Economic history of Russia

Main article: Russian economy

2012

Russia bypassed the Baltic countries in terms of GDP per capita

In terms of GDP per capita, Russia in 2012 is ahead of all countries of the former USSR (data from the World Bank).

High income gap between rich and poor

The Gini coefficient is used to determine the extent of the income gap between the poor and the rich. The closer the value of the indicator to one, the higher the level of social inequality.

According to the Global Wealth Report, in 2012, the Russian Federation became the world leader in inequality in the distribution of wealth. In particular, one percent of Russians account for 71 percent of personal assets in the country. In the world, on average, the richest one percent account for 46 percent of assets. At the same time, according to the CIA handbook for countries of the world, in 2008 this figure in the Russian Federation was 0.423.

In the United States, in 2011, the Gini coefficient increased to 0.463, while, for example, in 1968 this figure was 0.351.

The Gini coefficient China in 2012 was 0.474. This, according to Agence France-Presse, said the head of the Chinese statistical service Ma Jiantang^[1] for the^[1] in^[1]

2003-2011: Russia developed faster than most countries

For the most visual comparison, it is worth using not estimates of international organizations like the World Bank or the IMF, and not domestic Rosstat - but estimates of the US CIA (CIA data [1] The World Factbook ).

The main comparative indicator of countries is GDP at purchasing power parity.

The comparison base in this case is GDP, not GNP (gross national product), as this allows you to clear the comparison of the impact of the export-import balance. In the Russian case, it is extremely positive - due to the export of energy resources, and will significantly affect the importance and position of the country. But, since most of the revenue received from exports is placed in "kubyshkuo" (foreign treasury bonds, currency, precious metals), it is better to exclude it - within the country it does not produce any serious economic effect, but plays the role of a stabilizer^[2].

This is followed by a comparison of GDP, not GNP, as this clears the comparison from the influence of "gift oil" as much as possible. In this case, countries with negative trade balances, such as Turkey, the USA, Latvia or Greece, will benefit, and countries such as Russia, Norway, Germany or China are losing, well, okay. It should also be mentioned that the CIA comparison is the most stringent to the situation of the Russian Federation in the world (this can be seen here).

Important:

a) this comparison is made with the absolute size of the economies of the countries of the world, and not with relative (per capita),

b) GDP is calculated at purchasing power parity, and not by simple mathematical recalculation of current exchange rates of countries of the world. This is done to improve the objectivity of the assessment. Explanations are given on the CIA website, and there are detailed explanations on the Web why a simple recalculation of the course has long been virtually not used for comparison, as not correct enough.

The period was taken from 2003 to 2011 - eight years, during which quite significant world events occurred. First of all, this is the global economic crisis of 2008-2009, as well as a chain of "color revolutions" that greatly influenced the post-Soviet space and the development of the former republics of the USSR.

There are two groups of columns in the table - for 2003 and for 2011, and in each group of 4 columns.

Column 1 - shows the country's place in the world for this year. The World (world) and European Union (EU) meters, which do not belong to specific countries, were removed from the original CIA table, but were numbered in the general table. Only the countries of the world themselves remained.

Column 2 - Country. Countries are only those that are significant for research from the standpoint of Russia:

• the first twenty countries of the world - the whole
• all republics of the former USSR - entirely
• some countries that are interesting for general comparison (Poland, Israel, Turkey, Cuba, etc.)

Column 3 - the value of VNP according to the item taken from the corresponding annual section of the CIA website. The World Factbook. All data is easily verifiable.

Column 4 - The weight of the economy of a particular country relative to Russia, in percent. Russia is accepted as 100%, and the GDP of other countries is recalculated as% of its GDP - both for 2003 and for 2011. From this column you can clearly see whether the size of the economy of a particular country has grown relative to Russia, or has decreased.

You can look at the indicator and vice versa - is Russia catching up with a specific country, or lagging behind it, for the 8th anniversary under consideration? If the percentage in the graph has decreased, it catches up, if it has increased, it lags behind. In addition, the relative weight of countries compared to Russia can also be clearly assessed immediately. For example, Poland in 2011 is a third of the Russian economy (32.2%).

