Posted 15 июня 2021,, 12:27

Published 15 июня 2021,, 12:27

Modified 24 декабря 2022,, 22:37

Updated 24 декабря 2022,, 22:37

The logic of inequality: will the state solve the main problem of society

The logic of inequality: will the state solve the main problem of society

15 июня 2021, 12:27
Experts are confident that the current approach of the Russian authorities to the problem of constantly growing social inequality will ultimately lead to irreversible political consequences.

Economist Dmitry Prokofiev was seriously concerned about the growth of property inequality both in Russia and in the world, believing that this process has every chance of ending in a powerful social explosion. To begin with, the expert cites three quotes on this, published in three different sources:

News from the site Rabota.ru

Russians in the second half of 2021 would like to have an average monthly salary of 131.6 thousand rubles.

Residents of Moscow want to receive 158.7 thousand rubles, St. Petersburg - 151.9 thousand, and Krasnodar - 126.9 thousand.The top five by the highest expectations are closed by residents of Yekaterinburg (111.4 thousand rubles) and Nizhny Novgorod (109 , 2 thousand).

The total salary is more than 100 thousand rubles. want to receive 19% of respondents, and more than 150 thousand rubles. - 22%.

Another 15% of the respondents would like to earn from 70 thousand to 99 thousand rubles, and 23% - from 50 thousand to 69 thousand rubles. Salaries from 30 to 49 thousand rubles. want to have 16% of respondents, 6% of respondents would like to earn less than 29 thousand rubles.

(That is, in the capitals people ask (do not even ask, but would like) a salary of one and a half thousand euros, in the regions one thousand and one and a half dollars. Nothing prohibitive.)

News from RIA Novosti

RIAN analysts have calculated the "welfare rating" - how much money is left for a family with two children, if you subtract the cost of living from the sum of two average salaries

That is, how much free money a month remains "for a normal life", beyond the bare essentials.

In the "oil and gas lands" in terms of rubles, it turns out about the same thousand euros (in the Yamalo-Nenets district - 105 thousand rubles), in Moscow - a thousand dollars (73 thousand rubles), in St. Petersburg - 65 thousand. But in the Moscow region - already 40 thousand, in the Leningrad region - 37 thousand. (in Tyumen, by the way, only 42 thousand).

The deeper into Russia, the less money people have - Kemerovo - 36 thousand, Arkhangelsk region - 31 thousand, Kaluga region - 30 thousand, Perm - 28 thousand, Voronezh - 27 thousand, Volgograd region - 23 thousand, Novosibirsk region - 23.5 thousand , Yaroslavl region - some kind of magic figure 22227 rubles Nizhny Novgorod region - 22 thousand Pskov 8 thousand, Ivanovo region - 5 (five) thousand.

(Obviously, there is a gray economy, seasonal work, but...? What is the consumer market with such amounts of money on hand? What are you talking about at all?)

In Russia as a whole, in an average family with two children, the potential balance of funds amounted to 41.9 thousand rubles. In 19 regions of Russia, after minimal expenses, 10-15 thousand rubles remain in families with two children, RIAN experts write.

And the third piece of news from the consulting company Knight Frank:

Among Russian ultra high net worth individual - whose net assets exceed $ 30 million, including real estate at the main place of residence), the demand for luxury housing in London in the spring of 2021 increased by 50%.

Analysts note a rapid recovery in demand for luxury real estate in the UK from wealthy Russians.

“In the spring, the number of requests for the purchase of real estate in London increased by 50% compared to the same period last year. Basically, our clients choose apartments in the elite segment for the purpose of moving, for themselves or their children".

Real estate transactions were mostly carried out on a high budget - from £ 2 million.

At the same time, there are no "ultra-highnets" in the Russian Federation who would earn their money "bypassing the authorities".

The demand for real estate in London among them increased by 50%.

And those who work in the Russian Federation, after paying the necessary expenses, have an average of 40 thousand rubles for a famil ...

Prokofiev writes in this connection:

- the last time such a polarization of capital, as it is now, was before the First World War;

- the polarization of capital creates a polarization of opportunities (it is more difficult to measure), but it is at least comparable;

- war is a great equalizer, even if the original goal was the opposite;

- the pace of growth in the world is slowing down (what is now is a recovery after last year's failure). This is both the reason for the polarization and another factor pushing towards the “take and divide” decision;

- no matter what “take and divide” will be caused, maybe - “concern for the environmental agenda”, but it will happen. The only chance to avoid this is a new social contract, the Great Deal, the "big deal";

- it seems that its central part is the launch of economic growth. And it is possible to do this without losses for the elites (I believe that now the elites have no motivation to make a deal, everything is too chocolate for them).

