The indestructible block of the refrigerator and TV

Why, after the victory of United Russia, buckwheat prices rose in the elections: the economist explains

Buckwheat prices in the summer of 2021 have risen to a record level over the past 10 years, RBC reports citing Rosstat data.

According to preliminary election results, the “leading party” was most actively voting in the poorest regions of Russia, information agencies report.

There is a connection between these news.

Even food inflation contributes to the support of the authorities. And this is not a paradox, but a pattern.

In Russia, not only buckwheat is getting more expensive, the cost of which in stores in August 2021 on average reached 102.5 rubles. (The last time a mark of 100 rubles per 1 kg, buckwheat prices exceeded in May 2011, when this cereal went up to 112 rubles per 1 kg (in fairness, I will add that in terms of dollars buckwheat then turned out to be much more expensive, about $ 2.5 per 1 kg, versus $ 1.5 per 1 kg now.)

But the point is not even that food prices are rising, but that income does not grow. As stated in the article by the Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the scientific director of VNIIECH I.G. Ushachev and head of the department of agrarian policy and forecasting the development of the agricultural sector VNIIESKH A.V. Kolesnikova “Economic accessibility of food for the population of the Russian Federation”, which was just published in the journal “Vestnik of the Institute of Economics of the Russian Academy of Sciences”, “From 2014 to 2020, food prices rose by 51.7%, while the average per capita income is only 34.3%”.

Experts of the All -Russian Research Institute of Agricultural Economics explain what is happening. Yes, there are more products in the country, agricultural growth rate even ahead of GDP growth rate, but people do not have money to buy food:

“... During this time, the income of the population in ruble equivalent increased, however, despite this, the income of the population is not enough to meet the needs for rational norms for milk, eggs, vegetables and fruits.

The decreasing purchasing power of the population, with growing volumes of food production, does not help increase the consumption of food. This is especially true for low -income families.

Rational consumption standards for most basic food products have been achieved only in higher (income) 20% of the population. ”

“Rational consumption standards” people cannot secure for themselves for a simple reason - 10% of the poorest citizens of the Russian Federation spend 47% of “disposable resources” on food, as in Africa. But in 10% of the most wealthy food expenses, 16% of the budget take - as in Europe.

But what about the “help of the poor”, which seems to be spent in the Russian Federation?

No way, experts of the Russian Academy of Sciences explain. To achieve rational consumption indicators, household cash incomes should be at about 100 thousand rubles per month, while in the lowest -receipt strategic income is 27,960 rubles.

“It should be understood that an increase in targeted money assisted by households of the first and second groups will lead to an improvement in their financial situation, but will not solve the problem of increasing food consumption. The released funds will be spent on the basis of priority needs, including the repayment of consumer loans, household needs, etc. Thus, targeted monetary support will be ineffective. ”

In general, they did not live satisfying, there is no need and start.

100 thousand rubles, or a little more than a thousand euros per month - not so much money, nothing beyond. The level of Eastern European countries is 500 euros, 1000 euros are a regular salary.

But in Russia something has been going wrong, and for ten years.

Having analyzed the data of Rosstat, the authors of the article “Economic accessibility of food ...” come to the following conclusion: “... the low purchasing power of the population can be judged by per capita GDP. So, in 2010, this indicator amounted to 11,446.59 US dollars per person, and in 2019, 11,162.65 dollars for a man. ”

Again.

Ten years of the country's GDP cannot exceed $ 12,000 per person. What is this magic figure?

The magic of this figure half a century ago was revealed by the economist and sociologist Seymour Lipset, who explained that as soon as the per capita GDP in the country crosses a certain line (these days it is $ 12,000-14,000 per person), people begin to increase their political demands. The problem of survival in such a society is no longer worth it, people have enough “for food” and these expenses do not absorb most of their earnings. There is something to live on, there is something to spend, and there is no fear of losing work - the achieved level of economic development of society allows you to quickly find a place with comparable earnings (or, in extreme cases, change fate - find work in another place or master a new specialty).

So the first results of the voting “by regions” confirm - the strategy of “controlled poverty”, reducing people's income so that they do not have unnecessary requirements for power, and works. The TV/Internet and the refrigerator do not fight each other, but complement each other, the smaller in the refrigerator, the more carefully people listen to the instructions from the TV. The poorer the region, the more the results in it correspond to bossy expectations.

“Poverty controlled” is not a simple strategy.

The socio-economic structure of the Russian Federation resembles a South African apartheid. This “separate development” is not only different races, as in South Africa, but of different classes and territories. Somewhere within the boundaries of one country, “Luxembourg and Dubai” (in the sense of consumption) or Moscow turns out-and somewhere “ordinary Africa”. If you do not want to stay “in Africa” - prove to the authorities that you can take you “to Moscow”.

At the same time, the policy of the authorities, expressed by the words “there is no money”, and the categorical unwillingness to increase the real income of people under any pretext is an even more difficult thing than it might seem.

How is the study by the Donat Play IF You canm: does eaconomic inequality undermine Political Equaly? (“Do not play, if you can’t win”) Armina Schateer (University of Münsster) and Hertie School of Governance, Berlin), with an increase in profitable inequality, the political activity of the poor does not grow, but decreases. This leads to a further gap between the rich and the poor, and provokes even more indifference to the poor to political participation.

Why play the game in which you are obviously doomed to defeat, the poor man argues? It is better to try to please the authorities - maybe she will praise you for this. In this sense, an empty refrigerator and a screaming TV in this sense - both of them and the other explain to the person that he has nowhere to go - except to go to vote as the bosses will say - because otherwise there will be no chances for “victory” in the social game at all. Loyalty or social death - the choice is so -so, but people do not see another.

Clutching the income and consumption of people, the authorities are insurance from political competition not only of themselves, but also their children - a generation that has grown in poverty, will not be able to contrast the oligarchy. And even if one of the poor is able to get rich contrary to the efforts of the authorities, he will not go to protest, but he will look for opportunities to confirm the authorities of his loyalty.

People understand everything, and the “political struggle” in the poor regions (and it is, as without it) is spinning around the opportunity to get into a privileged layer paid by raw annuity. Accordingly, the authorities rules, regulating the circle of those who are allowed to this rent, and in this situation there is no point in economic growth “as a whole”-as soon as people begin to get rich, so the level of their loyalty will immediately decrease-if you can live “humanly” without complicity in power-then God with it.

Problems in power can begin no earlier than at the top of the place “for their own”. Only then, someone in power will definitely try to include social elevators,

The main condition for whose work is that they should bring candidates to the bosses not only up, but also down. That is, in relation to the elections-one of the pro-government candidates will be able to lose them.