Column 5 (on the left of the column groups) - shows in color who rolls where and in which direction. Beliy - remained in place in the world table of ranks, orange - rolls down, green - goes up. Rise and fall record holders are highlighted in a more intense color.

Comparison of the countries of the world by GDP (PPP) with an indication of the size of the economy relative to Russia

Some conclusions from the table.

1. Russia, contrary to established and enduring myths, is now not at all "rapidly lagging behind" China, but even a little closer to it in 8 years. In 2003, China surpasses it by more than 5 times, and after 8 years - by 4.7 times. That is, at least, "runs flat."

Relative to the United States - eight years ago it was 8.5 times less, now - 6.3 times. For eight years, the Russian Federation moved 4 places up, in the economic table of ranks, to 6th place in the world - after Turkey, this is the second result in the Top 20.

The same is true of Japan - in 2003, the Japanese were almost 3 times more than us, and now - significantly less than 2 times. So Japan's chances of a hypothetical revenge are gradually decreasing, let's face it, because economic growth makes it possible to maintain the armed forces even better.

2. Turkey's surprisingly dynamic growth is the record holder for GDP growth in the Top 20 group. 8 years ago, she is not in the top twenty, but now she has taken 16th place. Yes, if God forbid, the EU will take it into its ranks by stupidity - in 20 years it will devour all the Balkans and begin to bite off pieces from the stagnating economies of old Europe.

3. The most dynamic player in a stagnant Europe is Poland. It, like Russia, moved 4 places up (from 24th to 20th). 8 years ago, Poland was the size of a quarter of France, and now - with a third. It's a big growth. At the same time, however, this growth comes with a large negative balance in foreign trade and an increase in debts, which carries serious risks (this also applies to Turkey). Although, if there is anything to give in the future, then nothing is normal. The main thing is not like in Greece.

4. Iran, despite harsh sanctions and pressure, still slightly improved its position in the world (from 18th to 17th place).

5. The countries of "Old Europe" (Britain, France, Italy) are gradually deteriorating their position in the world, being in the stage of stagnation. The same applies to Canada, which has worsened its place by 3 positions.

6. The Netherlands and Thailand, the former "tiger of Asia," dropped out of the Top 20, more dynamic Poland and Turkey entered the top twenty.

7. India overtook Japan, and "dictatorial" Cuba and Azerbaijan moved up 20 and 18 places. And in general, the table clearly shows that "democratic" countries as a whole are developing much more slowly than "undemocratic." And therefore, new wars and sanctions in order to crush successful, but wrong (such as Iran) are still coming. The shift in the world order has never been trouble-free.

8. If 2001 were taken as the base, and not 2003, tectonic shifts would be visible even more clearly. So, Russia then occupied the 12th, not the 10th (2003) place in the world, Turkey was even lower in rank, Poland too, Germany and Japan more, etc.

When analyzing the state of affairs in the post-Soviet space, column No. 5 is added in the table - it shows the amount of economic growth over the same 8 years.

Some conclusions from the table.

1. The most important thing is the terrifying fall in the role and importance of Ukraine over the past 8 years. She moved to the world table on GDP ranks by 8 places down (from 31st to 38th), relative to Russia too - she was more than 1/5 of her neighbor, and now she barely exceeds 13% of her - that is, less than 1/7.

The same - and relatively another critical neighbor - Poland. If 19 years ago Ukraine (the heir to the Ukrainian SSR) was economically more than Poland by 14%, 205 against 180 billion $ (Factbook 1993), then already in 2003 - Poland is 1.7 times more than it. And now - almost 2.4 times.

There are two reasons, and both are important:

• Ukraine is part of a powerful empire, a supplier of managerial personnel and a base of advanced industry of a huge Eurasian market - this is one thing, and an independent one that has lost markets, devoid of cheap energy sources of a single state, this is another;

• the "Orange Revolution" and the incompetent rule of V. Yushchenko (2005-2010) during the period under review.

