Life of loan

Grigory Yudin and Alexey Zakharov about how they get into credit bondage

• Every third Russian income has an outstanding loan, while most of them are families with children and single mothers, poor Russians.
• For many, constant re -overpass has become a way of life. People fall into financial traps and cannot get out of them.
• Russia is one of the countries with the highest level of inequality in the world, and this inequality is just an engine for loans.
• Russian society is built on a hierarchical status basis, and loans for many are a means of establishing their social status.

Sergey Medvedev: We continue our study of eternal issues of Russian life. One of these issues of Russia in the XXI century is a loan, a loot of the population. Statistics show that every third Russian has an outstanding loan, while for the most part these are low-income families, families with children, and single mothers. How do they survive? How does debt morality are arranged in Russia? Helps consumer lending to fight poverty or only exacerbates it?

Video version of the program

Correspondent: in Russia there is a very rapid development of consumer lending. According to experts, about eight million citizens spend more than half of their monthly income to repay loans. The most re -raised Russians with low and medium salaries became.

The growth rate of this market indicate that the attempts of the Central Bank to control this segment did not bring a result. Loans play an increasing role in the budgets of Russian families. With almost zero growth of real income, this creates additional risks for the financial situation. Most of all consumer loans are common among residents of poor regions: in this way, citizens compensate for falling income. It is impossible to save endlessly, and people begin to abandon the savings model of behavior and spend more and more of the income on consumption.

About eight million citizens spend more than half of their monthly income to pay off loans

Against the background of the crisis, banks practically stopped unsecured consumer lending. At the beginning of the pandemic, it decreased by 1.7%, in May - by 0.2%, in June it grew by only 0.4%, and in July it again fell by 0.3%. The refusal to be re -accepted or generally in the issuance of a loan pushes borrowers to microfinance organizations (MFIs), where the situation is even worse. According to the data at the end of 2020, the debt of Russians to banks and the MFI reached a new historical record of almost 20 trillion rubles. The irresponsibility of the borrowers themselves also affects, who, in pursuit of short -term benefit, cannot appreciate their real financial situation.

Sergey Medvedev: In our studio , Grigory Yudin , a sociologist, professor MVSHSEN (Shaninki), and Alexei Zakharov , Associate Professor of the Higher School .

Gregory came with the book "Life in debt" (he is a scientific editor of this publication). There was a great sociological study on how the debt morality of Russians was arranged. Gregory, and, in general, the loan became normal Russian practice? Have people quickly learned that they become debtors? Indeed, traditionally, life in debt is not a part of Russian everyday life.

Grigory Yudin: This is not just a common widespread practice, but one of the key institutions in modern Russia, even political institutions. There are different estimates of the amount of lending. One of them, the official one, is that there were 40 million borrowers in front of the pandemia. In fact, this means that almost every Russian household, if it does not have a loan, then, one way or another, considers this opportunity. This is one of the key, perhaps, in general, the most important in Russia tool for planning life, medium -term constructions and long -term plans. And he, of course, determines everything: in many ways - marriage behavior, investment in education and healthcare, and even political behavior. It is clear that a person with the debt has the most important horizon is to pay a loan, and he behaves not in the same way as the one who has no current obligations.

Sergey Medvedev: He is on the hook of large institutions - banks and the state.

Grigory Yudin: And with the employer.

Sergey Medvedev: But the volume of credit load in Russia is not so large regarding GDP. In the United States, there are almost 70% of GDP-these are loans, and in Russia it is somewhere around 15–20%.

Alexey Zakharov: But we must also understand what interest people pay for these loans.

Sergey Medvedev: In Russia, this is completely different interest and a completely different share in the structure of the family budget. But from the point of view of the health of the economy - is it good if the population of Zak was?

Alexey Zakharov: Some loans are some symptom that the population is in a state of extreme need. The phenomenon, when people take loans at high interest, to intercept, and then it turns out that you still need to take a loan to pay for this loan, and so on, there is more or less everywhere where there is a need. This is because a person in a state of need cannot plan ahead. Due to stress, he reduces the cognitive ability, the ability to plan, financial literacy, and this is used by microcredit organizations and organized crime.

Sergey Medvedev: That is, the greater the need, the greater the pressure on a person and the less rational this decision. George, your survey confirms that these decisions are more irrational, and the more poor people are, the less rationally a loan is taken?

