on the shelves, all goods UNDER ...
              If you live in the USSR, then it is better in the late Stalinist USSR, beginning, mid-50-s. At least there was practically no deficit in it, and prices were falling, and brown bread, salt, pepper and mustard were free in the canteens.
              1. udincev
                udincev 26 December 2015 06: 57
                +3
                Quote: Nick
                The USSR was also different.

                Correctly. So, with the arrival of the bald one, if you remember, in addition to interruptions in bread, a loss of conscience also began. The path of partocracy to the birth of the oligarchy loomed.
            3. polkovnik manuch
              polkovnik manuch 26 December 2015 22: 04
              0
              Fight, so fight!
          2. The comment was deleted.
          3. Nick
            Nick 25 December 2015 08: 59
            -3
            Quote: mihasik
            Cattle! Bring back the USSR!

            Aha! Now they will also bring you the key to the apartment free of charge, in which the money is. Especially after such a "polite" address to "brutes". fellow Sulfazine wouldn’t hurt you. lol
            1. mihasik
              mihasik 25 December 2015 09: 57
              +4
              Quote: Nick
              Aha! Now they will also bring you the key to the apartment for free, in which the money is. Especially after such a "polite" appeal to the "cattle"

              And what else to call this former party nomenclature of the 80s and their offspring? Do not remember how the little gold boxes were taken from Moscow airfields by ILs? No? Even the report was on our media of that time (though they quickly hushed up and there were no consequences for anyone).
              And the oligarchs? Look at the history of the origin of their money and the presence of relatives on the party line ... And now it is the "elite" of the Russian state! laughing laughing laughing Nobody wants to "drip" in this direction? laughing Or is health more expensive? laughing
              The main thing for the authorities is to be loyal and they will "forget" about you, until the change of government laughing
              1. Aleksandr Tot
                Aleksandr Tot 30 December 2015 19: 07
                0
                mihasik. Mishiko, who will you be yourself? The coloring of your line of thought is already very noticeable. Those. you are participating in a trend on a branch on a topic, grabbing stars until the dew has slept - “and here Ostap (you) suffered”! And it did the trick, like a jammed diesel engine. Glazyev stepped on me ** who had overthrown the USSR. It hurts, but not fatal. It will be fatal for liberals when Glazyev from advisers moves closer to pedals and levers. A stir in the chicken coops of the liberals!
              2. Aleksandr Tot
                Aleksandr Tot 30 December 2015 20: 25
                0
                Mishiko, who will you be yourself?
                Your words - He works as a guarantor of stability!
                But she (stability) is not! There is no equilibrium in nature (the universe) with zero deviation from non-existent zero.
                I note - it (stability) is not by definition. There are laws of physics regarding stability of systems; the achievements of sociologists also do not convince of zero entropy. The economy depends more on the preferences of daddies than on mathematical calculations.
                Even the Most High (according to the source) redid Eve, admitted the mistake and sin of Adam, i.e. his mistake (divine) is a fact. We do not live in Eden, but extract resources for ourselves in a sweat.
                Wherever you go, if not a wedge, then a wrecker who imagines himself to be a healer and a universal solver, if not universal, then at least Earthly problems!
                Mikhail, well, their divine laws, let's lower it, well, for example, if you know that it is not the voltage in the outlet that kills, but the current, and the current depends on your resistance (if you decide to put your fingers in the socket) you will have to familiarize yourself with physics ( electrical engineering. At worst, Ohm’s law). So that ignorance does not kill you, you will take into account the resistance of your epidermis (skin), the chemistry of your other liver, taking into account its resistance to the passage of electric current, subject to (knowledge) about the influence of the emotional state of the body on the processes in the body.
                I have no doubt that you know not only microbiology and all the physical and technical issues that control the mental activity of the brain, but you also see the Earth from the side with all its dusting.
                And certainly you have reason to think and shuffle your information options. This right is defended by the liberals who have felt the trunk, tail, foot of an elephant.
                I am delighted with the experience of being present at VO.
          4. Tartary
            Tartary 26 December 2015 09: 15
            0
            Quote: mihasik
            And the state bank was not put on the book, because at any time they could check the "legal" income and block the account!

            You are our eternal Soviet dissident, have you not heard about the "Book to Bearer"? Why?

            There have never been private accounts in the State Bank - there was "Sberkassa" ... Do you know? Why?

            I don’t even want to discuss three-liter jars - I’m neighing a patamushta ... Do you have any idea why? Why don't you guess?
          5. Aleksandr Tot
            Aleksandr Tot 27 December 2015 14: 23
            -1
            0,6 rubles for $ was officially, really from 3.
            If you want to live in a stable deficient country - DPRK. Forward!
            I also lived in those days and did not think, but in vain did not think.
            Those BOTTOMS that you are addressing yourself.
            Let me remind you of an anecdote of the USSR times - Brezhnev L.I. broadcast - in principle, we have everything, and the stupid Soviet official asked - where is this "Prinzyp" store, I want to go there.
            The end of the 70s, the beginning of the 80s I took a turn at 5-00 (morning) for a soldering - 200 g of butter and 1 kg of meat with bones, or rather bones with meat. There was an abundance of seaweed and tourist breakfast on the shelves. At the same time, a riddle appeared - a long one, thunders and the sausage stinks. The answer is that people from Moscow are lucky on the train.
            Mishiko, you Mabut didn’t take a sip under the flag with which you covered yourself - at best you were born. Otherwise, I would not carry nonsense.
        2. Nick
          Nick 25 December 2015 08: 53
          -1
          Quote: mihasik
          The problem is that I again fell for the exhortations of our government, and specifically the GDP, when he said that it is better to keep the savings in rubles in an unstable market.

          Yes, you, Mishan, do not look for the extremes, they say Putin deceived you. When and where did he tell you something?
          Quote: mihasik
          I earned a certain amount of money in blood and then (spent 13 years without taking out), did it myself and believed that they would be enough for a quiet old age. But no!

          Not! Well, you are just positively out of this world! Show me the idiot who kept money for 13 years, unless of course he had any serious money, in rubles ?!
          I haven’t seen such years 25-30.
          Quote: mihasik
          Who is smarter in time bought up the bucks and euros and are not "buzzing" now! Well, I believed Putin! He's kind of like an authority!

          And what? Putin is of course credibility. No one doubts this. But does Putin work with us as a financial consultant? Where does he provide these services?
          As far as I know, Putin provides services to the population, but not in free financial consultations, but in public administration, as the elected President.
          In short, your story is not too believable to believe in it. Fake ...
          1. mihasik
            mihasik 25 December 2015 09: 45
            0
            Quote: Nick
            In short, your story is not too believable to believe in it. Fake ..

            Based on this, life is also fake! Now there is a man, tomorrow there is no man. end of story. Ugh, pounded, it was a fake!
          2. mihasik
            mihasik 26 December 2015 07: 21
            -2
            Quote: Nick
            But does Putin work with us as a financial consultant? Where does he provide these services?

            He works as a guarantor of stability! But she is not! And it turns out that stability is not for everyone! But for that the Government, it is good, according to the "guarantor", and the people do not understand their "happiness"! Maybe. But the "guarantor" only coughed to direct questions. Maybe sick?
            1. Nick
              Nick 27 December 2015 20: 00
              0
              Quote: mihasik
              He works as a guarantor of stability!

              The guarantee of stability is the stabilizer, BUT, only in a certain range of parameter changes. If the parameters go off scale, then the stabilizer may not be able to cope with its function. This must be taken into account. By the way, the President of Russia is the guarantor of the Constitution. That is the observance of constitutional norms and guarantees stability. What constitutional norms did the guarantor violate?
              Quote: mihasik
              But for that the Government is good, according to the "guarantor", but the people do not understand their "happiness"! maybe

              Perhaps so. It is possible that the Government managed to avoid the worst consequences in the context of the global crisis, and even in the context of international sanctions. In any case, when compared with the government of Gaidar, then the positive is there.
              Unfortunately, in my opinion, the economic system created in Russia by the middle of the 90-s and operating now is not optimal for the country. The system must be adapted to the needs of the country, to the needs of the people.
              In my opinion, the most suitable government in the new Russia for this was the Primakov-Maslyukov government. Unfortunately, B. Yeltsin, fearing political competition and being under the influence of the oligarchic "elite", quickly removed all key members of that government, including Primakov and Maslyukov.
        3. Gani
          Gani 25 December 2015 10: 47
          +5
          The problem is that I again fell for the exhortations of our government, and specifically the GDP, when he said that it is better to keep the savings in rubles in an unstable market.
          Yes, in the year 14 it was tin - without any warning from the authorities, the ruble was sausage so it still got goosebumps, we plowed for 4 months - there were a lot of orders in the fall and earned a little less than zero due to the difference in the value of contracts and new prices components ... I think in 2014 the insiders close to the Central Bank earned a lot of money on this and for the sake of this, first of all, the Central Bank helped attack the ruble (for example, they clamped the currency on REPOs and actively threw out rubles, for which banks immediately bought dollars, dropping the ruble, and all nonsense on TV was carried which contributed ...), but did not smooth out the panic, but rather intensified.
          and on inflation, statistics are pulled as they want - the real one is of course more than the official one,
          but as for this year and 2008 - the President cannot (although he can, but if he does so, the end of 2014 will seem like flowers) say on TV: "Guys, the ruble will be doubled, it will fall three times, run to the exchange offices. And in 2008 he said something like : "Don't panic, the ruble is stable, and stocks must be kept in the currency you use, and if there are a lot of stocks, then you can buy other currencies, so our Central Bank spends reserves and keeps a smooth devaluation, so whoever wants to can go and buy currencies for themselves just in case! "- in my opinion, a direct (as far as possible) warning. And this year, a broker friend said that, on the contrary, the consensus forecast was that the dollar by the end of the year will be written and our authorities will try to drop the ruble, but not the fact that it will work out, and then the Turks drop our plane, and then the oil gets hammered under the plinth ... and now they are scaring 100 rubles / dollar
        4. Aleksandr Tot
          Aleksandr Tot 26 December 2015 17: 53
          0
          Mihasik
          Fools learn from their mistakes, smart from strangers, the wise do not need kicks of fate, they do not receive them.
          Smart people know what they say, and fools say everything they know.
          By the way - there are no words "crachborons", there are "crumblers".
          Mihasik, it’s not you who surprised, you were surprised +! Well, how many are not able to learn from their mistakes here on the forum!
      3. Alekseev
        Alekseev 25 December 2015 07: 31
        +1
        Quote: varov14
        The most ridiculous thing is that I lived in Gaidar times exactly the same as now,

        Something you are stuck in development, however! laughing
        But with regard to the dollar and the depreciation of the ruble, here, clearly, you can not put an equal sign.
        Far, far from everything has risen in price, like a dollar, twice. And real estate, for example, fell in price.
        Imports fell by 100 billion. And what, badly bad?
        As for Glazyev’s advice, I personally am with both hands.
        But at the same time, I understand that the issues of regulating the economy in the current conditions are a very complicated issue and we have far from complete information and competence on this issue.
        Experience, "the son of difficult mistakes," reminds us that the truth, as a rule, is in the middle ...
        How much they smelled about the floating ruble exchange rate and Nabiullina.
        And how was it necessary? Issue currency as authorized by government official? And who rules?
        Or did you forget how much a piece of blue cotton fabric cost - Wrangler jeans or an imported two-cassette radio tape recorder when you did not freely give currency to your hands, in the 70-80s?
        And Glazyev’s advice wasn’t completely empty, and there is a soft loan. Few? Maybe...
        But a number of industries are working well, the same as agricultural, aircraft, and energy. Our main problem is not so much an economic one, but a lack of order and strictness towards superiors. There will be order and the economy will go up.
        1. goose
          goose 25 December 2015 12: 44
          +3
          Glazyev's first advice is to limit the export of capital based on the experience of South Korea and Germany. This will save the economy from waves of "speculative" capital and will not let it bleed.
          And for our corrupt government officials, bankers will be difficult to withdraw funds to offshore.
          1. jaroff
            jaroff 25 December 2015 17: 16
            +2
            Who will limit? Who will limit himself?
      4. NordUral
        NordUral 25 December 2015 10: 25
        +4
        I already asked the question - why did you decide that we have not Gaidar times? Nothing but cheap rhetoric has changed.
    2. NordUral
      NordUral 25 December 2015 10: 22
      +2
      And why did you decide that Gaidar times have sunk into oblivion?
  2. qwert
    qwert 24 December 2015 07: 25
    84
    "So, the first proposal coming from Sergei Glazyev is to stop holding on to inflation indicators by all means and means."
    Stalin, at one time generally did not care about all these indicators of inflation and other things, did not look back at world trends, but under him the country developed in such a way that China in its best years could only dream. But industrialization is such a thing on which "you can't cut the dough, for personal" business "speculative deals are more profitable. This is what needs to be changed.
    1. sa-zz
      sa-zz 24 December 2015 07: 52
      0
      Quote: qwert
      Stalin, at one time he generally wanted to spit on all these indicators of inflation and other things

      Under Stalin, for the ruble stolen from the state - put to the wall.
      Glazyev’s main suggestion (which is on the surface) is to print more money. I wonder why no one thought of this before him?
      1. Hardy
        Hardy 24 December 2015 10: 00
        26
        Quote: sa-zz
        Glazyev’s main suggestion (which is on the surface) is to print more money. I wonder why no one thought of this before him?