In general, it can be clearly seen that revolutions (of different colors) for large countries are an unacceptable luxury and a source of huge problems for subsequent development. On the example of Ukraine, it is clear that the "orange" countries did not solve any problems, but many aggravated the previous ones. By the way, this also applies to Russia, if similar events hypothetically occur in it - only the damage will be even greater, since the system is more complex and the economy is larger. That is, evolution is both cheaper and safer than revolution.

2. "Dictatorial" Belarus (Belarus) under the iron heel of Old Man, on the contrary, has noticeably strengthened its position - despite all the dislocations, devaluations and problems in the field of finance. Moreover, Belarusians even slightly improved the weight of their economy and relatively Russian (from 5% to 6%), which also developed quite quickly.

This is especially well illustrated by the Belarus/Lithuania pair - see at the bottom of the table: real production, albeit not the best in the world, against the artificially inflated service sector and the destruction of production inherited from the empire. As they say, the comments are superfluous.

3. The highest growth leader is Turkic-speaking Azerbaijan, more than three times! Armenia should think very seriously if this trend continues further.

4. Among the Baltic limitrophes, Lithuania and Latvia gradually acquire the features of failed states, since they successfully got rid of imperial industry, and did not acquire a new one. In addition, they are critically bleeding out in terms of the economically active population. Estonia, on the other hand, remained on the verge and found its place in the European division of labor - on sea transportation, freight and passenger.

5. Georgia, thanks to the decisive roll to the West, and the corresponding injections into the economy, managed to extract dividends from the "rose revolution" and economically doubled. And despite the 2008 war. That is, you can, of course, laugh at how Saakashvili eats a tie, but nevertheless the country has not lost its economic position, but, on the contrary, has strengthened them. But this is done with a huge negative foreign trade balance - that is, with great risks in the future (Polish model).

6. Nazarbayev's authoritarian-Bayan Kazakhstan is developing rapidly and at the same time evenly. As well as dictatorial Uzbekistan. Another reason is to compare the state of "revolution, anarchy" and the state of "authoritarian stability," by aggregate result - say, with neighboring Kyrgyzstan.

7. Outsiders who have no prospects as independent states - Moldova and Kyrgyzstan. Since the prosperous times of the Soviet empire, they have literally fallen into the abyss, into the lowest ranks of losers. Tajikistan, on the contrary, has more than doubled - but, I suspect, thanks to transfers to families sent from Russia.

1997

Shuttles have found a way to carry clothes on themselves for sale in the Russian Federation, China, 1997.

1981

White crow. Crocodile Magazine, No. 30, October 1981.

1962: Kosygin reform attempt

The need for reforms in the Soviet Union was realized earlier than in China, where they were then consistently implemented, said Alexander Abramov, professor at the Department of Stock Market and Investment Market at the Higher School of Economics in 2015. As he recalled, the discussion about the impending transformations in the USSR began with an article by Yevsey Lieberman, professor at the Kharkov Engineering and Economic Institute, "Plan, Profit, Prize," published in the Pravda newspaper in September 1962.

In it, in particular, it was proposed to allow a certain independence of enterprises, allowing to set contractual prices, and spend profit on the development of production and stimulating the team. These provisions formed the basis of the subsequent "Kosygin reform," which ensured certain progress, but by the end of the 60s. was curtailed.

"As a result, a fantastic chance to reform the USSR economy was missed," Abramov regrets.

According to him, if the attempts to modernize the Soviet economy were successful, today it would demonstrate an increase of 7-8% of GDP per year. At the same time, the share of GDP per capita in the Soviet Union would be significantly higher than in China. As a result, the USSR, which became very attractive, would turn into one of the world's shopping centers.

1928

Golden blockade of the USSR

Main article: The golden blockade of the USSR in the 1920s

1921

Cheremnykh Mikhail Mikhailovich (1890-1962) "Window of Growth," 1921.

See also

• Russian economy