Grigory Yudin: Yes. The specifics of Russian lending is that we have a rather poor quality credit load. It is really not very large in the aggregate expression, but it has quite poor quality, because a significant part is poor in the poor or slightly above the poor. These are those who spend 40% of income and more on loans, and these are already critical values. And this part is growing, and this is actually the subject of anxiety for the regulator. We found that a significant part of the loans constitute "hysterical loans." For a long time, a person thinks about whether to take a loan to him, he has arguments for "for" and "against". But if you find out what was a direct occasion to take a loan, it turns out, as a rule, that it was some kind of emergency related to a break in communications, which usually presses on the most painful for a person-on his self-esteem. Something must happen so that you think: if I will not take a loan now, then I am a loser, I lost.

A very large lending factor in Russia is a gigantic inequality that exists in the country

Here, a very large lending factor in Russia comes into business - this is a gigantic inequality that exists in the country. And for a huge number of our fellow citizens, it is fundamentally important to raise their consumer status to prove to myself that "I am standing something." There are often no opportunities for this, and examples of overcoming are visible, especially outside of Moscow. People go to the capital and see that those who are engaged in about the same have a completely different level of consumption.

Sergey Medvedev: Let's say people take an iPhone on credit. Here we approach the main issue of Russian life: who are you, who am I? Why such aggressive driving? Why in China there are so few accidents on the roads, and in Russia there are so many of them? Because the Chinese together solve the general problem, and do not understand the statuses. And in Russia, there is a constantly understanding of the statuses at the wheel. And with loans the same thing: are I trying to raise my status, jump above my head?

Grigory Yudin: The greatest probability of getting into a credit trap is observed in people who are in a state of aggressive competition, for whom right now there is a question about the loss of face, respect for themselves. Those for whom it is less relevant, who is ready to rely more on support from the side, is ready for some collective action, as a rule, have some insurance from entering the credit hole. And even if they get there, then it’s easier for them to get out.

Sergei Medvedev: After all, people have grown in such a paternalistic dependency paradigm that the state will always come and help us out. Is it left?

Alexey Zakharov

Alexey Zakharov: I don't think. It is very important here how much people focus on others. How much you focus on other people, how important it is for you on their part, is the most connected with your willingness to take a loan at high interest.

Grigory Yudin: We were just entering this study with the hypothesis that the standard Russian borrower is such a freeloader who takes loans, and then thinks that a good Putin will come and pay them for him. But, as it turned out, everything is exactly the opposite. Paternalists who hope very much for the state are very limited layers: either very marginalized or entrepreneurs, but they have a slightly different moral. But the standard, ordinary Russian borrower is just inclined to blame himself in his problems, and this organically follows from his desire to prove something to yourself: in this case, you will not ask for the help of others, but you will try to prove to yourself that you are able to cope with this. Some time ago, in Russia there was a wave of suicides of borrowers, and often even relatives until the very last moment did not know that these people had a lot of loans. A person chooses physical death before the threat of loss of face. People are not very ready to record that the responsibility for a heavy loan can at least partially lie on the bank that this loan gave.

Sergey Medvedev: It turns out that Russian society is in some ultracapitalist, ultraatomized situation: a single person in the face of the market, in the face of society with constant competition, seeks to prove something, relying only on his own strength and not asking for help from others. But then this destroys many myths about Russian society: about paternalism, collegiality, collectivity, and the help of others.

Alexei Zakharov: In my opinion, the fact that a person blames himself for all bad things is a kind of marker of learned helplessness, when you think that all the good things are happening to you are the result of external forces, and everything is bad-the result of your own sins or your own wine. This pattern is characteristic of low social status, for people who constantly face need and restrictions.

Sergey Medvedev: In your book, great attention is paid to religious communities. How much is community relations play the role here: religious community, neighboring community, relatives, veteran organizations?

Grigory Yudin: We concentrated on Orthodox communities and decided to see how much a person belonging to the arrival of dense ties differs in his credit behavior from who is not included in any community. And it turned out that the differences are quite serious: people included in the community have a number of insurance just from such strange hysterical decisions. In the communities, it is not customary to give a member of the community to die or starve. We at one time, making a study in small cities, found out that the institution of debt books is very common there. In large cities, this is practically not, but in small cities it is very common. The seller cannot tell the buyer: “No, money - get out,” because this buyer lives on a neighboring street: you cannot leave a cub. In this sense, the insured force of the community arises, but it does not just give a person money for free, but begins to exercise some control, ask: where did the money go, why is it not? There is a group that begins to be interested in what is happening in this person, and it can keep him from some impulsive decisions. For example, a woman quarreled with her husband, her husband said: "Choking without a washing machine." - "Ah, so! I'll go and take it on credit!" And if you have some kind of community, then you come, complain about it, and they say to you: "Calm down, you have no problems with a loan and not with a washing machine, but with your husband, and this problem must be solved."