        This is how our speculators misinterpret Glazyev’s proposals. And the people, as always, are engaged in cheap divorce.

        In fact, the main proposal of Glazyev is to send money not to banks for speculation in the foreign exchange market, but to the real sector at a small percentage and to ensure control of its intended use. And control of the intended use is also not difficult, it is enough to impose speculative transactions on the exchange, that is, short transactions: yesterday I bought and I sold it today, it is 99 percent tax.
        1. Letun
          Letun 24 December 2015 10: 16
          10
          Quote: from article
          .if there are proposals for improving the efficiency of the Russian economy, but they are not implemented by the authorities, it turns out that either adviser Sergei Glazyev somehow modestly approaches the President of Russia with advice, or the President of Russia neglects the advice of Sergei Glazyev, or the president does not neglect the advice, but here their implementation is reduced to zero, getting lost on other power sidelines.

          As the author correctly noted, Glazyev is an advisor to the president, and unlike an assistant, an adviser cannot, on his own initiative, go out to the president. In my opinion, Khazin said that they tried to "shove" Glazyev into the position of assistant, but Mr. Ivanov turned this initiative down. So this stone about a modest approach was clearly thrown into the wrong garden.
          1. PHANTOM-AS
            PHANTOM-AS 24 December 2015 12: 46
            12
            Here is an interesting presentation by Boldyrev.
            1. jaroff
              jaroff 25 December 2015 17: 28
              +1
              And they say that there are no worthy people. That those who are shuffled in one deck are the most intelligent and worthy guardians for state interests.
            2. polkovnik manuch
              polkovnik manuch 26 December 2015 22: 13
              0
              Probably something interesting says, but there is no sound! It's a shame.
          2. varov14
            varov14 24 December 2015 22: 32
            +1
            IVANOV and the main lisa .. ....... they survived, probably a mistake.
        2. Tektor
          Tektor 24 December 2015 11: 41
          24 th
          In fact, the main proposal of Glazyev is to send money not to banks for speculation in the foreign exchange market, but to the real sector at a small percentage and to ensure control of its intended use ...
          And if specifically: whose money and who should send? There is no state money: the entire budget is planned, and reserve funds are at the bottom, and we will now empty them. So who "should" send their money where? Where did you send your money? But they should ...

          Glazyev’s proposals are divorced from economic reality. Full-fledged Money is secured by someone's debt obligations: money is generated by the obligations to return them, and with interest. Now, if you are given a billion, what will you do with it, if in a year you will have to give 1,2 billion? And in a reliable bank, the rate is not more than 10% per year ...
          But Glazyev’s proposals are simple: to give money at interest much lower than the rates at banks and lower than inflation. Those. you don’t even have to do anything: spit on the ceiling and row the loot with a shovel ... Everyone wants it, it’s obvious.
          1. dog1965
            dog1965 24 December 2015 12: 06
            +7
            There is also a third question - where to send? We have adopted targeted development programs that are financed from the budget. There is also project financing (Budget and State Corporation). Loan for opening a shoemaker or minicondy? It's a good thing, but how does it work out in practice? Does the Central Bank print (draw) money, does an entrepreneur come to it? Will not work. This means giving it back at 3-5-7% to a bank that has a credit department. We still have about 1000 such banks. Who will control that this money will go to the bakery and not to the financial market? Okay, let's say the entrepreneur received the money. And where is their business? Personally, I only came across the fact that the minimum (so that the legs do not stretch out) are paid a salary, and the lion's share - on themselves, loved ones. And the interest of entrepreneurs for this money lies in Europe, where he will take "honestly earned" and take away. And this is Medvedev so naive "there are almost no gray schemes" In practice - in three out of four small offices. If it doesn’t take it away and the company simply declares itself “bankrupt”. And now the result has been reduced, and there will be no exhaust at the output. And if the enemies still hurry up?
            Here the whole system needs to be changed somehow.
            1. Tektor
              Tektor 24 December 2015 16: 24
              -7
              The Central Bank prints (draws) money, does an entrepreneur come to him? Will not work. It means to give a bank with a credit department at 3-5-7%.
              Immediately a mistake: the Central Bank cannot "draw" money and release it into the economy ... The Central Bank exchanges money for collateral (debt obligations or assets, such as gold or currency). The Central Bank must always maintain a balance: the money supply must be equal to the pledges so that the Central Bank can completely withdraw money from circulation. In this situation, the currency issued by such a Central Bank will be stable and stable, and the money is secured by debt and assets. The Central Bank can issue money with a subordinated loan under targeted financing programs. Then the bank through which the attendants are transferred simply acts as a "postman". It is this path that must be expanded in every way.
              1. Botanologist
                Botanologist 24 December 2015 21: 52
                +6
                Quote: Tektor
                The Central Bank cannot "draw" money and release it into the economy ... The Central Bank exchanges money for collateral (debt obligations or assets, such as gold or currency). The Central Bank must always maintain a balance: the money supply must be equal to the collateral so that the Central Bank can completely withdraw money from


                This is a liberal fallacy. If that were the case, then when the ruble falls against the dollar by 2 times, the Central Bank must either increase emission by 2 times or withdraw 50% of dollars from turnover. But he’s not quite, so don’t fuss.

                Quote: Tektor
                In this situation, the currency issued by such a Central Bank will be stable and stable, and the money is secured by debt and assets.


                And if the asset has fallen in price in 4? OIL, for example. Your suggestions for securing assets. In the obligations of the US Treasury to keep?

                This is called \ liberal. For you, money is the meaning of the economy. This is a dead end.
              2. Botanologist
                Botanologist 24 December 2015 21: 52
                +3
                Quote: Tektor
                The Central Bank cannot "draw" money and release it into the economy ... The Central Bank exchanges money for collateral (debt obligations or assets, such as gold or currency). The Central Bank must always maintain a balance: the money supply must be equal to the collateral so that the Central Bank can completely withdraw money from


                This is a liberal fallacy. If that were the case, then when the ruble falls against the dollar by 2 times, the Central Bank must either increase emission by 2 times or withdraw 50% of dollars from turnover. But he’s not quite, so don’t fuss.

                Quote: Tektor
                In this situation, the currency issued by such a Central Bank will be stable and stable, and the money is secured by debt and assets.


                And if the asset has fallen in price in 4? OIL, for example. Your suggestions for securing assets. In the obligations of the US Treasury to keep?

                This is called \ liberal. For you, money is the meaning of the economy. This is a dead end.
            2. Yuyuka
              Yuyuka 24 December 2015 22: 48
              +3
              Here the whole system needs to be changed somehow.

              And why not make the interest on the loan dependent on the profitability of production? If you brought income to the treasury, return the interest on the loan, right up to the zero rate! What is not an incentive?

              Dreams, dreams ... where is your sweetness? dreams have gone - disgust remains ... No one is interested in the development of production, that’s the whole answer
            3. varov14
              varov14 24 December 2015 22: 56
              0
              Ordinary Soviet accounting, even if it is the personal money of a "banker" - the debit must always coincide with the loan.
              1. goose
                goose 25 December 2015 14: 13
                +1
                Quote: varov14
                Ordinary Soviet accounting, even if it is the personal money of a "banker" - the debit must always coincide with the loan.

                Not true, in the Soviet system, money was issued for the project. For example, the BAM is under construction: it needs 8 billion, but it will give about 10 in 10 years. These 8 billion are released, and the people are building BAM. Debit with credit converged. In fact, BAM was bought from the country for 8 billion, the state even in profit - an object for 10 billion bought for 8.

                According to your system, the bank receives both a share in the growth of the country's assets, and% on the loan, and money back. Isn't it bold in debit?
            4. Yuyuka
              Yuyuka 24 December 2015 23: 03
              +2
              There is a third question - where to send? We have adopted targeted development programs that are funded from the budget. There is also project financing (Budget and State Corporations). Loan for opening a shoe shop or mini-confectionery? It's a good thing, but how will this work out in practice? The Central Bank prints (draws) money, does an entrepreneur come to him? Will not work.

              here the dog is buried! give money for the development of production! specifically - suffocating from a lack of funds to expand production, give money for machines and materials! Well, I can’t spend them on a house, an expensive car! Or is the production room also a problem, not a single bank will give the full amount, only a part, where can I get the rest?
            5. Levbon347501
              Levbon347501 26 December 2015 20: 28
              0
              Glazyev offers a solution to fundamental areas, and it’s easier to think about the spending of loans taken for specific projects. Well, for example: Someone like the bailiffs (for example) or a special unit in each particular bank, pays the costs of the entrepreneur for the implementation of the project in the amount of the approved estimate and not any cash.
          2. coolvoldik
            coolvoldik 24 December 2015 12: 42
            15
            And Mr. Putin, for the second time in a row, directed the money of the National Welfare Fund (reserve fund) to capitalize on the additional capital of commercial banks. Refusal to support the ruble and additional capitalization of banks - clearly indicates at whose expense the banquet. Those. clearly not at the expense of the oligarchs ("business elites").
          3. varov14
            varov14 24 December 2015 22: 46
            +3
            Whose money provides you a loan issued on a bank card. Obviously inflated by the bank from the air, which the state does not know about. That’s why they almost come home with this loan - you will give it well, if you don’t give it back, the state will enter the situation and return it. Vseravno wash. So put the full money ...... and do not mislead people.
          4. Suvorov
            Suvorov 25 December 2015 01: 38
            +2
            Quote: Tektor
            And if specifically: whose money and who should send? There is no state money: the entire budget is planned, and the reserve funds are at the bottom, and we will now empty them. So who "should" send their money where?

            The problem is solved simply: on a competitive basis, authorized manufacturers of domestic equipment are selected that are ready to offer modern solutions (no worse than foreign counterparts), a government contract is concluded with them and they are the final recipients of money. The money is issued by the Central Bank in the form of a targeted loan to commercial banks at a small fixed interest rate for lending to industry for the purpose of updating the production base. After receiving a loan, the entrepreneur enters into an agreement with an authorized company for the purchase of equipment. The security (70-80% of the collateral base) is the purchased equipment, the rest of the collateral is provided by the entrepreneur independently. This creates a powerful incentive for the development of domestic industry. Although, abuses are possible with such a scheme, including the withdrawal of money to the "speculative sector", but the benefits will still "outweigh" the disadvantages. At the same time, the risk of inflation is minimal, since the equipment manufacturer will pay all taxes and contributions to social funds, i.e. in fact, it will help the state to fulfill the budget. All that remains is to develop a tough control system. To begin with at least this ... But something must be done, otherwise we will forever depend on the price of oil and the dollar, and therefore on external "players" who will not give us a chance to get out of stagnation.
            1. PHANTOM-AS
              PHANTOM-AS 25 December 2015 01: 52
              +4
              Quote: Suvorov
              The problem is solved simply: on a competitive basis, authorized manufacturers of domestic equipment are selected, ready to offer modern solutions (no worse than foreign counterparts), a state contract is concluded with them and they are the ultimate recipients of the money.

              In the current Russian Federation, this is impossible.
              Quote: Suvorov
              Money is issued by the Central Bank in the form of a target loan to commercial banks at a small fixed percentage for lending to the industry for the purpose of updating the production base.

              All grannies will immediately leave for speculative operations by banks as well.
              Quote: Suvorov
              It remains only to develop a tight control system.

              One and a half million policemen and other law enforcement agencies, together about two belay
              What other control is needed?
              Here only one political will is needed, a turn to a nationally socially oriented state!
              But this just will not happen ...
              1. afdjhbn67
                afdjhbn67 25 December 2015 01: 56
                +3
                Quote: PHANTOM-AS
                Here only one political will is needed,

                I remembered .. "Patience, my friend, patience. And your stubble will turn to gold" ...
                1. PHANTOM-AS
                  PHANTOM-AS 25 December 2015 02: 29
                  +3
                  Quote: afdjhbn67
                  "Patience, my friend, patience. And your stubble will turn to gold" ...

                  If so ... what
                  There would be no poor ...
              2. Suvorov
                Suvorov 25 December 2015 02: 19
                +3
                Quote: PHANTOM-AS
                All grannies will immediately leave for speculative operations by banks as well.

                In order to prevent money from being "depersonalized" and not spent on "currency speculation" by the banks themselves, give it only through an account opened in the Treasury or a special account in the Central Bank, so that it cannot be directed to other purposes than the targeted issuance of loans. Then the banks themselves will not look for an excuse to delay the issuance of a loan (and at this time "twist" the money), but, on the contrary, will start actively looking for borrowers. If they do not "master" the money in time, then the Central Bank will not give them more. And so, they will earn their 4-5%. At the same time, all work with borrowers (including checking their solvency) will remain with them (including the risks of non-repayment), there is no need for the state to "bother" with these issues. Even if the borrower receives money at 8-9% for 7-10 years, and for large projects up to 15-20 years, then it's already good. And "monetary replenishment" will not hinder the industry, and business has room to develop, banks will not be left behind either, and the state will receive its own in the form of taxes and new jobs. Consumers (population) will also say thank you. It remains only for the Central Bank to "persuade" the president ...
                1. PHANTOM-AS
                  PHANTOM-AS 25 December 2015 02: 33
                  +4
                  Quote: Suvorov
                  So that the money is not "depersonalized" and does not leave ...