We need to do something about it.

***

Expert Telegram channel Dauphinois refers to the idea and zvestna French economist Thomas Piketty to give every adult citizen of the EU legacy.

In one of his interviews, he noted that there was not a single society in which the rich would admit: "We are rich and you are poor, period" (but it seems we have come close to this). “The ruling elites are always forced to use sophisticated narratives. They have to say: “Yes, let's say we are richer than you, but this is good for society as a whole, since we provide order and stability in your own interests, because we - like religion or the Old Regime in pre-revolutionary France - offer you spiritual leadership ... "As you can see, nothing is new under the moon, the current visits about special spirituality are just a retelling of the narratives of centuries ago..."

At the same time, one cannot but admit that the methods proposed by Piketty are much more humane than everything that is offered in the vastness of the former USSR, where cannibalistic views prevail. Compare what Piketty is proposing with what Belousov is doing.

Piketty: “This “legacy for all”, as a complement to universal access to basic values and services of the public system for providing basic living needs, such as education, health care and pensions, is intended to guarantee a basic income. All these tools are not replaced by them, but supplemented.

Why is this so important? The problem I see is that a person with a good education and health, as well as a good and well-paid job, is forced to give half of their income as rent to the children of the owners of the house, who will receive rental income throughout their lives. Income inequality entails huge inequalities in life opportunities. Some people have to pay their rent for life. Some may establish firms or inherit family businesses. Others will never be able to start their own business, because they have no start-up capital... Anyone who wants to change something in the property structure of society must achieve changes in the structure of public negotiations, because those who do not have property have a very weak position. He needs to find a job to pay rent and bills every month, and so he has to take what they give. There is a huge difference between those who own 100 or 200 thousand, and not zero or 10 thousand euros..."

And here is what people like Belousov think about this, who proposes "a refusal to build a consumer society, a course towards" working poverty "and clamping down on imports".

The difference between the hikes is a little impressive, isn't it?"

***

Journalist Pavel Pryanikov tries to answer the question: are the elites ready to share?

“Developed countries seem to be. For example, in the United States in the past six months, public opinion has been pumped up by the fact that billionaires have finally even begun to pay taxes at least at the level of the middle class. Plus - for capital gains. The fight against the offshorization of large companies has moved off the ground - this is the recent introduction of a lower corporate tax level for developed countries of 15% (which, of course, is not enough, but it’s the beginning).

But in Russia and China - some of the world leaders in inequality (together with the United States, South Africa, Brazil and a number of other countries) there are no such conversations yet. On the contrary, I see that the demands of a part of society last year for social payments have ceased. Again I see the type of Facebook liberal “on horseback” - “don’t give money to the prolam!”. As if someone is going to take this money away from them, and not from the collective image of the bribe-takers "Belozertsev and Sidash" (I wrote about the latter yesterday, the deputy governor only kept $ 35 million in money). Or about the money lying dead in the NWF and the reserves of the Central Bank - and this is $ 750 billion, or more than 50 trillion. rub. free money in Russia.

(At the same time, the type of Facebook liberal, especially a zealous defender of "liberal values", for the most part does not work in a market economy. This is mainly a state employee - at the Higher School of Economics, RANEPA, from various state funds of "development institutions" and other near-state offices, which the authorities have now bred quite a few - ASI, Rusnano, RVC, the Foundation for Monocities, Polytechs, etc., near-oligarchic and Western foundations and institutions, etc.

The most prominent example of this type was Gaidar and Chubais, who had not worked a day in a market economy ...)

Two types of money distribution prevail in Russia now. The first is the conditional group of Siluanov-Kudrin-Nabiullina: to distribute money only to banks, and they themselves will find successful borrowers. The second is the conditional group of deputy prime ministers Belousov-Borisov, the head of Rostec Chemezov and the "Glazyev group": give money only to "support enterprises", preferably at 0% - for the construction of tanks and missiles, bridges, railways, large factories, etc...

And there is not a single not only lobbyist, but just an influential group who would talk about the third, Western way of distributing money - to consumers, i.e. common people. People, having received money, will decide by their own spending who is an effective economic entity and who is not. Well, plus it solves humanitarian problems and the problem of real stability in society, as well as the development of the economic environment. People have no money - development is impossible..."

"