The national idea is dependency. How the rise in prices pulled together government and population

But popular. Which is more important in an election year. How far will the populist steps of the Cabinet of Ministers take and should we expect a sharp "rollback" after the elections?

Victoria Pavlova

Recent polls by the Levada Center, showing 75% of Russians are confident that the interests of the authorities and society do not coincide, can hardly surprise anyone. In 2007, a discrepancy was found in 63% of the respondents. However, today this trend has every chance of a refraction and a new turn - immediately after March 8, the government and society merged in a single impulse and agreement. The new unifying idea was price control.

Back in the USSR 2.0

First, Mikhail Mishustin signed a decree according to which the relevant ministries, together with the FAS, must monitor prices for consumer goods and services in order to prevent their growth. Immediately after that, data from the Levada Center arrived, indicating that the share of Russians who consider the rise in prices to be the main problem of society has grown to 58%. On the other hand, the share of people who consider poverty and impoverishment as the main problem fell to 40%, and the share of those concerned about corruption - to 39%. The number of those dissatisfied with the "weakness of the authorities" also decreased.

Nostalgia and the people's desire for the Soviet model are becoming brighter: let the government live in a parallel world, the salary is penny and allows you to save up at best for Zaporozhets, but rye bread is 16 kopecks each, and a ticket to the Pyatigorsk sanatorium from the trade union could be obtained for 30% of the cost.

Professor of the European University, economist Dmitry Travin believes that there is nothing special and surprising in this, and the problem of rising prices worried and continues to worry Russians under any government:

- I remember the 90s well. Then there was no Putin, no authoritarian regime, and the rise in prices was definitely one of the problems. People are worried about this problem, this is a natural human property.

But independent analyst Dmitry Milin draws attention to the fact that the authorities themselves are interested in this state of affairs.

- The authorities, themselves amazed by the psychology of dependency, the majority of whose representatives have never soiled their hands with creative labor and have always lived at the expense of the state, are implanting the ideology of dependency in society. The years of youth and maturation of most of our representatives fell on the period of Brezhnev's "stagnation", and they, being unable to come up with something new, simply reproduce those "stagnant" years in the current version of "stability" - a version of economic stagnation interrupted by crisis falls. By and large, what the country (forcedly!) Began to withdraw from in the late 1980s (it was not Gorbachev's love of democracy that led to Perestroika, but “stagnation” - more than a decade of stagnation of the Soviet economy, because reforms in the USSR were not started by Gorbachev , and Andropov, whom it is difficult to suspect of democracy), has now returned in full. 68% of Russians believe that the state should take care of its citizens and provide them with a decent lifestyle. Moreover, the situation changed quite quickly: in 2015, 49% of respondents thought so, in 2020 - already 60%, in 2021 - 68%. Moreover, 37% of Russians want to become officials, that is, they are not eager to bother themselves with creative work. An extremely sad situation: in fact, in Russia in 2021 the Soviet society of infantile parasites, affected by the syndrome of "learned helplessness", was reproduced. In such a state of society, there can be no modernization, and the country's future is extremely sad, with the prospect of a repetition of the collapse "a la" of the USSR in 1991.

Receive or earn?

It is interesting to trace on what strings of public sentiments politicians played in modern Russia.

Earlier, while there was still at least some semblance of a course towards a healthy market economy, rather than state capitalism with elements of a planned economy, the authorities did not seek to focus attention on the surge of Russians' concerns about prices. In the short-term program of Yevgeny Primakov in 1998 and the program of Sergei Stepashin in 1999, the emphasis was placed on the restoration of budget revenues, economic growth and the strengthening of the ruble. In 2009, Vladimir Putin, being prime minister, was surprised only by the prices for sausages in Perekrestok, and in 2015 Dmitry Medvedev was busy with import substitution and inquired about prices only in the Voronezh grocery store. In late 2020 - early 2021, the rhetoric changed dramatically. “Why did the responsible ministries and departments not take timely measures and missed the situation with the rise in prices for important products? Although you have all the tools. Underestimated the risks. They let it go", - said Mikhail Mishustin at a meeting with the government last December. At the same time, the profit of the "profitable business" last year fell by almost a quarter. Such populism resonates in the hearts of voters, but does not at all contribute to economic recovery and further improvement of living standards. The experience of the “iron lady” Margaret Thatcher in Great Britain, showing that unpopular measures, together with strict adherence to the chosen course, give positive results, is still alien to us. At first, many people did not like the privatization of state-owned companies and the decline in social protection. And then it turned out that you can earn more money than just "receive" from the state. But our government, as experts say, chooses the most simple, comfortable and safe option for itself in the short term.