                  To do this, just a little: change the system.
                  Because no good wishes act on these.
                  According to some reports, an amount equal to the country's budget is being stolen in our country.
                  What do you think, a thread of free will refuse such money?
              3. The comment was deleted.
            2. The comment was deleted.
          5. The comment was deleted.
          6. goose
            goose 25 December 2015 14: 08
            0
            When the state gives a million to the bank at 8%, the bank cries that it is not profitable for him to give the same million to two at 18%. Is that normal?
        3. alicante11
          alicante11 24 December 2015 13: 15
          +2
          In fact, the main proposal of Glazyev is to send money not to banks for speculation in the foreign exchange market, but to the real sector at a small percentage and to ensure control of the intended use


          Sorry, but through WHAT will the money be sent? There are only two ways, either budget transfers / grants, or through banks. Given the theft of officials who distribute budget money, that of bankers, only a small part of the money will reach the goal, and even that is too late until they scroll through all the necessary schemes ...

          And control of the intended use is also not complicated, it is enough to impose speculative transactions on the exchange, that is, short transactions: yesterday I bought and I sold it today, it is taxed at 99 percent.


          A simple scheme, a one-day company is created at the bank / office / company, which receives an order / wins a tender for the supply of something for a huge amount. Money, at least an advance, is received, and then the one-day day registered in the Canaries disappears.
          1. varov14
            varov14 24 December 2015 23: 07
            +2
            One thing remains - the post office, train stations, banks, telegraph and lampposts, there is no way out.
        4. wax
          wax 24 December 2015 15: 15
          +1
          That's right, you understand Glazyev. I think Putin understands ... But, the counter-revolution has come to pass, and the President seems to have no strength for the revolution.
          1. varov14
            varov14 24 December 2015 23: 12
            +3
            Be self-effusive, he just has friends with strange names.
      2. Chiropractor
        Chiropractor 24 December 2015 11: 18
        15
        Quote: sa-zz
        Glazyev’s main suggestion (which is on the surface) is to print more money.



        Sorry, but you are either a provocateur.

        No need to think of anything - Glazyev offers to return long cheap money to the country. Long - return period 7-10 years.
        Cheap - interest for using a loan of 3-5%.
        The source can be anything other than the printing press. And your notorious printing press is a horror story for the people as a "source of monetary inflation." And credits are NOT ISSUED by suitcases of money !!!
        1. afdjhbn67
          afdjhbn67 25 December 2015 04: 01
          +2
          Quote: Kostoprav
          The source can be anything other than the printing press. And your notorious printing press is a horror story for the people as a "source of monetary inflation." And credits are NOT ISSUED by suitcases of money !!!
          Reply Quote Report abuse

          You see, inflation is not afraid of the people, but of the banks - so that loans in which people are mired are not depreciated .. and thereby do not damage banks .. hence the fight against it without stuffing extra. money supply, as always in post-perestroika Russia.
          For the people - without the people ..
          1. Chiropractor
            Chiropractor 25 December 2015 10: 26
            +1
            Quote: afdjhbn67
            inflation is not scary for the people


            Right now, people were surprised !!!
            The worker received on November 30 the salary laid down in the cost of the goods produced by the worker, and here bang! Since December 1, prices have risen ... well, yes, it’s not a big deal ...

            Banks also lay the maximum inflation rate in the cost of the loan - they are the ones that take inflation into account in their operations.
      3. SHOCK.
        SHOCK. 24 December 2015 15: 17
        +4
        it is the creation of cheap credit resources and the management of mechanisms to bring these resources to innovative sectors of the economy in order to support investment activity is the main direction of macroeconomic policy.


        You need to carefully read, and not crawl on the surface. Yes, print more money! But for spending this money, there should be TEST CONTROL! Isn't it clear?

        And now, all the same, it’s worth moving on to the question that was raised in the material above: why, apparently, apparently the positive initiatives of Sergei Glazyev do not pass? Yes, everything is very simple: because if they take place (at least the same transparent public-private partnership), then the whole tower will collapse, which has been built brick by brick for many years under various presidents and prime ministers. The very principle of a corruption-liberal economy will collapse, the main attribute of which was the withdrawal of funds abroad, and which, by the way, is considered by many to be some kind of investment of some external projects.


        "Money, the blood of the economy." At the moment, the country is bled out. It just bleeds!
      4. varov14
        varov14 24 December 2015 22: 22
        +1
        You apparently didn’t read the next sentence, to give money to industry, but not to speculators of loan interest, someone will do it when everything is tied to the moneylender on the loan interest. He feeds himself from this, feeds power and something else falls to us. To make money from the air is what a remarkable mind one must have. That’s why they love him, he will always throw him on old age, and not serve as an official for a century. Ktozh such a chicken will be cut. In the Union, industry was generally non-cash, try to steal if there is no clandestine production. They stole it in such detail, except that the chief would build a cottage out of production materials, unless this is a sweep by time, for example, childish pranks, a toilet and that one in the garden. Therefore, all the guarantors and cherish this ....... he will always share air money with them, but they will live in the castle and with the Italian toilet.
    2. Aleksandr21
      Aleksandr21 24 December 2015 10: 21
      16 th
      Quote: qwert
      "So, the first proposal coming from Sergei Glazyev is to stop holding on to inflation indicators by all means and means."


      And this is a very bad proposal. If you try to think about it, he promotes the idea of ​​turning on the printing press and pumping the Russian economy with cheap money. The efficiency here is quite controversial, even if the interest rate is made the minimum for the business, i.e. The main question is how will this money be used? Considering the scale of corruption in our country and the "efficiency" of the use of funds. But the damage is simply colossal, imagine what will happen to the money of the population if the printing press is turned on? How many times will they depreciate? What will happen to the prices of goods and products? What will happen to the salary of state employees? So let's put it bluntly, not really. We need to look for other ways to solve current problems.
      1. BecmepH
        BecmepH 24 December 2015 11: 25
        +5
        The author of the first post, Igor39, vangov))) Alexander21 knows how to help Russia. Here is his recipe-
        We need to look for other ways to solve current problems.
        We will do as Alexander21 suggests and everything will be a bunch !!! Have you noticed that our prime minister also very often repeats the word "SHOULD"? Did not notice? Note...
        1. Aleksandr21
          Aleksandr21 24 December 2015 12: 02
          14 th
          Quote: BecmepH
          We will do as Alexander21 suggests and everything will be a bunch !!! Have you noticed that our prime minister also very often repeats the word "SHOULD"? Did not notice? Note...


          Apparently you are far from the common people, do not go to the store, do not buy food, clothes and get salary in dollars, this is the only way I can explain your support for Glazyev's proposal. Even the President does not dare to pump up the Russian economy with cheap money, because he understands what risks they carry, so I advise you first of all not only to read but also to think. And all these tales about "long" money is just a ride on the ears, where will they come from? Now in the Russian economy there is a crisis, there is no money, our various funds have emptied significantly, because money goes to support the state. programs and national projects. Where will the money come from for Glazyev's proposal? Who will invest in Russia from abroad? No, they will be printed for a long time, but the economy cannot be fooled, I understand that expressions such as money supply and monetary aggregates do not tell you anything, but I have an economic education and I perfectly imagine what will happen to our economy if it is like that " help ".
          1. Mexovoy
            Mexovoy 24 December 2015 12: 46
            14
            In the summer I met an article in which there was data on the economy being filled with money. 50% of GDP, so many rubles now in our economy. You understand that this is not normal. No one has money. The business does not have money to develop, to raise salaries. Loans are not overwhelming, they are simply asphyxiating. What kind of growth can we talk about when the Central Bank kills our economy under the slogans of protection against inflation? Average inflation over the past 15 years is 20% per year. Bullshit, just bullshit. The USA prints its grandmothers and does not take a steam bath. But we could not create Altyn or Evraz (not the essence in the name). Why do you think the Atlantis were so grieving at us? Due to the creation of a single currency in the customs union.
          2. Svist
            Svist 24 December 2015 13: 26
            +2
            Quote: Aleksandr21
            Even the President does not dare to pump up the Russian economy with cheap money

            Cool!
            1. Aleksandr21
              Aleksandr21 24 December 2015 13: 32
              -6
              Quote: Svist
              Quote: Aleksandr21
              Even the President does not dare to pump up the Russian economy with cheap money

              Cool!


              "Putin did not agree to print money"

              http://www.mk.ru/politics/russia/2011/07/11/604707-putin-ne-soglasilsya-pechatat
              -dengi.html
              1. cap
                cap 24 December 2015 14: 41
                10
                Aleksandr21 RU
                "Putin did not agree to print money"

                http://www.mk.ru/politics/russia/2011/07/11/604707-putin-ne-soglasilsya-pechatat


                -dengi.html
                "Now, according to scientists, we are using the model of monetary emission, which was once implemented in colonial countries. Pegging to foreign currency, excessive dependence on foreign capital is the reason for the vulnerability of our financial system, commodity hypertrophy." The banking system in such conditions is not may develop normally: our banks are forced to take out loans 2-3 times more expensive than foreign ones, "Glazyev diagnosed." The entire banking sector in Russia is less than one American bank. " “We do not offer to print cheap money to revive the economy,” he warned. The essence of the main proposal - to take advantage of the post-war experience of Europe - Glazyev had in mind the issue of money under bills of exchange to enterprises. Then it will already be possible to realize the dream of long and cheap money in the country and a refinancing rate of 3-4%.
                Putin agreed that "long-term money is a problem that is constantly on the ears." But he had objections: The prime minister recalled the experience of the United States, whose banks were giving out unsecured loans left and right, as well as the experience of neighboring Belarus, which provided a 2% loan to the construction sector: “Nobody could repay the loans, the banks shook.”
                Glazyev said that this is not just about cheap money - it is necessary to check the viability of enterprises, to organize monitoring of everyone’s activities.
                This method turned out to be too complicated for the premiere: "This is manual work." But he did not reject the ideas of scientists: “I do not say either“ Yes ”or“ No ”.
                That’s the whole point of the meeting between Vladimir Putin and academics.
                About "manual work" just "class". Remains another instrument language. Maybe there is a third about which nothing is known. hi
          3. Altona
            Altona 24 December 2015 14: 16
            +9
            Quote: Aleksandr21
            Where will the money come from for Glazyev's proposal? Who will invest in Russia from abroad? No, they will be printed for a long time, but the economy cannot be fooled, I understand that expressions such as money supply and monetary aggregates do not tell you anything, but I have an economic education and I perfectly imagine what will happen to our economy if it is like that " help ".

            --------------------------
            The essence of Glazyev’s proposals is to print 4-5 times more rubles than the currency, and not 1 to 1, as it is now written in the law on the Central Bank. But send them not to the current banking system, but create a separate channel for financing the real sector of the economy. In general, there is a semblance of a return to the system that existed in the USSR. But at the same time, revive state planning, where to give entrepreneurs directions, which markets to create. Not directive, indicative, but indicative, in the form of beacons. In general, a whole range of measures. But the Government will not master this.
            1. Aleksandr21
              Aleksandr21 24 December 2015 14: 37
              -6
              Quote: Altona

              The essence of Glazyev’s proposals is to print 4-5 times more rubles than the currency, and not 1 to 1, as it is now written in the law on the Central Bank. But send them not to the current banking system, but create a separate channel for financing the real sector of the economy. In general, there is a semblance of a return to the system that existed in the USSR. But at the same time, revive state planning, where to give entrepreneurs directions, which markets to create. Not directive, indicative, but indicative, in the form of beacons. In general, a whole range of measures. But the Government will not master this.


              Well, the fact that they print "4-5 times more money" will just lead to an increase in the money supply. And the "separate channel" is just a wish, in reality money does not come from nowhere and does not go into the unknown, you can certainly finance some separate important areas of the economy, here I agree with you, but this money will not disappear later. The state gives money to banks - those to large and medium-sized businesses - business produces some kind of product - a consumer. Therefore, inflation will grow with its ensuing consequences, etc. you cannot simultaneously give a lot of money to the business and not increase the money supply.
          4. Neophyte
            Neophyte 24 December 2015 17: 36
            +2
            Nevertheless, it was the IMF who advised keeping the rate high, while all countries adhered to the minimum rate!
            On the face, management from the outside.
            1. Aleksandr21
              Aleksandr21 24 December 2015 18: 20
              0
              Quote: Neophyte
              Nevertheless, it was the IMF who advised keeping the rate high, while all countries adhered to the minimum rate!
              On the face, management from the outside.


              Yes, our Central Bank is too dependent on Western "partners" it is time to move away from this and follow only its own interests. But pumping up the economy with cheap money, thereby accelerating inflation and putting millions of Russians on the threshold of poverty, is not an option, cheap money will not replace those reforms that need to be carried out in the economic field.
          5. Victor Demchenko
            Victor Demchenko 24 December 2015 19: 29
            +3
            a little late, but I will answer your post: I am just from the people, and we do not need to go over the ears, as you put it! only during the construction of the Vostochny cosmodrome was the theft of an awesome amount of OUR money proven, and you ask where to get the money! it is tougher to ask the thieves, ask the answer from successful managers, such as Chubais, and then really, everything will be a bunch!
            1. Aleksandr21
              Aleksandr21 24 December 2015 21: 29
              0
              Quote: Victor Demchenko
              a little late, but I will answer your post: I am just from the people, and we do not need to go over the ears, as you put it! only during the construction of the Vostochny cosmodrome was the theft of an awesome amount of OUR money proven, and you ask where to get the money! it is tougher to ask the thieves, ask the answer from successful managers, such as Chubais, and then really, everything will be a bunch!