If you still need to take a loan, they will most likely tell you where to get it on some more or less favorable conditions, and often it may turn out that the desired product can be found with other members of the community. The community often includes people a little richer, and they are looking for an opportunity for someone to help: many people have an unrealized need.

Sergey Medvedev: Alexey, how interesting it is to banks - a huge mass of debtors, poorly served debts? And, nevertheless, the space is flooded with offers of cheap money. 90% of the spam that I receive is the proposals for loans, not to mention what is happening on the boards of ads.

Alexei Zakharov: Yes, banks are interested in the flow of customers, and on the other hand, they are very interested in the loans are given, and recently they are trying to weed out those who are potentially unreliable. Social networks are one of the sources of information: let's say, if a person has many photos with alcohol, then, probably, they will not give him a loan.

The most aggressive part of the lending market is microfinance organizations

Grigory Yudin: Banks are really not interested in taking on heavy loans. However, the most aggressive part of the lending market is microfinance organizations, and we know very little about who owns them in Russia. Some investigations show that some of them are quite obviously affiliated, on the one hand, with banks, and on the other, with special services, because then special services can then carry out violence. In this sense, part of the banks, on the one hand, is not interested in getting unnecessary debts, and on the other hand, she takes on some bad burden, and then throws it down. And this is already a different, a little underwater part of the business.

Sergey Medvedev: The usual scheme of a person’s descent on a credit staircase: first he takes a loan at a bank, cannot serve the debt and begins to be reinstalled by the MFI. And with each next iteration, the percentage grows.

Grigory Yudin: Yes, something like that. This is what our respondents call the "tunnel": when you take each next loan, you have a feeling of a tapering tunnel. And the further, the less you are inclined to tell someone about this. Initially, you took a loan to deal with the problem, and now you have additional problems, and you can already completely lose your face. It is interesting that the MFIs are used in advertising, the slogan is constantly repeated: "Do not go to friends, do not humiliate yourself in front of them - come to us, and you will solve all the problems."

Sergey Medvedev: Do many manage to get out of this trap, or is it already becoming a way of life for years and years?

Grigory Yudin

Grigory Yudin: For many of our compatriots, this is a way of life. Someone has a better situation, someone worse. The last reaches a little bit, but the debts grew, so there was a calculation on the fact that you can somehow get out of this. People rather, one way or another, come out of this. Wine is a key parameter for a huge number of borrowers, because they already obviously feel guilty for not managing the loan. This is an ideal tool in order to manipulate a person: it is enough to convince him that he is to blame and he will do anything.

Sergey Medvedev: As I understand it, at the political level, for many years, the question is about to somehow regulate, regulate the MFIs and collection agencies. There are some progress, or is it an increasingly “gray” zone associated with the security forces, another part of the push-ups as a resource?

Alexei Zakharov: I don’t know how much it advanced, but really the microcredit sphere, and not only with us, but everywhere, is associated with violence, with criminalitis.

Sergey Medvedev: And if you look from the back? We hear about Gremin-Bank Muhammad Yunus, about how this microcredit works. In the end, in many societies for centuries there were cash desks of mutual assistance: say, Raifaisen cassa in the German-speaking regions. Is there something similar in Russia?

Grigory Yudin: With "Gremin" a very difficult story. Indeed, Yunus was congratulated on this project for a long time. Now anthropologists have great doubts about its consequences, because then he had a rather destructive influence on these same communities in the sense of atomization. He actually began to turn into entrepreneurs people who did not see themselves in this capacity. This led to destruction in the community. The same thing happens in Russia. When a tiny door with microcredits appears in a small town, we come in three years - and the city cannot be recognized in the sense of social density. People treat each other differently, because all the time there is a source of money from the outside. The city becomes more atomized.

Sergey Medvedev: Human ties break up?

