Among the round table participants were members of the Federation Council (Chairman of the Federation Council of the Russian Federation Sergei Mironov, Deputy Chairman of the Federation Council of the Russian Federation, member of the Presidium of the General Council of the United Russia party Svetlana Orlova), deputies of the State Duma, including Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Vladimir Katrenko .
The “round table” dedicated to the legislative priorities of United Russia was actually the first event where some approaches to the new party program were voiced. As part of the Round Table, four reports were distributed, which will form the basis of the draft program that will be proposed by the CSKP.
At the round table, Ildar Gabdrakhmanov, deputy of the State Duma of the Russian Federation, member of the Committee on Budget and Taxes, gave a report on “Competitiveness and Economic Policy”.
Truly national sovereignty is possible only with a strong, developed economy. Russia is an integral part of the global economy, where strict rules of the game apply and only the strongest survive. The rest are destined for the role of secondary countries.
For Russia, this competitive struggle in the international market is only becoming fiercer every year. If in the first years of market transformations of the Russian economy foreign companies were afraid to actively work in our market, today, when political stability and development prospects have appeared in many areas of business, their presence is only increasing. Competition is growing accordingly.
The United Russia party assigns the main role in winning this competitive struggle to Russian business itself, counting on its effective management.
However, in the modern world, not everything is determined by private business. Much depends on whether the state can create for Russian business at least equal competitive conditions with foreign companies.
Unfortunately, it can be stated that the current government is unable to effectively solve this problem.
A striking example is the situation with infrastructure. It is obvious that in this area the participation of the state is absolutely necessary; infrastructure development is his direct responsibility. It is also obvious that today its weak development is becoming a brake on the economy.
For example, on average, the share of transport costs in the price of goods in Russia is about 20%, which is 2 times higher than the costs of European companies. This is partly due to the long distances. But another reason is the poor state of communications, which leads to a decrease in the speed of movement of goods and passengers, breakdowns, and losses.
Obviously, reducing these costs is directly related to the competitiveness of the economy. Therefore, increasing the productivity of transport systems should become one of the basic goals on which government efforts should be focused.
This can only be done through infrastructure development.
It is unacceptable that in the 21st century, about 50 thousand settlements in the country do not have paved roads, and the density of roads per 1000 inhabitants in the Russian Federation is 6 times less than in Canada and 3 times less than in the USA , with a territory almost 2 times larger than in the countries of North America. What kind of development can we talk about under these conditions?
The low pace of development of the road network is directly related to low funding for road construction from the state. The total volume of financing for the transport industry from all sources in 2005 amounted to 2.4 percent of GDP, incl. road construction - 1.2 percent of GDP, while public capital expenditure alone for EU candidate countries is set at 2.3 percent of GDP.
However, instead of increasing funding for road construction, the Government is pursuing a diametrically opposite policy.
The Law of the Russian Federation “On Road Funds in the Russian Federation” was repealed, the federal road fund was liquidated, the “coloring” of road funds was abolished, all issues related to the financing of roads were transferred to the regions, which account for about 70% of all roads. At the same time, as a result of the reform of interbudgetary relations, the regions chronically lack funds not only for the development of the road network, but sometimes even for social payments to the population.
Perhaps, given the federal budget deficit, this approach was justified. At that time there was a choice: pay salaries to teachers, doctors or build roads. And naturally we chose the first option.
But why does the same situation persist today, with such a fantastic federal budget surplus?
The Ministry of Finance of Russia not only is not trying to start financing road construction at the required level, but, on the contrary, has proposed since 2007 to prohibit regions from creating targeted road funds within their budget. However, road funds exist in the USA and in many European countries. Only Germany abolished the road fund a few years ago, as it completed the task of creating an extensive road network.
Thus, in conditions of insufficient funding for road construction, it is necessary to return to the issue of creating road funds.