              Well, let them shake the thieves, who is against it? I am all for it, but one should not confuse the injection of new money into the economy (with its own risks) and the return of old ones. I just pointed out the fallacy of what Glazyev suggests, and not that everything is fine and nothing needs to be done. You definitely need to do something, but you need to act differently. And what he proposes: "to stop holding on to inflation indicators by all means and means" will only lead to the collapse of the social component of the state. The real sector is not a fact that we will raise, taking into account all the peculiarities of the development of funds, even in your example with the East, but we will definitely finish our own population.
          6. Hardy
            Hardy 24 December 2015 23: 40
            0
            Quote: Aleksandr21
            I have an economic education and I can imagine very well what will happen to our economy if it is so "helped".

            Economic education is good.
            Then explain to us ignoramuses. How is it that in the Russian Federation with a minimum public debt and a positive trade balance, the national currency is becoming cheaper, and in the USA with a huge public debt and a negative trade balance, the dollar is getting more expensive?))))
          7. mihasik
            mihasik 25 December 2015 02: 02
            +1
            Quote: Aleksandr21
            And all these tales about "long" money is just a ride on the ears, where will they come from?

            Totally agree! laughing Where can "long" money come from with such "predicted" inflation and a speculative economy encouraged by the state?
          8. Chiropractor
            Chiropractor 25 December 2015 11: 40
            0
            Now it was a shame.
            Let's discuss the sufficiency of the M1 and M2 units in Russia - I can not only wave arms and legs, cut, stitch people, shoot with different calibers and throw from a fork to an ax and a stool, I have a diploma and an economist, not the current Bologna, but quite a classic.

            That's right, now there is a crisis in Russia. But think - the crisis of what?

            Quote: Aleksandr21
            they will be printed

            No and no again.
            There is money. The country's income is declining, yes, but we are selling oil, bread and weapons, and there are still incomes. And this money lies on budget, in fact, accounts. And the question is how to properly manage them.
            Right now they are lying and no one can take them - because the Central Bank in an orderly manner raised the rate at which they can be taken - by a very large amount (we will talk about repos later, okay?). Glazyev offers to reduce this% for using money, this payment for giving you money (for a while!) To reasonable limits - so that farmers can take the money, whose profits are not out of 5%, and small and medium-sized businesses that live by 10-15%. A krupnyak can always go to IPO.
            Further, so that banks can take advantage of this money and so that they do not constantly circulate checks of the Central Bank (and in every commercial bank, by the way, there is a representative of the Central Bank who constantly watches and whose results the banks close their work) and to simplify the activities, introduce the separation of banks - either they take money and give it to the industrial sector, or they play on the stock exchange and they don’t give that money.
        2. Aleksandr21
          Aleksandr21 24 December 2015 12: 48
          -2
          Quote: BecmepH
          The author of the first post, Igor39, vangov))) Alexander21 knows how to help Russia. Here is his recipe-


          There is no ready-made recipe for raising the Russian economy, if everything were so simple, then they would already have found a way, and so it is proposed to treat one thing and cripple the other. I can only paint you what will happen if you follow Glazyev's advice. But what will happen is that the state will turn on the printing press, print "short" and "long" money (the difference there will be only in the maturity). no other funding sources are on the horizon. Will give this money to banks, they, in turn, will give it in the form of interest-free loans (or with a small percentage) to factories, enterprises, medium and large businesses. Once new money pours into the market, then, accordingly, the old money begins to depreciate, inflation, prices for food, clothing, equipment, medicines, services, etc. rise. grow, salary, as is usually the case, remain in place, i.e. there will be a banal impoverishment of the population, and a very large part of Russia, we are talking here about tens of millions of people. Consumer activity will decline, i.e. there will be nothing to buy products, people will think how to squeeze out. The business that this money will give, they will certainly help, but the question will arise about the sale of these products, the population as a consumer? doubtful selling abroad? perhaps, but the markets are already divided and it is very difficult to break through somewhere else. Of course, some part of the production will be ordered by our other business, and it is quite possible that economic growth will even begin, but in the social part there will be a disaster. Plus, there will be a question about the most effective use of "short" and "long" money, where are the guarantees that they will not be taken offshore? Where are the guarantees that they will be used effectively and not put in your pocket? So there are more questions than answers, and the question of efficiency is very dubious.
          1. Victor Demchenko
            Victor Demchenko 24 December 2015 20: 01
            +1
            in my opinion you describe today ... and also:
            Quote: Aleksandr21
            Consumer activity will decline, i.e. there’s nothing to buy products, people will think how squeeze.

            so can it still survive? fool
            today pensioners and state employees (teachers, doctors, etc.) are starting to think about it ... not all, but very many.
            1. Aleksandr21
              Aleksandr21 24 December 2015 21: 17
              0
              Quote: Victor Demchenko

              so can it still survive? fool

              Sorry, typo. And so yes, many begin to think about how to survive ... all hope for the government (although there is no more faith left with such a policy) but I repeat once again, turning on the printing press is not an option, we need to carry out reforms and try to solve problems by not pouring money, but wise economic policy.
      2. avdkrd
        avdkrd 24 December 2015 12: 22
        +5
        Quote: Aleksandr21
        And this is a very bad offer. If you try to think about it, he promotes the idea of ​​turning on the printing press and pumping up the Russian economy with cheap money.
        .
        Not without it. If the business does not receive cheap money, then development can be forgotten. Targeted essentially state money will not save the economy as a whole, especially in conjunction with the privatization promoted by Medvedev that the oligarchs of the first wave have not yet managed to pull apart. Just in case of turning on the machine, it is necessary to ensure the inability to send this money to bank speculation with currency. It is easy to predict that the profit from buying foreign currency will exceed the bank rate in the short term and the receipt of money by the real sector of the economy must be tightly controlled. Perhaps today in Russia there are no such mechanisms, but they must be created otherwise we will go along the path of Kiev. Maybe sanctions will play a role and in the Kremlin they will start to do something, rather than talk about the independence of the economy from oil.
        1. Aleksandr21
          Aleksandr21 24 December 2015 13: 11
          -3
          Quote: avdkrd

          Not without it. If the business does not receive cheap money, then development can be forgotten. Targeted essentially state money will not save the economy as a whole, especially in conjunction with the privatization promoted by Medvedev that the oligarchs of the first wave have not yet managed to pull apart. Just in case of turning on the machine, it is necessary to ensure the inability to send this money to bank speculation with currency.


          Even if the state can provide control over banks, and for the fact that this money will reach the final consumer (medium-large business), there is no guarantee that this money will give exactly the effect that the government expects from it. Maybe we can get a couple of percent of GDP and some kind of growth in production, but we can get a drastic change in the situation, we need a whole range of measures to help business, and the effect will not work out quickly, it may take 10-15 years before the results are achieved, plus it’s also necessary take risks into account, and they (IMHO) are very large, I personally do not believe that these funds are used for their intended purpose, there are no mechanisms in our country for controlling public funds, part of the money goes into a pocket or offshore (which is the same thing), or rather not even Thus, the Central Bank can track all operations to withdraw capital from Russia, its possibilities allow, but the fact that nothing is being done leads to sad thoughts. There are too many interests of different people there .... well, the very effect of pumping money into the economy, I wrote above what the population expects with this outcome ... so the risks are too great. And mechanisms to help business exist, in addition to the proposed method, just to use them, you need political will at the highest level, i.e. Your lobby is everywhere.
      3. Volzhanin
        Volzhanin 24 December 2015 12: 32
        +1
        The bottom line is that to print, but not to give to everyone, but to those who really manage them competently for the good of the Fatherland, and at the same time have tight control. Then the exhaust will be.
        Essno, just print and distribute - will oppa.
      4. Victor Demchenko
        Victor Demchenko 24 December 2015 19: 25
        +1
        well here is your question
        Quote: Aleksandr21
        Considering the scale of corruption in our country and the "efficiency" of the use of funds.

        the answer is very simple: if you can’t take advantage of the stolen, then steal the hell? if there is the most severe control over the movement - I’m sure for all 100500 no sane person will risk his skin! For such a turn, one thing is necessary: ​​the real responsibility for theft, moreover, toughened up during the theft from the state pocket, up to the execution and confiscation of the THROUGH THE WHOLE FAMILY. guarantee, no one wants to go under the bullet knowing that the family will be kirdyk. enough, play out tolerance! as far as I know, today there is an opportunity to get stolen even from Swiss banks, that’s what you need to get! and then come up with an excuse fool : small children ... it's about the former Minister of Agriculture of the Russian Federation Skrynnik ... recourse
        1. Aleksandr21
          Aleksandr21 24 December 2015 19: 50
          +1
          Quote: Victor Demchenko

          the answer is very simple: if you can’t take advantage of the stolen, then steal the hell? if there is the most severe control over the movement - I’m sure for all 100500 no sane person will risk his skin! For such a turn, one thing is necessary: ​​the real responsibility for theft, moreover, toughened up during the theft from the state pocket, up to the execution and confiscation of the THROUGH THE WHOLE FAMILY.


          I completely agree, but unfortunately there is not enough political will to implement such a plan. Everyone is tied to the top with each other, here is an article about Chubais above, everyone asks one question, why is he in the government and still free? And the answer is simple, good friends (the roof, so to speak), he helped them with privatization, and they help him now, and cover him and his affairs .... and while there is such a picture, there’s no need to talk about any real fight against corruption .
    3. avdkrd
      avdkrd 24 December 2015 12: 06
      12
      Quote: qwert
      Stalin, at one time generally wanted to spit on all these inflation indicators and other things, did not look back at world trends, but the country developed under him so that China could only dream in its best years.

      What does Stalin have to do with it and how does its financial policy intersect with Glazyev’s proposals ???
      The ruble under Stalin was a non-convertible currency, the planned economy, coupled with the preservation of the money supply, provided a steady increase in the purchasing power of the domestic ruble - the money supply remained at the planned value, and the number of assets and goods increased. We must take into account the complete lack of speculation in the stock market in view of the absence of such.
      Glazyev offers quite obvious things (not for the Central Bank and the Ministry of Finance) precisely for the current social system, and the inability of the GDP to resolve this issue can put an end to all Russia's ambitions. I have a cognitive dissonance from the economic policy of the Russian Federation - on the one hand, from all the stands they broadcast about support for small and medium-sized businesses, import substitution, the need to introduce new technologies, and the rest blah blah blah, while the interest rate in the bank is at least 19%. What new industries can we talk about with such a percentage? Given that it is very difficult to take even such a percentage not for trade processing, but for production. Long money in banks is absent as such, and in fact, in order to "recapture" serious production, it takes 5 or even 10 years. It turns out that banks are ready to lend only to "monsters" from business, which, in principle, develop as much as they strengthen their monopolies, and medium-sized businesses simply survive. Project finance is absent as a class due to the price of the loan money. The Central Bank's credit policy allows it to exist relatively comfortably only in speculative activities, when profits are instantaneous.
      1. Igor39
        Igor39 24 December 2015 15: 01
        +2
        avdkrd comrade says real things, absolutely agree, my friend the farmer wanted to take a loan from the bank on the security of the property, came from the bank to look at the property, a couple of tractors of 197 .. year of manufacture, residual value-0, warehouse made of brick 195 .., residual value -0. Under what you say you want to take a loan? laughing And he is sowing slowly on this rubbish, give him money he can do more, only the banks will strangle him with interest, they must be given right away.
    4. Nick
      Nick 25 December 2015 09: 11
      0
      Quote: qwert
      "So, the first proposal coming from Sergei Glazyev is to stop holding on to inflation indicators by all means and means."
      Stalin, at one time generally did not care about all these indicators of inflation and other things, did not look back at world trends, but under him the country developed in such a way that China in its best years could only dream. But industrialization is such a thing on which "you can't cut the dough, for personal" business "speculative deals are more profitable. This is what needs to be changed.

      Che, you are absolutely right!
  3. ramzes1776
    ramzes1776 24 December 2015 08: 01
    +8
    Yesterday I read an article on VO "Putin against the" Sect of the Holy Printer "and there were convincing arguments, but only opposite ones. Now I sit and scratch my turnips, I don't know who to believe now.
    1. sa-zz
      sa-zz 24 December 2015 08: 20
      +6
      Quote: ramzes1776
      Now I’m sitting and scratching turnips, I don’t know who to believe now.