Grigory Yudin: Yes, because you used to feel the elbow, and all the time there was moral and social control with all its pros and cons. Ты должен был быть готов, по крайней мере, объяснить своему сообществу, откуда у тебя то или иное благо и нужно ли оно тебе прямо сейчас. А когда у тебя есть возможность брать деньги извне… Эту кассу никогда не открывают местные, это люди из других городов, у них нет моральных обязательств. Это разрывает обычные связи.

Сергей Медведев: То есть права была русская литература – деньги портят людей (в данном случае – местное сообщество). Ну, не деньги как таковые, а доступность легких денег.

Григорий Юдин: Да, деньги в форме легкодоступных кредитов начинают разъединять людей, и на этом месте сложно сразу выстроить что-то, что заменяло бы прежние связи.

Сергей Медведев: Сейчас постоянно идут трения по поводу Бюро кредитных историй. Скажем, если ты на плохом счету в Бюро, ты не можешь добиться ответа на вопрос, почему банки отказали тебе в кредите. Человек должен знать, почему банк или какая-то финансовая организация отказали ему в кредите?

Алексей Захаров: Я думаю, да.

Сергей Медведев: Сейчас эта сфера абсолютно непрозрачна. Есть какие-то права заемщиков в данной ситуации?

Григорий Юдин: В принципе, скоринг – это прогрессивная практика, которая позволяет как-то фильтровать людей. Однако вопрос в том, что закладывается в эту модель. Наша идея состоит в том, что наиболее эффективен скоринг, который учитывает включенность человека в сообщество, наличие какой-то возможности для распределенной ответственности. В этом смысле более эффективный способ регулирования кредитования – это как раз не внешние кредиторы, а что-то вроде кредитных кооперативов, которые в России были еще до революции и сейчас отчасти кое-где сохраняются. Это ситуация, когда ты получаешь деньги не из какой-то дыры в небесах, а из ресурса, связанного с твоим собственным сообществом, которое может тебя контролировать. И в этом случае ты хорошо понимаешь, почему тебе дают или не дают деньги.

Сергей Медведев: Кредит, по большому счету, двигает экономику? Это прирост ВВП?

Без кредитов экономика не может нормально развиваться, на этом держится вся банковская система

Алексей Захаров: Да, конечно! Без кредитов экономика не может нормально развиваться. На этом держится вся банковская система.

Сергей Медведев: Чисто статистически это включается в ВВП?

Алексей Захаров: В ВВП включаются оказываемые услуги. Если я работаю в кредитной организации, получаю зарплату, это включается в ВВП.

Сергей Медведев: Но от суммы кредитов ВВП не зависит? Насколько экономический рост зависит от общей закредитованности?

Алексей Захаров: Экономический рост зависит от инвестиций. Чтобы построить новый завод, фирма должна взять в долг.

Сергей Медведев: Я имел в виду потребительские кредиты, розничные кредиты.

Григорий Юдин: Это стимулирование спроса. Вы получаете дополнительный спрос. Во многом российская экономика так развивается в той части, которая не является чисто ресурсной. Она накачивает спрос кредитами, и этот спрос создает некоторые новые рынки. Другое дело, что у этого есть цена. Да, современные экономики не могут работать без кредитов. Вопрос только в том, каков характер этих кредитов, кто их дает, при каких условиях, на что он смотрит.

Сергей Медведев: И на что их дают. Одно дело – предметы долгосрочного пользования (ипотека, бизнес-кредит, покупка машины), но когда кредиты идут на покупку продуктов питания, это уже другое качество.

Григорий Юдин: Такие тревожные типы кредитов, которые мы наблюдаем, это кредиты на свадьбы и на отдых, или на какие-то простые продукты долгосрочного пользования. Наши респонденты объясняют – "мне хочется жить достойно".

Сергей Медведев: Мы часто видим "Мерседесы", припаркованные у "хрущоб". А кредит помогает бороться с бедностью или консервирует ее в российских условиях?

Алексей Захаров: Кредит консервирует бедность, потому что определенная часть дохода человека уходит на проценты по кредиту. Человек в определенно смысле становится кредитным рабом.

Григорий Юдин: Кредит – это образ жизни. И для бедных людей это, конечно, способ воспроизводства бедности. Но в этом состоянии могут оказаться совершенно разные люди. Вполне стандартный способ попасть туда – это взять какой-то кредит в условиях, когда у тебя все более-менее распланировано, а потом, например, ты теряешь работу или у тебя заболевает близкий родственник. Это погружает тебя под какую-то ватерлинию, и дальше кредит – это просто способ воспроизводить этот образ жизни.