"The authorities are unable to ensure price stability without the formation of the Soviet "deficit" effect and the black market (the black market also existed during the Second World War under Stalin, when people were shot on the spot for speculating in food) with unregulated prices. You can always find out about the success in regulating prices by the disappearance of products and goods in stores. If prices are fully stable (this was already in the days of "war communism" arranged by Lenin), famine will begin”, - notes Dmitry Milin.

Why don't the Europeans complain about the rise in their prices?

In Europe, most products are not at all cheaper than ours. For example, if 1 kg of chicken breast in one of the largest Moscow supermarket chains costs 319 rubles, then in an ordinary Norwegian supermarket you will have to pay about 1200 rubles for it. The disruption of production chains during the pandemic hit the prices of basic foodstuffs hard around the world: in Indonesia, tofu has risen in price by 30%, in Brazil, black beans have risen in price by 54%. Only here from the same Norway for some reason you do not hear complaints about high prices.

It's just that the average salary there is 43 thousand kroons per month, at the current exchange rate it is about 370 thousand rubles. And this salary is available to 80% of the population. If there is an opportunity to make good money or, in extreme cases, to receive material assistance from the state, then the rise in prices ceases to worry the people so much. The main difference between developed economies is that during a crisis they try not to save money, but, on the contrary, to increase public spending in order to revive production and get out of the crisis as soon as possible. In the United States, for example, the House of Representatives of the Congress approved the second package of economic support. This time it is valued at $ 1.9 trillion. Of these, 410 billion are direct payments of $ 1,400 per person. To spend. Another $ 1,200 monthly unemployment supplement has been extended since September, and the Child Benefit is $ 3,600.

The government encourages consumption growth, but payments are one-off, benefits are also limited in time, and then you will have to maintain your usual standard of living. In our country, even with products that are far from the most expensive by world standards, people can only afford a very meager and completely unhealthy diet, especially in the Far East. And in every possible way they hope that the price freeze will last for a long time, remembering the USSR with a penny inflation. However, many people forget about the consequences - the hyperinflation of 1990-1995.

Experts warn of the dangers of restrictive measures.

"From an economic point of view, actions to contain prices are not correct. The state should not control prices. The more market in the economy, the better. And if the state ever interferes in some issues, then it should not be administrative control over prices, but more subtle regulatory mechanisms", - Dmitry Travin notes.

Hunger and humility

There is a clear tendency in Russia: as soon as there is a chance to work and increase their income, the level of public concern about prices immediately falls. So, by 1998 (even before the default), when private entrepreneurship was growing by leaps and bounds, only 40% noted the rise in prices as the main problem of society. In 1999, after the default, this figure went up to 85%. In 2003, when the wave of stability began to roll in, price concerns were 48%.

People could come to terms with constantly updated price tags, but this takes many years without crises and shocks. The rise in prices is observed all over the world - this is a natural result of the crisis and freezing of the economy. But we have raised him to the banner of populism, which can only worsen the situation. But there are elections ahead, which means that the triumph of populist measures is still ahead. Maybe the story with prices is just the first signs?

"Yes, this is populism, agrees", - Dmitry Travin, - But I don’t think that after the elections it is worth expecting any drastic unpopular decisions. However, I believe that this kind of price control measures are temporary. That is, it is not at all necessary that the government will control this in six months, but I do not expect any serious development in the economy".

Modern history knows no examples when artificial restrictions and deprivation of money from enterprises would ultimately lead to a positive result. But otherwise it is necessary to push everyone: both the government, thinking about the options for reforms, and people. To be able to work 1,786 hours a year and have an average salary of 4.5 thousand dollars a month, as in the United States, you must first try very hard and give out 2,148 hours a year. And so for decades, gradually increasing labor productivity. But hungry people hungry for unprecedented miracles are much easier to manage. This is especially true on the eve of the elections.

True, all this can lead to the opposite effect.

“You shouldn't have any illusions about the convenience of managing a“ hungry and wonder-hungry population”. The 300-year-old monarchy in Russia in February 1917 "faded in three days" due to a small shortage of bread at state regulated prices, although there was no shortage of bread at market prices, only 20% higher prices. Famine ruined more than one government, and not only in Russia. The story about Marie Antoinette with the words attributed to her: "No bread - let them eat cakes" is also a story about hunger and power", - warns Dmitry Milin.

Read about how dangerous what is happening for the current government can be and how the consequences of the current measures will come back to haunt in an interview with Novye Izvestia with a political scientist, president of the Center for the Development of Regional Policy Ilya Grashchenkov.