      I read it too. In the first comment, Igor39 ironizes
      in Russia, every second person knows what needs to be done, and on the site almost all the experts in the economic bloc, so many talented economists disappear
      and now all these economists are probably scratching their turnips. In general, "Voennoye Obozreniye" is a site of "unafraid economists"; it is not difficult to invest something like that.
      So, as time goes, I will look for information and opinions of pros, only after that I will draw conclusions, which I wish to all comrades hi
    2. Averias
      Averias 24 December 2015 08: 35
      -1
      Quote: ramzes1776
      Yesterday I read an article on VO "Putin against the" Holy Printer Sect "

      Greetings! I also stand at a crossroads. In my opinion, yesterday's article (which you mentioned) more clearly demonstrates what the launch of a money machine is fraught with, as well as the consequences of this. I have been reading Glazyev for a long time, he is a smart man, no doubt about it, but somehow everything "just" comes out with him (subjectively, of course). Although, since he is not strong in economic squabbles, it is foolish to take sides. It is possible that both are wrong. Only here I will repeat, in yesterday's article the author clearly explains why not. And Glazyev, on the other hand, says (demands) with 100% confidence - I know how to fix everything. And this always worries me.
      1. tveritianin
        tveritianin 24 December 2015 09: 42
        13
        And you are not alarmed that Glazyev has not been given a "run" with his thoughts for more than eight years, while he, as he was an adviser to the President, remains so. And one more detail on the topic: Glazyev's advice is being tested in the press, but they are not allowed into the case, and those who do not let them, both ruled the economy, and still rule, while the country was rolling down. and it rolls.
        I would agree with the author of yesterday’s article, if from year to year we at least gradually rise, but we are falling apart.
        I understand that experimenting in a country like ours is impossible, it’s just criminal (remembering the 90s), but sitting around waiting for manna in the form of pink oil prices is also a crime.
        It is difficult for us not economists to take sides, but as citizens of our country, we have the right to demand that the Government do what will strengthen the State and make its economy strong. And here (one gets the impression) the "work" of economists is in full swing only in the blogosphere and at economic forums, apart from the life of the Country and its Economy. We got a lot of fun and okay. You will see that "Red" will not have to answer for, as he put it, the market. Get away with it.
        And the last thing, note that neither on the upcoming article, nor on today's Prime Minister will ever say anything, I do not mean the articles of the authors themselves (he does not read them), but the essence of the problem.
        1. alicante11
          alicante11 24 December 2015 13: 19
          0
          And you are not alarmed that Glazyev has not been given a "run" with his thoughts for more than eight years, while he, as an advisor to the President, remains so.


          Because his advice MAY come in handy. But only if the Americans smash China into chips and put the Heroes on the chain. Then we will have to forget about both export and import, and begin real import substitution. Then the machine will turn on. True, I’m not sure that we will get even with time an equally diverse and rich assortment of domestic products. Rather, it will all be very small, poor and expensive. I explained the reason for this yesterday.
      2. Cube123
        Cube123 24 December 2015 09: 48
        +1
        Glazyev has one problem. He offers a revolution. In fact, to give up power.
        As soon as the economic system allows enterprises to exist independently of the State, the State will recede into the background and, accordingly, politics will give way to the economy.
        Is our country ready for such a step? The big question. A very real result could be the collapse of the country and the ripping up of residues.
      3. Chiropractor
        Chiropractor 24 December 2015 11: 42
        10
        Why, why are you talking about "turning on the printing press"? Because someone interpreted Glazyev's program this way? And your stressful memory of the 90s kicked in?

        Glazyev offers a solution to the problem.
        Problem: lack of money for working capital in a business (small, medium - any).
        Those. the barbecue cannot buy meat for the production and sale of barbecue, even if he has the means of production - barbecue.

        The reason for the problem: cheap loans are not available, abroad - due to sanctions, domestically - because of high loan rates (I will not sell barbecue at such a price to include the cost of the loan). Those. there is money inside the country! But to take them off the shelf, you have to pay roughly 30% every year until you return them back.

        Solution: to offer loans within the country, but with interest both abroad.
        That's it!

        Next, the skewer buys meat, hires a waiter, leases a truck, hires a carrier, he brings raw materials and carries barbecue, brings revenue - the economy was replenished with jobs and goods.
        Suppose that he gives kickbacks to the SES and firefighters for the barbecue - the relevant authorities will fight this, but then, when these bodies can be organized and motivated from barbecue taxes. We need to adjust the spinning of the wheel of the economy, and the lubrication of the axis and the elimination of the imbalance will be addressed in the process. Because while the wheel is standing, everyone has nothing to eat!
        1. alicante11
          alicante11 24 December 2015 13: 28
          -5
          Those. the barbecue cannot buy meat for the production and sale of barbecue, even if he has the means of production - barbecue.


          And, perhaps, before starting your own business, first save up money not only for barbecue, but also for meat? Instead of buying barbecue and meat on credit, and then draconian interest should be passed on to buyers and risking ruining and staying with debt on the neck.

          Cause of problem: cheap loans are not available.


          Yes, they already got these loans. They only allow you to raise prices. Because you can not lay out the entire amount, but take in installments / credit. And that means you can lay out more money. Moreover, neither the producer nor the consumer receives this allowance (does not save), and only the bank that credited either the producer or consumer remains in the gain. We have lived, they offer shoes on credit, because prices in stores, not to mention boutiques, are unbearable. Soon we’ll start buying food on credit.

          Solution: to offer loans within the country, but with interest both abroad.
          That's it!


          And who will give you such a loan? The bank must earn on credit. And without banks, how will the loan reach the consumer? Personally, Glazyev will ride and give out grandmas on barbecue? To those who need it (the defense industry, large s / x), cheap money already reaches it. But they are few, they are administered manually. And in order for cheap money to reach Mansur from barbecue, it is necessary to return the Soviet Sberbank, which did not work for profit.

          Next, the skewer buys meat, hires a waiter, leases a truck, hires a carrier, he brings raw materials and carries barbecue, brings revenue - the economy was replenished with jobs and goods.


          And scores all the interest in the price. And we are surprised. why such a barbecue expensive, but sinewy.
          1. Chiropractor
            Chiropractor 24 December 2015 15: 57
            +2
            Quote: alicante11
            And, perhaps, before starting your own business, first save up money not only for barbecue, but also for meat?


            Save up - how? With s / n putting off? It will take 200 years to save ....

            I’ll tell you another secret - even large enterprises, not to mention small ones, do not currently have their own funds for current operations. NO MONEY!
            A profit of 5-10% (that's a lot!) From investments goes to repay loans, expand production, and research and development.

            Quote: alicante11
            draconian interest to shift to buyers

            And to whom?
            The essence of Glazyev’s program is that% should not be draconian!

            Quote: alicante11
            Yes, we already got these loans

            Do not take. Who makes you? Mistress wants a new iPhone?
            And do not confuse installments with credit.

            Quote: alicante11
            Soon we’ll start buying food on credit.

            This is your economic theory. and its validity is worse than Glazyev’s theory.
            Demagogy.

            Quote: alicante11
            To those who need it (defense, large s / x), cheap money already reaches
    3. Hardy
      Hardy 24 December 2015 10: 13
      +4
      Quote: ramzes1776
      Yesterday I read an article on VO "Putin against the" Sect of the Holy Printer "and there were convincing arguments, but only opposite ones. Now I sit and scratch my turnips, I don't know who to believe now.

      Maybe it's time to start thinking yourself?))))
      If from the Russian Federation only officially annually exported by 150 000 000 000 bucks annually, then maybe everything is not so bad here?)))
      We stupidly pay crazy interest for foreign loans. The question is, why is it worse to print your money and not be a debtor in 150 billions? Is that so hard to understand?))))
      1. alicante11
        alicante11 24 December 2015 13: 31
        -2
        If from the Russian Federation only officially annually exported by 150 000 000 000 bucks annually, then maybe everything is not so bad here?)))


        It was nice. It’s worse now.


        We stupidly pay crazy interest for foreign loans. The question is, why is it worse to print your money and not be a debtor in 150 billions? Is that so hard to understand?))))


        For raw materials, agricultural, defense and bankers, money is already without a printing press. Something is paid ... without restructuring. And the rest did not get foreign investments either.
        1. Hardy
          Hardy 24 December 2015 14: 10
          +8
          Quote: alicante11
          For raw materials, agricultural, defense and bankers, money is already without a printing press. Something is paid ... without restructuring. And the rest did not get foreign investments either.

          And in your opinion "rubles" are not foreign investments?))))

          Have you ever read our laws and the Constitution in your life? For particularly lazy, here are a few excerpts with comments:

          The Central Bank carries out monetary emission (Constitution of the Russian Federation, Article 75 paragraphs 1 and 2), functions and powers independently of other public authorities.
          The Central Bank is a private legal entity, i.e. it is not a state bank.
          According to the law, the foreign exchange reserves of the Russian Federation are only managed by a legal entity - the Central Bank of the Russian Federation, which is not liable for obligations and is not subordinate to the government of the Russian Federation.

          Article 6. The Bank of Russia has the right to appeal to the courts in the manner determined by the legislation of the Russian Federation.
          The Bank of Russia is entitled to apply for protection of its interests to international courts, courts of foreign states and arbitration courts.

          Article 7. The Bank of Russia ... issues ... normative acts binding on federal authorities ... and individuals.

          Article 4. The Bank of Russia performs the following functions: ... is the depository of funds of the International Monetary Fund in the currency of the Russian Federation, carries out operations and transactions provided for in the Articles of Agreement of the International Monetary Fund and agreements with the International Monetary Fund.

          I translate into Russian: The Central Bank complies with the instructions of the IMF and issues rubles in an amount not exceeding gold and foreign exchange reserves. That is, the ruble is an ersatz dollar. It differs from a buck in that its rate can be brought down and thereby write off debt obligations of the West. Because the buck does not get cheaper, they pay the same oil, turn it into the national currency and then devalue))) And if the Central Bank has zero bucks in the egg, then we won’t have rubles))) And do not care what the country seems to there are factories, resources ... No guys, and the defense industry, and agricultural is not ours ...
          1. alicante11
            alicante11 24 December 2015 14: 28
            0
            And in your opinion "rubles" are not foreign investments?))))


            Not foreign. The ruble is provided by gold reserves, which are stored not only in bucks, but also in gold. In addition, rubles issued for gold reserves available in the depositor can be reused

            Have you ever read our laws and the Constitution in your life?


            Well, I’m sinful, I like to read laws sometimes, and I even read the constitution completely.
    4. McLuha-MacLeod
      McLuha-MacLeod 24 December 2015 10: 21
      +6
      Yesterday, a murky and vile article was
    5. aleks 62 next
      aleks 62 next 24 December 2015 10: 35
      10
      ..... Yesterday I read an article on VO "Putin against the" Sect of the Holy Printer "and there were convincing arguments, but only opposite ones. Now I sit and scratch my turnips, I don't know who to believe now ...

      .... And you don't scratch your turnips .... What Glazyev offers was quite successfully implemented in Ukraine (Yes, yes !!! in Ukraine) in 2002-2005 ... Then the economic growth was by 2005. 12% .... All the media then predicted the role of the "Eastern Tiger" in Ukraine .... Azarov then and now says that money should work ..... Of course there was inflation, but it lagged behind the real incomes of the population and quite strongly .... So that Glazyev's proposals make sense ... lol
      1. alicante11
        alicante11 24 December 2015 13: 33
        +3
        Azarov then and now says that money should work


        The key word is WORK. Money supply can be replaced by the speed of its turnover. This is the work of money.
    6. nov_tech.vrn
      nov_tech.vrn 24 December 2015 12: 03
      +3
      I read an article against the holy printer, I did not find convincing arguments, the repetition of spells and mantras, as well as stones in the garden of those who disagree, even where you need to ponder, automatically at best sarcasm. The fact that Putin has been represented by the apparatus and how many years it has been led by notorious liberals, I don’t think it’s necessary, the workers of the apparatus are most likely strong professionals, but when they were selected, they were guided by very specific criteria in the economic sphere, advisers, there are clearly adherents of financial and economic block, and Glazyev, he is from the side, and he is still climbing something.
  4. varov14
    varov14 24 December 2015 21: 51
    0
    Yes, talented economists are disappearing, and why is it that the nationality is not the same, the money is not the same, and only projects and licking one place for nothing.
  5. Aleksandr Tot
    Aleksandr Tot 26 December 2015 19: 23
    0
    Igor39, you, of course, are the first on the branch, earned + and regalia on VO. For the sake of sports interest, I keep track of topics-questions-answers in connection with my oddities in the VO.
    I draw your attention to the key phrases - "Also news", "every second knows", "How many" talented "economists ..." - deserve + visitors.
    VO - you are no longer VO, the site is strange.
  • gla172
    gla172 24 December 2015 07: 18
    12
    Glazyev Golov! A smart man, there’s nothing to say here ...
    1. vadgen
      vadgen 24 December 2015 08: 31
      11 th
      Of course, the "head". Just imagine, come to the store, and there the prices have increased by 20 percent, against yesterday they have increased because "the first proposal coming from Sergei Glazyev is to stop holding on to inflation indicators by all means and means" (c). And together we rejoice what Glazyev "head" belay
      1. Chiropractor
        Chiropractor 24 December 2015 13: 45
        +4
        Quote: vadgen
        stop holding on to inflation indicators by all means and means "(c). And together we rejoice at what Glazyev" head


        First of all, did they increase by 20% from figal? The population will not have excess money supply, all the money will be spent by business enterprises ...

        Secondly, the Central Bank of the Russian Federation has not been able to cope with the retention of inflation or the retention of the ruble for the second year already. In fact, the Central Bank of the Russian Federation (monetary power in Russia, but not Russia - for those who understand) has already scored inflation - he can do nothing with it, because it is not monetary, but systemic! So why make a garden? When the dam is broken - you can only target the level of water rise. A new dam needs to be built ...
      2. Lexus
        Lexus 25 December 2015 20: 47
        0
        Inflation is also formed by the interest rate.
    2. My address
      My address 24 December 2015 08: 34
      -6
      hi, Dear Sergey!
      Yes, smart, but unprincipled.