Сергей Медведев: А способно ли российское государство в своей нынешней политэкономической форме бороться с бедностью? По-моему, в посткрымской экономике последние лет пять потребление государству уже не нужно. Экономика потребления все больше, особенно на уровне регионов, заменяется экономикой выживания, а для экономики выживания тотальная кредитная задолженность как раз хорошо работает.

Алексей Захаров: Если государство создает хороший инвестиционный климат, задает прозрачные правила игры, то рано или поздно экономика будет развиваться. Институциональная среда – это и есть путь борьбы с бедностью.

Григорий Юдин: Но российская экономика в значительной степени построена на неравенстве. Она не может функционировать без этого гигантского неравенства. Россия – одна из стран с самым высоким уровнем неравенства в мире. Она функционирует на уровне жесткого отделения сверхбогатой элиты со всеми ее дворцами, аквадискотеками и яхтами от всех остальных. Это неравенство как раз и является двигателем для кредитов. Когда у вас происходит более-менее плавный рост ВВП, сверху делятся десятью процентами доходов, и этого хватает, чтобы все остальные по чуть-чуть улучшали свой статус. Но если это прекращает двигаться, то возникает ситуация, которая есть последнее время. В России последние годы уже просто начала увеличиваться бедность: количество людей, находящихся за чертой бедности, составляет 19,9 миллионов, и этот показатель растет.

Сергей Медведев: Пандемия 2020 года в этом отношении добавила производства бедности?

Алексей Захаров: Пандемия, конечно, стала достаточно серьезным испытанием, потому что закрылась часть бизнесов, люди потеряли работу.

Григорий Юдин: Сама по себе пандемия и вынужденная изоляция разрушают дополнительные связи. И в этом смысле те, кто оказывается новыми заемщиками, еще сильнее рискуют, чем те, кто рисковал до этого.

Сергей Медведев: Да, 2020 год еще больше усугубил тренды, которые и так были: и политические, и экономические. Мое впечатление, что где-то до 2014-2015 годов рост экономики обеспечивало потребление. А сейчас рост фактически обеспечивается одними госкорпорациями, и потребление не обеспечивает такой большой процент ВВП, а после 2020 года тем более. Раньше рост происходил за счет увеличения сектора услуг и расширения: города-миллионники, мегаполисы. Это тоже двигало систему кредитования. А сейчас появился очень большой рост в госсекторе, в госкорпорациях, а внизу консервируется культура бедности.

Григорий Юдин: От кредитования все равно сейчас никуда не деться, потому что для огромного количества людей в России это просто понятный способ мобильности. В стране очень трудно с мобильностью, с повышением статуса. И вот кредиты как раз позволяют осуществлять мобильность. Независимо от их роли в развитии экономики, с точки зрения создания мотивации для лояльности, это, конечно, ключевой институт.

Сергей Медведев: Какой самый необычный кредит, с которым вам приходилось столкнуться?

Григорий Юдин: Не то чтобы самая необычная, но довольно показательная история – это кредиты на вещи, которые, с точки зрения обыденной необходимости вроде бы не являются обязательными, но фактически ставят человека перед выбором: либо ты берешь кредит, либо теряешь уважение и становишься лузером. Поэтому, например, человек с крайне низким уровнем дохода может взять кредит на кольцо с бриллиантом для своей невесты. Это вопрос статуса – ты мужик или не мужик, ты можешь это обеспечить или нет? Или ребенок начинает просить какой-нибудь гаджет, потому что у других детей он есть. Родители оказываются перед выбором – либо объяснить ребенку, что не всякий гаджет, который ему понравился, нужно покупать, но он будет ныть дальше, либо сказать: ну, и ладно, в конце концов, ты мне плешь проешь, возьму-ка я кредит. Мы видим, что реальная альтернатива: либо взять кредит, либо выстраивать отношения. Но выстраивать отношения довольно болезненно, тяжело. А смысл этого действия состоит в том, чтобы от тебя отстали, чтобы ты показал свою независимость и самостоятельность.

Сергей Медведев: Проблема в том, что российское общество построено на очень сильной иерархической статусной основе. Люди постоянно стремятся доказать свой статус и обмениваются по этому поводу символами. И, конечно, здесь наготове кредитные организации. Хочу напомнить о вечной мудрости: кредитуйтесь с умом и помните, что берешь чужие деньги, а отдаешь свои.