Politicians again spoke in the language of the 90s
Catch in another place. The words forgotten since the 1990s-“nationalization”, “monetarists” have been returned to Russian political everyday life. Is it worth a change in the vector of economic policy - I tried to understand The New Times
Knowledgeable people claim that usually restrained A.B. Chubais sent large politicians to three letters twice in his life. One of them was Boris Berezovsky. Others - Yuri Luzhkov. With the Moscow mayor, the prominent “monetarist” and the privatist waged hot and cold wars from the beginning of the 1990s and until the very recent time, when it ended with reconciliation and joint calculation of investment in the metropolitan electric power. But last week, Luzhkov again remembered the unkind word “monetarists”, guilty of crisis, and called a spade a spade: what is happening is nationalization, only with the subsequent sale of assets. That is, the secondary antique one is already once divided by property.
Deja vu
Yuri Luzhkov returned the language of the 1990s-it is easier to describe on it what is happening in economic policy. “We must get away from monetarism. We must move on to capitalism, which would form a developed state with a full -sized domestic market ”; “I think that the state ... now it is necessary to nationalize a number of industries”; “Some time after stabilization, the state must necessarily set ... assets (nationalized.-The New Times) for sale. But not at the prices at which the Norilsk Nickel was bought at one time, but for those that this enterprise and industry really costs. ”
What is this-a transcript of the meeting of the government of the first half of the 90s? A meeting of the State Duma in the second half of the same decade? Record of the performances of academic economists of the old school in the office of Deputy Prime Minister Oleg Soskovts? No, pinch yourself: this is 2009, privatization has long completed, the notorious Norilskel, which has not produced at the time of sale, has become a working enterprise since then, many property objects that had previously been on its side have turned into such vandy pieces that some comrades who created their empires with workplaces, high salaries and excellent production indicators. prison.
Yuri Luzhkov, who sincerely believes that the entrepreneur is his deputy Vladimir Resin (well, right - our state is not a regulator or an arbitrator, it is a businessman who establishes the rules of the game for himself), in his ideas about the ideal economy is not alone. For example, the head of the Russian Railways Vladimir Yakunin, who is characterized by commitment to Orthodox and state values, spoke out for the introduction of restrictions on the movement of capital, in a simple way-for restricting currency transactions. This one can reach the return to the Criminal Code of the article for illegal foreign exchange operations. That is, return to the state preceding the 1990s.
What did Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin, who has become a living symbol of a decade, answered in such cases? "We were engaged in monetarism - and we will do!"
Who is to blame?
It is guilty, judging by the hints, of course a certain collective Chubais. Today, the Minister of Finance Alexei Kudrin was his living embodiment. Let us give the floor to Yuri Mikhailovich: "Finance Minister Alexei Leonidovich Kudrin decided to save money and put them in the reserve fund ... And they did not work there for the development of the economy of our state." And in his collision on the monetarist Luzhkov is not alone. The stabilization fund, which actually saved the country's banking system in the past five months, has become the subject of attacks not only of the Moscow mayor, but also, for example, the first deputy head of the presidential administration Vladislav Surkov, who, without naming names, lamented about the wrong economic strategy: it was necessary to invest in investment projects, and not preserve money. It seems that the lessons of the same 1990s-about the monetary nature of inflation, about the dangers of excess monetary mass for the health of the economy, about the trap of budget deficit-turned out to be unacceptable. And ... old disputes are returning. Since the very meetings of the government and the parliament of the past decade ...
The impression of a coordinated attack, which is being conducted in order to shift the ministant, who has been a blow to the ministry for a year, has become aggravated by the statement of the head of the Investigative Committee Alexander Bastrykin: they say, surrounded by the Minister of Moneter, the financiers-zhuliki dug up. The hint is clear: maybe the minister is not without sin. This public statement was made without taking into account the principle of the presumption of innocence - in relation to the current and former deputies of Kudrin Sergey Storchak and Vadim Volkov, the court verdict was not issued. The situation is exacerbated by rumors about the possible rotation of the government in March this year, as well as culuar conversations about the possible replacement of Kudrin by the Minister of Defense Anatoly Serdyukov. In short, the direction of the main blow is understandable-the unfinished liberals-monetarists. After all, Kudrin is also the Central Bank and his head Sergei Ignatiev. However, this is also the VTB Bank ... It is clear: the crisis, the people need to be guilty. Only there are they looking for them?
New redistribution
In his first “conversation at Kamelk”-a clarifying conversation with the Rossiya channel-Dmitry Medvedev about the problem of Stabfond spoke unexpectedly strictly and definitely: “The last development of events showed that these decisions were correct, because those states that thoughtlessly spent money, having the opportunity to create their reserve funds, funds of future generations, are now in our pre-banking state, and our The financial and economic situation is absolutely stable ... I believe that the policy, which was pursued in the field of finance recently, has proved its effectiveness. ” So, it’s too early to make Kudrin in a switchman?
But as for nationalization, in fact, her power is afraid of her. And not only because the excessive participation of the state in the economy can lead to image losses. The fact is that no one knows how long the crisis will last. And state managers do not smile at all to manage all this time by nationalized "bad" assets. Sergei Chemezov, for example, scored property to his state corporation, but now he does not know what to do with her. Hence the assurances of the “upper people”, which began already in October 2008: “The government does not set the task for a long time to be present as a shareholder in the capital of large companies” (Igor Shuvalov); “We do not need the state -ownedness of the economy” (Dmitry Medvedev); “The expansion of the presence of the state in economic life is a compelled measure and is temporary” (Vladimir Putin).
Even more interesting, with the subsequent - residence -based - selling assets. Of course, in the logic of the development of the Russian Crony Capitalism, it can be assumed that the hospitalists affiliated with the highest state officials (including in uniform) will receive the best pieces of property under the new redistribution. But who will give a guarantee that the new privatization will be tightly controlled by the authorities? That there will be no discontent with the conditions for redistribution of property from a normal business? That privatization will remain bloodless?
Nationalization? New privatization? These are not toys. As the aforementioned Viktor Stepanovich said in the 1990s: “Who has hands itch? Catch in another place. " You will be more complete - we will add from ourselves ...