      For how many years he has been repeating his proposals, the efficiency of which more than half cannot be denied The authorities are not trying not only to refute, but also to try. It is impossible to refute, but it's scary to try - because it will work out!
      And his lack of principle is that he does not scream about it. Do not want to slam the door. Well, how can you be an adviser, get big money and see that your advice is not needed? How can you not respect yourself?

      For me, the eyes are like Zyuganov. I support the views of both. But I do not respect both.
      1. serezhasoldatow
        serezhasoldatow 24 December 2015 09: 21
        +3
        In the USSR, torture was carried out over mice, and in the Russian Federation over citizens. No experiments needed, experienced people needed.
      2. Volzhanin
        Volzhanin 24 December 2015 12: 38
        +5
        Under Glazyev’s program, it’s necessary to change the legislation a little - and this means spitting mericosia in the face, not even spitting, but giving in the face. And to the shit! smile
    3. serezhasoldatow
      serezhasoldatow 24 December 2015 09: 20
      0
      "Brian's head!"
    4. guzik007
      guzik007 24 December 2015 09: 41
      +8
      Glazyev Golov! A smart man, there’s nothing to say here ...
      ------------------------------------------------
      Glazyev is ours, unfortunately,
      truthful buffoon with the king.
      They rule the opinion of the king,
      red demons, but in vain ...

      Oh how! struck poetry ...: = _
    5. severbob
      severbob 26 December 2015 18: 11
      0
      why didn’t he name a single family name?
  • Kostya Andreev
    Kostya Andreev 24 December 2015 07: 18
    +5
    Glazyev is cool, Correctly says. Movement is life, and we stomp on the spot, and do not learn from mistakes.
  • chikenous59
    chikenous59 24 December 2015 07: 23
    +6
    Yesterday, there was an article stating that Glazyev offers things that could harm the economy, namely, pumping up the economy with money. Dozens of experts on the site were directly disappointed in Glazyev, and today they applaud him again.
    Tomorrow some article will come out again with nice words, justifications that the economy cannot be pumped up with money, and our experts from VO will applaud the author for the clever idea and say that Glazyev is wrong.
    Maybe then it’s easier not to have a debate about who is right, Glazyev or everyone else?
    1. venaya
      venaya 24 December 2015 07: 51
      +7
      Personally, I immediately wrote that I did not understand yesterday’s article - a constant compilation of events, and without any serious justification. But the opinions in the articles must be presented different, almost mutually opposed, otherwise it is not useful to understand which of the authors is right or wrong, and what exactly, it is useful for a more complete understanding of economic processes.
    2. Alexander Romanov
      Alexander Romanov 24 December 2015 07: 52
      0
      Quote: chikenous59
      . Dozens of experts on the site were directly disappointed in Glazyev, and today they applaud him again.

      wassat Tomorrow Glazyev will be cheated again and these same experts will throw him with slops laughing
      1. venaya
        venaya 24 December 2015 07: 57
        +1
        Quote: Alexander Romanov
        Tomorrow Glazyev will be cheated again and these same experts will throw him with slops

        So it’s useful - truth is born in a dispute.
        1. Cube123
          Cube123 24 December 2015 11: 39
          +1
          Quote: venaya

          So it’s useful - truth is born in a dispute.

          In economics, you need to count, not argue. Without calculations, everything is there: "empty words".
          1. Chiropractor
            Chiropractor 24 December 2015 15: 22
            0
            Quote: Cube123
            In economics, one must consider, not argue.


            It is necessary to consider in accounting.

            Maybe I’ll upset one of you, but economics is the only science in which people can get a Nobel for opposing theories!

            There is never and never will be a single true economic theory. Each theory is 100% suitable only for each specific country in a particular period.
            1. Cube123
              Cube123 24 December 2015 16: 27
              +1
              Quote: Kostoprav

              There is never and never will be a single true economic theory. Each theory is 100% suitable only for each specific country in a particular period.

              For this you need to count. Is this model suitable for our particular country for this particular period? Without calculations, it will definitely turn out: "We wanted the best, but it turned out - as always." There are no options here. It's like in technology, if an airplane has turned out on paper, perhaps it will turn out in hardware. If it doesn't work out on paper, it won't fly in hardware.
              Try to create and promote a serious company without creating business plans and business models. And making the economy of the State work is a more complicated task.
              1. venaya
                venaya 24 December 2015 17: 02
                0
                Quote: Cube123
                To do this, you need to consider ... There are no options here ...

                In fact, Academician Glazyev does not look ignoramus at all, given the fact that his concept is supported by other leading experts as well, and from various areas of science. And it can be considered a car, the exact same one that you are currently using. The problem itself is not in the calculations, but in their methods, and these methods should be taken into account by very, very many circumstances that are simply not accessible to a machine or a simple bookkeeper, due to insufficient knowledge in many areas of science necessary in this case. Not just all of this, the primitivistic approach will not work here, not everyone can access such complicated estimates, highly skilled specialists in their field should be respected.
                1. Cube123
                  Cube123 25 December 2015 13: 48
                  +2
                  Quote: venaya
                  Quote: Cube123
                  To do this, you need to consider ... There are no options here ...

                  In fact, Academician Glazyev does not look ignoramus at all

                  Nobody said that Glazyev was ignorant. But, as Kozma Prutkov said: "A specialist is like a flux. Its completeness is one-sided."

                  The state is not limited only to the economy. For example, costs not defense directly contradict the canons of the economy. And there are also social programs, international relations, ensuring internal stability, providing the population with food and water, minimizing environmental damage, educating the younger generation, providing the elderly and much, much more. All these are conflicts of interests and the task of a politician to ensure stable and harmonious development of the entire State, and not its individual parts. This can only be reduced to economics.

                  Therefore, Glazyev may be a thousand times right from the point of view of the economy, but the conditions of the country may not allow to begin the implementation of these ideas at this particular time.

                  Not to mention the fact that the economy is not a "spherical horse in a vacuum", but the possibility of finding the optimal solution to applied practical problems in conditions of limited resources. But the optimal solution just means that for different conditions and different planning horizons, the optimal solutions will be different. In fact, the task is to maximize the positive effect while minimizing the inevitable collateral damage. At the same time, the admissibility of various damage can also be assessed in different ways. And the damage from unverified experiments on living people can be enormous. The amount of responsibility for a mistake is very high.
              2. Chiropractor
                Chiropractor 25 December 2015 12: 24
                +1
                Quote: Cube123
                This is what you need to consider.


                To count, you need to know what and how to count.
                Medvedev counted - everything is normal with us, but pensions are not indexed, the NWF is losing weight .... Do you like how he counted?

                Glazyev counted - and then it started - "no-no-no, he didn't count a fig, he just blurted out something and repeated it nine more times in 8 years." Guys, if we don't like how Medvedev thinks, can we still try to check as Glazyev counted? Well, where else is worse? He does not believe that everything should be sold / privatized to foreigners, he simply believes that people who want to work should be given start-up capital for a while in the form of a loan, and these people should be separated from those who want to speculate.
      2. Victor Demchenko
        Victor Demchenko 24 December 2015 20: 17
        0
        Sanya, they will tell how you express yourself those who have cereal instead of brains! the thinker will think first and ... is unlikely to cheat. what
    3. nov_tech.vrn
      nov_tech.vrn 24 December 2015 12: 28
      +6
      no one wants to look a little more carefully, everyone rushed to discuss, he said, she said, the meaning of Glazyev's proposals, not just to pump up (well, or as they like to say, print money, print cash just no one will print), the Russian economy, according to all the canons, it is experiencing a severe money hunger, in the turnover of funds, about 30% of the required amount !!!, according to the classics of economics, the required money is determined not by the number of colorful foreign candy wrappers imported for our quite material resources taken out abroad, but by the market volume and speed turnover of funds in it. Long money, they are at a low turnover rate, and the mass of money does not raise so much and should be tied up - for the construction of a bridge, plant, road, and banks should not receive them, they should go for their intended purpose, and then bankers will not be able to spin them for speculation and confiscation, against which there should be so much objection, if necessary, and real terms, that's why the whole establishment is against it. (the powers to which the "economic gurus" refer to at least 70% of the required amount in circulation, here they are stupidly type as much as necessary. Those who wish can google).
  • worldofpain
    worldofpain 24 December 2015 07: 25
    +6
    I fully support Glazyev, although underwater economic trends require more serious discussions.
  • zekaze1980
    zekaze1980 24 December 2015 07: 27
    +4
    Glazyev may be right, but for all such conversations over the course of 25 years, another opinion developed another chatter.
    If you are so sure of the correctness of the words, you need to fight so, fight for your cause, because you are almost with the president himself. and if you only cry in an interview with reporters, you’re worthless to such advisers.
  • Reinau
    Reinau 24 December 2015 07: 28
    11
    Many smart people who are university professors with whom I spoke consider Glazyev to be a smart and intelligent professional. You probably, dear readers, have not noticed, but in our press, and especially on television, there has been a harassment and ridicule of Glazyev for a long time. Now ask yourself, why? sad
    1. tasha
      tasha 24 December 2015 07: 53
      +4
      Oh, these teachers ...

      I'm not even an economist at all. About 20 trillion is in deposits at banks with the population. rubles. 20 000 000 000 000. The same banks, of course, are much more profitable to use them on speculation with the currency, securities. It’s just that they won’t live otherwise, they will not be able to show attractive interest rates.
      For example, through special government agencies, those people who are "ready to work for the development of the economy" were given a certain amount of money at a low interest rate for a long time. (By the way, you can now get these through various municipal, regional funds, subsidy programs. But spend a lot of nerves. But you can ...).
      So this ermine pile of money will creep into hands anyway. For example, I bought a machine tool, the machine manufacturer spent part of it on raw materials for a new machine, part part was given to workers. The worker has spent this money, demand has risen, prices have risen .. What will the deposit holders tell you?

      Question. Why, then, money from deposits does not go directly to production. Through the same stock, for example? Why should there be an intermediary? Carry out such an experiment. Ask someone you know for money for your own business, write him a registered share, and the yield is how it goes, there are risks. Where will he send you?

      Mortgage, for example. State money goes on a mortgage. How much noise because of the same mortgage? Overwhelming, bondage, slavery. Who argues. Here's another question. I have a young specialist with a mortgage. So take me less taxes on the amount of his mortgage payments. And I will pay this money for it for a mortgage. Good? Good .. And no intermediaries.
      1. guzik007
        guzik007 24 December 2015 09: 49
        +3
        I'm not even an economist at all. Deposits in banks with the population are about 20 trillion. rubles. 20.
        -----------------------------------
        Feverishly tormenting the calculator .... Oooh !!! where are my 128 million !! where is this contribution! Oh my damn sclerosis !!
        Yeah .. You're not an economist at all, my friend.
        1. tasha
          tasha 24 December 2015 16: 11
          0
          Does the number of zeros introduce you into such ecstasy or is the process of tormenting the calculator? Judging by the number of comments, tormenting the keyboard for you is also a difficult process. The quality of the comments is lame, though.

          However, judging by the number of those who supported you, you are not alone .. I was probably in a hurry with this answer for you. It was necessary to observe more. A number of real economists would have known. wink
      2. Volzhanin
        Volzhanin 24 December 2015 12: 41
        +1
        Ha. Yeah. Only our banking system was built by the merikos - it is their flesh from the flesh. Findings? smile
  • Great-grandfather of Zeus
    Great-grandfather of Zeus 24 December 2015 07: 33
    +6
    Glazyev then speaks correctly and offers everything sensibly, but ... those to whom his statements are directed by liberals to the marrow of the bones, and obviously do not intend to change anything in the current state of things.
    1. cap
      cap 24 December 2015 09: 19
      0
      Quote: Reinau
      Many smart people who are university professors with whom I spoke consider Glazyev to be a smart and intelligent professional. You probably, dear readers, have not noticed, but in our press, and especially on television, there has been a harassment and ridicule of Glazyev for a long time. Now ask yourself, why? sad

      Quote: Great-grandfather of Zeus
      Glazyev then speaks correctly and offers everything sensibly, but ... those to whom his statements are directed by liberals to the marrow of the bones, and obviously do not intend to change anything in the current state of things.

      I agree, officially there are no rebuttals from economists.
      They discuss only paid journalists, or experts (many who received an "additional diploma" over the hill), who saw the machine in the picture. Who pays? Thieves and oligarchs who are happy with everything. The so-called "Elites", who became such on the principle of "rags to riches." They buy titles, orders, but everyone wants to be buried in Paris and London. "Russianness" is only surnames and even then not always, and not for everyone.
      Really, who is against. Convince, by reference to competent criticism of Glazyev. hi .
  • rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 24 December 2015 07: 41
    +5
    Sergei Glazyev’s initiatives will continue to be openly ignored

    Because he does not fit into their system with his proposals. And in vain they do not listen, and even more so ignore it. But here the principle is not only corporatism, but also eternal - I sit higher, so I know better.
  • Riv
    Riv 24 December 2015 07: 47
    0
    Yeah ... And if Glazyev ruled Germany, then Berlin would still hold on :)

    His proposals cannot be realized without a rigid controlling system of a socialist type. And if it is introduced, then Glazyev himself will head the column of people going to clear the taiga. Together with Kudrin.
    1. serezhasoldatow
      serezhasoldatow 24 December 2015 09: 25
      0
      Pretty realistic look at the article. I am joining.
  • parusnik
    parusnik 24 December 2015 07: 51
    12
    I will express sedition .. The trouble is that there is no one to accelerate the economy according to the advice of Glazyev .. It is necessary to abandon kickbacks, machinations, parmesan and jamon, and who refuses .. this applies to the majority of the management team from the very top to the bottom .. For all branches I will not say ... but I speak for my ... The work of our enterprise, federal and state, I can describe as follows ..: "Around the state enterprise" Hercules ", a lot of joint-stock companies were fed" ...
  • asiat_61
    asiat_61 24 December 2015 07: 52
    11
    Everything that Glazyev offers has already been used by Primakov and Gerashchenko. Industry growth is 20% in 8 months. But with such a system it’s difficult to steal, so they will slow down and water Glazyev with dirt. The guarantor said that the Central Bank, well, works very well, so no jump I don’t expect a jerk.
  • Military Builder
    Military Builder 24 December 2015 08: 01
    +9
    Quote: Reinau
    You probably, dear readers, have not noticed, but in our press, and especially on television, there has been a harassment and ridicule of Glazyev for a long time.


    as M. Zadornov said: "If a person is scolded in the media and the government, a good person will read it out"
  • Russian Uzbek
    Russian Uzbek 24 December 2015 08: 10
    +9
    everything has its time! Academician Glazyev’s time has not come yet ... when the oil drops below 20, then Glazyev’s time will come
    1. Stirbjorn
      Stirbjorn 24 December 2015 13: 02
      +1
      Alas, it looks like we’ll stretch a couple more years hi
  • Gray 43
    Gray 43 24 December 2015 08: 28
    +2
    My acquaintance has a small business, he wanted to take a million rubles for development, they told him in the bank that he must return this loan in a year or so, in the wildest conditions, especially in the current economic situation, so he spat, and for the population loans with space interest at a rate, although the doughs are thrown to the banks by wagons, but they don’t go further, they don’t work, and therefore it remains to pray for oil quotes
  • vladimirvn
    vladimirvn 24 December 2015 08: 34
    +1

    Let everyone, will do his own thing.

    The trouble is, if the cobbler starts the cakes,
    And the boots stitch the pastry,
    And things won’t work out.
    Yes, and a hundredfold
    What who loves to take someone else’s craft,
    He forever others stubborn and foolish:
    It’s better to ruin everything,
    And glad soon
    The laughing stock of becoming light
    Than honest and knowledgeable people
    Ask il to listen to reasonable advice.

    From the fable “Pike and the Cat” (1813) by I. A. Krylov (1769-1844)
  • Belousov
    Belousov 24 December 2015 08: 40
    +6
    Glazyev’s advice is aimed at the welfare of Russia, which does not fit into the tasks of the liberal economic block of the government. The question here is the truth in another way - the activities of the Central Bank and economists, the government is openly aimed at the collapse of the country and the pursuit of the economy, education, health. But at the same time, Putin constantly endorses this government course ...
  • ibu355yandex.ru
    ibu355yandex.ru 24 December 2015 08: 47
    +6
    Glazyev is wrong, our government liberals say. He does not know what he is talking about.
    Some Siluanovs and Ulyukaevs all know everything, only they cannot say anything clearly. Already the Chinese have openly told us everything they think about our government and their bright leader, DAM. And we do not care, we believe in our cause, mixed up on American interests ...
    And until it all continues?
  • Million
    Million 24 December 2015 08: 51
    +4
    We now have what we have. Based on these indicators, we can evaluate the work of the government and the president
  • chikenous59
    chikenous59 24 December 2015 08: 52
    +2
    Quote: venaya
    Quote: Alexander Romanov
    Tomorrow Glazyev will be cheated again and these same experts will throw him with slops

    So it’s useful - truth is born in a dispute.

    When experienced experts argue, yes. And when ordinary citizens argue, the sense of it is like a goat's milk.
    1. venaya
      venaya 24 December 2015 09: 04
      +3
      Quote: chikenous59
      When experienced experts argue, yes

      Yes, turn on the TV, there are very experienced arguing and not very poorly paid "experts"- I assure you, there is much less sense from the dispute of these undoubted professionals, since they are simply paid.
  • Stalnov I.P.
    Stalnov I.P. 24 December 2015 08: 55
    +4
    If we proceed from the postulate about the role of the individual in history and historically established notions that the role of the first person in our state is usually higher than in other states, our history confirms this, we get the following, all the proposals of Glazyev and other NORMAL economists, politicians and specialists first the face of the state simply does not want to HEAR, that’s the whole answer, there’s nothing to say about professionalism, a complete lack of knowledge of the development of the national economic complex in all its spheres, the economy as a whole, the lack of strategic thinking and planning, and most importantly POLITICAL WILL. I’ll add, because they also spoke about this vicious economic policy in the 90s and 2000s, here is the confirmation that for more than 20 years you could hear, see, change this policy, the presence of criminal persons in the environment of the gdp and government The Gaidar-Chubas-Kudrin clan only confirms that they DO NOT HEAR US, they only know how to divide and saw, create, create, and multiply, their mind is simply not enough and its eyes are sealed with a green piece of paper.
  • Severodvinsk
    Severodvinsk 24 December 2015 08: 56
    +2
    Let's put it in order, inflation cannot be less than the interest rate
    The ruble is a reflection of the dollar (so we are all waiting for foreign investors to print rubles in their currency later)
    This works for all countries, but for some reason we don’t (it is not clear)
    We have less rubles in the economy than other currencies (not a ruble country at all)
    And a lot of things, such as a ban on lending to the Central Bank of the Russian economy, an incomprehensible eagle on rubles (coat of arms of the interim government) and much more
  • What a
    What a 24 December 2015 09: 05
    -1
    Sergei Glazyev, who, for a second, is an adviser to the president of Russia - what kind of adviser is this on which the president is side by side. It would be better not to disgrace leaned into a normal opposition.
  • 31rus
    31rus 24 December 2015 09: 23
    +2
    Dear, in my opinion, both the government and Glazyev are just fooling our heads, here, like in the Duma, here is the opinion of the government, but the opinion of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation and the Liberal Democratic Party, and the result is only one crisis, all the hope for investments that are not foreseen, hence the bonds and the sale of balances state property, although we believe the US policy towards Russia is not constructive, but in my opinion they have found our weak spot and I am sure they will hit precisely the economy, through sanctions, through military conflicts, through political isolation (for example, negotiations with the EU), and supporters of Russia , so there are either new elections (Argentina), or head-ons (Brazil), but Russia is attracted to different negotiations, but this is just "use"
  • nekromonger
    nekromonger 24 December 2015 09: 24
    +4
    while yasin, grefs, etc., teach everyone's mind we will wait for oil at 100. they do not need the real sector.
  • voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 24 December 2015 09: 37
    +4
    I must admit that President Putin is, in principle, not
    likes (and never loved) to engage in economic
    questions. Neither in good years nor in difficult ones.
    His principle: "somehow it will resolve itself ... it cannot be
    bad for a long time ... something will happen and the situation will change for the better ... "
    When he started out, he set out to create an "economic superpower."
    With rising commodity prices, the course seemed right ...
    1. tveritianin
      tveritianin 24 December 2015 09: 51
      +4
      I agree. He does not like to deal with internal problems, and advisers from the Government will do everything to make it their way. That's why we live.
      Having worked at school for 30 years, my wife receives a pension of about 8000 rubles, the teacher at school a little more than 12-14 thousand. And remember the numbers that the first persons of the state call in their public appearances!
      1. alicante11
        alicante11 24 December 2015 13: 42
        +1
        And remember the numbers that are called by the first persons of the state in their public speeches!


        Well, 2 bets, plus off-budget, so it runs. True, you will not want to live after all this. But who promised that under capitalism we will live? Under capitalism, we will WORK to the grave. And not GDP invented this order. Although he supports him.
    2. alicante11
      alicante11 24 December 2015 13: 40
      0
      I must admit that President Putin is, in principle, not
      likes (and never loved) to engage in economic
      questions.


      Well, if he didn’t love, then he picked up assistants who loved. Simplification alone has done more for small business than all the howls of economic gurus. And it appeared after the arrival of GDP.
      Incidentally, the tax maneuver is also a good invention. For the state, of course.
  • Alexander S.
    Alexander S. 24 December 2015 09: 42
    +5
    I talked with a friend. In a large bank it works. He concluded that a complete liquidation of the entire banking system was needed. And leave only one state bank. For private banks (Sberbank and VTB - also private traders .. we’re not forgetting) will never and under no circumstances mass lend to industry. They rely on quick profits. This topic has gotten into their subcortex. And industry gives it in many years. This does not suit them. And no bets will help.
    1. alicante11
      alicante11 24 December 2015 13: 44
      0
      He concluded that a complete liquidation of the entire banking system was needed. And leave only one state bank


      Strongly looks like a "scoop". Then, was there any point in destroying the Union and stirring up capitalism, if we now come to such conclusions? Or do we only learn from our mistakes?
  • afrikanez
    afrikanez 24 December 2015 09: 50
    +3
    Even if Glazyev’s proposals are accepted, then who will fulfill all this? If the same people who are now engaged in the Russian economy, then we can’t see any rise as our own ears. Sad but true!
  • trophy
    trophy 24 December 2015 10: 14
    +2
    quote: "There is an opinion that the initiatives of Sergei Glazyev will continue to be openly ignored, if only for the reason that the economic helm of the state is held by persons named by the notorious Mr. Khodorkovsky people ...". Here I disagree. As a matter of fact, why does the author think that only economic. Such a situation as now in the State is possible only in the case of coordinated actions of all branches of government, both legislative and executive and judicial. One mafia with the same goals and attitude towards the citizens of their country. Saliters are the most appropriate term.
  • moskowit
    moskowit 24 December 2015 10: 15
    +3
    I don’t know, I don’t know. Sergei Glazyev says, weighed, correctly. But we can all philosophize from the outside. Why are they not allowed to manage the real sector? And they don't, because they are not a member of a "group" in which people do not allow the inclusion of new faces, but move horizontally; Golikova, Medvedev, etc.
    And so, of course, he’s right ...

    "... it is foolish to pay attention to the twitching from the outside, for example, of the IMF, whose tasks include anything you want, but not real economic growth in Russia ..."
  • wertin
    wertin 24 December 2015 10: 17
    -3
    I don’t know, maybe Glazyev is right, but maybe not. But all such interviews are very reminiscent of the famous talk about New Vasyuki.
  • Skalpel
    Skalpel 24 December 2015 10: 26
    +3
    [quote = parusnik] Around the state enterprise "Hercules", a lot of joint stock companies were feeding "..
    I absolutely support it - since the times described by Ilf and Petrov, little has changed in the methods of management and doing business in the Russian Federation. There is a layer of "stuck" at the "trough" of power, which is absolutely not profitable for the transparency of business processes. As long as our economy is raw and speculative - what the heck is REAL growth?
    And in relation to GDP to economic and social policy issues, "noble fatigue" has long been visible ... he is tired of them. Not interested..
  • Dimon-chik-79
    Dimon-chik-79 24 December 2015 10: 44
    +9
    Quote: Russian Uzbek
    everything has its time! Academician Glazyev’s time has not come yet ... when the oil drops below 20, then Glazyev’s time will come

    As when the time came for Primakov and Gerashchenko. Then the same was the crisis to which we were led by this entire liberalistic "Gaidar circle", which ruined the country's economy. And when the economy was pulled out of that abyss, they quickly got rid of Primakov and Gerashchenko. Here, and oil has risen in price very by the way, only know the grandmother rake in and drank what the liberals have been doing to this day. What the twenty-five-year rule of the country's economy by the liberals turned out to be, how they have been modernizing and pulling the country off the oil needle all this time, we all feel now on our own skin. And the most interesting thing is that they cannot clearly answer a simple question - why did they not do all this before! What prevented them from doing their job all this time! In general, what confidence can there be in them ...
    Quote: Kostya Andrei
    Glazyev is cool, Correctly says. Movement is life, and we stomp on the spot, and do not learn from mistakes.
  • Boris55
    Boris55 24 December 2015 11: 01
    -4
    "Everyone expects from Putin some radical measures to reform the economy, but they will not be. Because there is a time and place for all things under the sky, including financial reforms. And on the eve of the resetting of the world economy, arrange perestroika at home - like death. " Completely: http://79.120.77.163/klin/page.php?id=461
    1. cap
      cap 24 December 2015 12: 46
      +1
      Quote: Boris55
      "Everyone expects from Putin some radical measures to reform the economy, but they will not be. Because there is a time and place for all things under the sky, including financial reforms. And on the eve of the resetting of the world economy, arrange perestroika at home - like death. " Completely: http://79.120.77.163/klin/page.php?id=461

      I followed the link and read the following:
      Incidentally, this leads to a somewhat paradoxical conclusion: there are no liberals in the Russian government. Under these specific conditions, they simply cannot be there. They will not survive. They will not be able to make tough decisions aimed at both stabilizing finances within Russia and keeping it in the world system.

      Then what does Nabiullina have to do with it? And despite the fact that the Central Bank is part of a common team. Like Medvedev. Like Ulyukaev. And Siluanov, Gref and other financiers. And, no matter what the angry “patriots” send to the Internet, this team works only and always for the interests of the country.
      Here you will have such a peacock-mawlin.
      Author - Julia Brazhnikova
      My question is what kind of fee they pay for such a brilliant rubbish. This is generally about the article. hi
      1. Boris55
        Boris55 24 December 2015 13: 36
        +1
        What made you so excited? This:

        Quote: cap
        ... there are no liberals in the Russian government ...

        or that?

        Quote: cap
        ... this team works only and always for the interests of the country ...

        First. It depends on who sweat what is meant by the term "liberal".
        On the second. They really work for the interests of the country in which they are - the bar and all the rest - slaves.
  • kirgudu
    kirgudu 24 December 2015 12: 22
    +1
    Glazyev is used as a scarecrow for liberals. And no other way.
  • Volzhanin
    Volzhanin 24 December 2015 12: 24
    +8
    However, our president said that the government and the Central Bank are doing everything right, and Glazyev’s opinion does not bother anyone.
    It is strange of course, if he had stated the opposite, then the question immediately arises for him - and why the hell are you holding these dolgolom? Nobody will tell us the whole truth - for this, the authorities receive a selective negative from the people.

    There was an article recently on the site, where another "smart guy" was proving with figures that the Central Bank is leading us on the right path, and well done in the government, and Glazyev is down.
    Only Glazyev’s opinion and argument sound an order of magnitude more convincing ...
    What can I say - the walker has already said everything: at the economic helm of the state are people "with whom it would be possible to fully work in the new Russia", collaborators and traitors.
  • Watson J.
    Watson J. 24 December 2015 12: 38
    0
    Guys, let's turn on the logic. Calmly, step by step, without instant sporadic reactions.
    1. "Democracy" will not be. At least during our lives for sure. The main thing - there is no sponsor. I hope this is clear. There will be frenzied capitalism in third world countries. Those. what we have now. Let's try to talk about how to change this.
    2. There is no one to change the system, there is no strength (money). So, we must try to change it, going beyond the existing system. In another way, just nothing. How to make central power independent of system capitalists?
    3. Only one idea comes to my mind - to make Putin an absolute monarch. Do not rush to throw rotten tomatoes, I myself do not believe that this can be crammed, but it seems to me that there is simply no other way to break the vicious dependence of the authorities on capital.

    Currently, GDP is essentially temporarily in office, isn't it? And after all conceivable and unimaginable periods have passed, he must remain in the "system." So, there will be no gestures against red Judas. But IF he will be there forever ... Moreover, we will protect him ... And if he knows that after leaving his inheritance will not be shares in offshore, but the state ... And that not a single redhead can throw him for the law on execution for theft state property ... Think about it. The monarch, in principle, can be independent of the desires of the capitalists. Armies and special services subordinate to the monarch, and checks on the detector. For security. And let him spawn more male heirs so that the thought of destroying makes no sense. ANY person thinks about what he will leave behind his descendants. Here is the state. The approach to solving problems will change. Thoughts will not be about how to strengthen the cooperative "Lake", but about how to strengthen the state, which will go to the children.

    Of course, there are a lot of problems, this is just an assumption. Of course, corruption will remain. But no matter how much I reflect, problems find a solution. By analogy with the previously existing rules for dismissal from the army with the deprivation of military pensions. Stealing at the civil service - you lose state pension (in addition to judicial punishment). If the official will have a sword of Damocles depriving him of all rights of his fortune, pension, and the possibility of receiving a salary from the state for life, he will think a thousand times before stealing. This is in addition to the firing point for theft. Many letters.

    In short, the main idea is. The idea of ​​choosing a ruler for a certain period always seemed absurd to me. Like, for, they steered, 4 (6) years, let's see what happens, maybe once again let us steer. Or let’s give another try. There is little logic, if not to say that it is absent. No one will give advice to revive, it is a given. The constitutional monarchy in this case looks like a more logical form of government. All controversial issues can be finalized, the highest decision-making body also exists on paper - the Supreme Synod, which is also independent of the will of the Rottenbergs and others, they have their own brewing. But we get at the helm of human capital independent of power.

    In the constitutional monarchy, I see only two, well, three serious negative factors. This is a weak monarch, non-fulfillment of the constitution by the monarchist branch and a monarchist coup. But this, too, can be provided for in the constitution and everyone is obligated to abide by it. Since childhood, the monarchist branch has been preparing to govern the state and is receiving the appropriate education, which is also important. We need not homegrown temporary workers, but people who have been trained in this difficult craft since childhood.

    Legally restore the monarchy once to spit. And by the way, again an interesting thought. Imagine that Karl Marx is right, and socialism inevitably comes after imperialism. Enlightened monarch may well transfer power to the Soviets without revolution (Well, there is a chance). But the capitalists will never give up power to the Soviets ever.
    1. cap
      cap 24 December 2015 12: 53
      +1
      Quote: Watson J.
      Legally restore the monarchy once to spit. And by the way, again an interesting thought. Imagine that Karl Marx is right, and socialism inevitably comes after imperialism. Enlightened monarch may well transfer power to the Soviets without revolution (Well, there is a chance). But the capitalists will never give up power to the Soviets ever.

      Read only the rest of the reasoning selected, quite true + hi
      1. cap
        cap 24 December 2015 13: 37
        +1
        Here is an expert on Glazyev? And on the eve of the resetting of the world economy, arranging perestroika at home is like death. "Completely: http://79.120.77.163/klin/page.php?id=461
  • 3vs
    3vs 24 December 2015 13: 27
    -3
    I would recommend to the moderators for this article to post fresh from the notorious
    crimsonalter titled: Putin against the "Saint Printer Sect".

    Reasonedly!

    They say that there is nothing stronger than “an idea whose time has come”. It turns out that Putin is stronger and that he is able to overcome even the idea that has mastered the broad sectors of the Russian political and economic elite. Roughly speaking, officials, bankers and businessmen want to get access to a ruble printer and scribble freshly printed rubles in their pockets, waving slogans about reviving the economy and freeing the country from the bondage of dollar dependence. Putin did a terrible thing: he clearly stated on the air and in front of the whole country that no one would receive the keys to the money printer, and those who want to get cheap money should not “shake at the Central Bank”, but work to reduce inflation.

    The importance of this action by the president can hardly be overestimated, since in recent months the idea of ​​"printing and distributing to whomever" has taken possession of the minds of various elites. In addition to the Glazyev's report, already analyzed by the author of these lines, the same ideas penetrated not only the joint proposals of the self-proclaimed liberals of the Stolypin Club, but also the program of the “liberal platform of the United Russia party”.

    View in full: http://politrussia.com/ekonomika/putin-protiv-sekty-895/
    1. cap
      cap 24 December 2015 14: 25
      -1
      crimson alter-This is the author of the article that is being proposed to read.
      Hiding your name under a nickname, is it easier to get away from questions?
      The author’s tactics are called shadow boxing.
      One critic musician, crimson alter- will be? ..... this is already an intrigue.
      Time will tell who is right. Will we discuss or not. Everything is decided in heaven. Happy New Year! hi
    2. tasha
      tasha 24 December 2015 19: 36
      0
      And another article by the same author (crimson alter)

      http://politrussia.com/ekonomika/budushchee-rossiyskoy-ekonomiki-414/

      Plus I give an excerpt from the blog of LJ user kroshka-cat from 18 on September 2015 regarding the report of S. Glazyev.

      ***

      And exactly excited. Liberators staged a falling hysteria over the torn pieces on the economic theme; urapatriots immediately mobilized and began to bow to the academician in the style of "I did not read / read the report, I didn’t understand / read anything, I didn’t understand anything, but not a pro in economics, but Glazyev’s head! Patriot! Opposes liberals!"

      I.e. The leak of the report and the subsequent publication did not provoke a substantive discussion among professionals, first of all, but swarms in the people. At the same time, again I draw your attention, the report touches on such a wide range that no citizen alone can in principle evaluate it professionally. Whatever practical experience and education with scientific degrees, he did not have on a specific issue.

      Is the delimitation of the electorate before the elections does it seem so called? You are against Glazyev = liberalist; you are for Glazyev = statesman patriot.

      ***
  • vladimirvn
    vladimirvn 24 December 2015 13: 31
    +1
    If the state does not need anything from you, then you have nothing
  • rJIiOK
    rJIiOK 24 December 2015 13: 47
    +3
    Scold Glazyev - pluses under the article
    Praise Glazyev - pluses under the article

    Hitler will praise tomorrow - again there will be pluses under the article. Guys, well, what’s like a herd, determine your opinion.
  • iouris
    iouris 24 December 2015 14: 36
    +3
    Glazyev is a point of view, an advisor whose advice no one needs. The system needs the Glazyevs just as the forbidden Communist Party was. The revived KPRF is not a communist party, just as the LDPR is not liberal. The Communist Party of Ukraine, even after the fascist oligarchic coup, tried to integrate into the system and participated "in the elections." So what?
  • Ostrovnoy
    Ostrovnoy 24 December 2015 15: 11
    0
    bucks need to be printed, not rubles
  • kazachyok69
    kazachyok69 24 December 2015 16: 22
    +6
    What tips? Yes, such advisers are a dime a dozen .. No advice to the GDP and his associates is needed .. In the country, to put it mildly, something incomprehensible .. Then the Leader refers to the USSR, the TRP .... but what, the USSR asks? When it comes to Bubble about the USSR, the Power forgets ... "Qualified managers cannot work for little money!" Who are they? Sechin, Miller, Yakunin and others? What are their qualifications except as an old friend of Putin ... In my opinion, everything goes to hell .. For there can be no economic recovery with a constant increase in taxes and energy prices inside the country ... Everyone says about gasoline, that it is so expensive ? And right there, in the world SO! At the same time, they talk about settlements in rubles .. Some kind of nonsense .. And Electricity? Next year, an increase of 11% + will make the population pay for networks! Gentlemen, comrades, do you understand that it is Putin's government that he fully supports doing? In my opinion, the population was finally decided to rip off! In China (Wholesale) we sell kW for 1,5 rubles .... at the wholesale market the price is about the same ... generation costs an average of 1 rubles across the country. We pay 3,5 rubles now. There are no networks in the tariff? Do you have to pay for them? And then do not tell me, who will have extra profit for 4 rubles without the "networks" that we will pay for kW next year?
  • tacet
    tacet 24 December 2015 16: 22
    0
    I'm not a big expert in economics. This article gave the impression of a growing undercover struggle in the government's economic bloc. All the same, the adviser to the president cannot but have an influence on the decisions of the government and sl-but part of his recommendations should be implemented (declared at least) into reality. In this case, Mr. Glazyev says what the "electorate" wants to hear, as if declaring on negative points "I have nothing to do with it! I warned you!" In general, populism breathed.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Neophyte
    Neophyte 24 December 2015 17: 44
    +3
    Today, the president praised the work of the government? Here is the answer to the problems!
    GDP has long come under the influence of Kudrin’s students and is apparently afraid of change?
  • Signaller
    Signaller 24 December 2015 18: 22
    +2
    Here I am reading this article, probably already the tenth, and I don’t understand one. Everyone knows how to heal and why. That our banking system, led by the Central Bank, is a usurious system. But there are no real actions and will not be foreseen in the near future. Why????? Fox opinion. GDP is busy with foreign policy, but his hands do not reach his native land. Today one meeting with the Indian leadership, tomorrow with another. And so every day. An analogy suggests itself with a wonderful verse by Korney Chukovsky "Telephone" - "Oh, this is hard work, to drag a hippopotamus out of the swamp." You won't envy the guarantor, but it is necessary, oh, how it should be ...
  • VIT101
    VIT101 24 December 2015 18: 40
    +1
    All discussions on the forum are in the spirit of pure monetarism. Is it good when there is a lot of money in the country, or is it bad. In my opinion, the problem must be approached from the other end. Is there enough inventory in the country when injecting extra money? Will this lead to empty shelves while the economy is reorganized, new enterprises start working, food production increases, etc. If demand increases at previous volumes, I venture to assume that prices will rise, i.e. vague doubts torment me, although I am entirely on Glazyev’s side.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  • Signaller
    Signaller 24 December 2015 20: 06
    0
    All this is briefly written on our website, only in the economic section. Mikhail Khazin vividly and briefly described what we needed. Read, if interested.
  • Finntroll
    Finntroll 24 December 2015 20: 14
    +1
    Scribe, all who haut Glazyev, do you think that the government is doing everything right? Glazyev offers an alternative path of development, dangerous, imperfect, BUT with a clearly defined goal - the restoration of industrial production. What has our tattered government actually done to restore this production since 2008? Dropped to the plinth National currency, squandered the stabilization fund, tryndit from the zombie box, incomprehensible mantras about stagnation, crisis, reduction, deficit, "import substitution" (underline the necessary) everything! And the most annoying thing is that the Guarantor has no claims to them, at least judging by his statements. Yes, thank you, we have learned to substitute toilet paper for import, one more thing about food products (and that is far from everywhere).
    1. Lexus
      Lexus 25 December 2015 21: 27
      +2
      In general, everyone understands that Glazyev is right. Yes, actually this has already been proved by all developing economies. He offers nothing new except to take the first step. The whole question is only in the goal-setting of our government - they are making money and not raising the country. The current system contributes to this as well as possible.