It is necessary to adopt a federal law on the development of road construction in the Russian Federation for 10 years, in which it is necessary to clearly define the priorities of road construction and the sources of formation of road funds, as well as the methodology for spending funds between regions. Transport tax, import duties on cars, as well as 100% of excise taxes on petroleum products can be established as sources for the formation of road funds. At the same time, funds should be allocated on a public tender basis in order to minimize the corruption component.
Speaking about the financing of road infrastructure, it should be noted that when developing infrastructure projects, it is desirable to more actively use the mechanism of public-private partnerships, as well as concession mechanisms. For this purpose, an Investment Fund was created. But you need to understand that the main financial burden in this matter should lie with the state, as it exists in developed countries.
Roads are just one example. Similar problems with lack of funding exist in other sectors of transport infrastructure. It is necessary to stimulate the modernization of existing airports, sea and river ports (including to solve such a priority task as ensuring the transit of goods along international transport corridors). And here, too, a conscious government policy is needed, and in many cases, direct financial participation.
An important tool for attracting funds for infrastructure development (especially in the areas of road construction and modernization of the engineering infrastructure of housing and communal services) can be a financial institution - a government issuing and credit agency.
Now for municipal authorities, practically the only source of debt financing is loans from local banks, which have a limited, short-term and expensive resource base.
At the same time, a fairly large debt financing market has already been formed in Russia, and modern mechanisms for issuing, circulating and repaying bond loans of executive authorities make it possible to attract financial resources for the needs of local development in a significant volume and at an interest rate significantly lower than the rate of inflation.
To carry out lending to cities and municipalities of Russia and professionally manage their consolidated debt, it is necessary to create a specialized financial institution - an issuing and crediting state agency with a special status, special tasks and the right to issue bonds. The purpose of raising funds by the Agency should be lending to budgetary municipal investment programs focused on the socio-economic development of municipalities and local financing of national projects.
The creation of the Agency could transform small municipal loans and individual short-term bank loans into large, highly liquid bond issues traded on the Russian capital market, as well as professionally manage the resulting debt.
It should be noted that the creation of the Agency does not imply the introduction of a monopoly on lending to Russian municipalities.
The creation of such an Agency will not be an innovation. A number of Western European countries have accumulated positive experience in using state financial institutions to issue debt obligations of local authorities and provide them with access to cheap market resources. European municipalities, with the exception of the largest European capitals, prefer to enter the market for internal and external borrowings exclusively through such financial structures.
An analysis of foreign experience shows that such an Agency in Russia can become an institution for national development, overcoming the uneven economic and social development of Russian municipalities.
Another aspect on which the state’s efforts should be focused is supporting the creation of new industries and enterprises, and technical re-equipment.
Despite the increase in domestic demand, industrial development in the last 7 years was mainly carried out by using existing capacities. These facilities were built back in Soviet times, and the technological equipment lags many years behind the equipment used by developed countries. A significant part of enterprises practically does not invest funds either in the creation of new technologies or in the modernization of old ones.
All this negatively affects the rate of industrial growth. Thus, if in 2004 the industrial production index was 108.3%, then in 2005 it decreased by more than 2 times and amounted to 104%.
In the context of increasing competition in world markets, such a situation is simply unacceptable. Russia is still losing to Western countries, and today to many Eastern countries, which are increasingly focused on innovative industrial development - the economy of knowledge and technology development.
Therefore, it is necessary to create conditions as soon as possible for the creation of new industries and the modernization of old ones. This is possible by creating a favorable environment for the development of investment processes, increased investment in production infrastructure and the development of innovation.
Basic things such as stability in regulation and taxation, developed and accessible financial infrastructure have a positive impact on the investment climate.
The main obstacle hindering economic development is the high tax burden, which does not give enterprises the opportunity to invest in production development. The current tax regime aims to endlessly repair old, inefficient equipment, and places high barriers to purchasing new ones. So, when purchasing new equipment on credit, an organization is obliged to pay VAT, import duty (if it is imported), and also pay property tax. In this case, interest will have to be repaid from net profit, that is, the cost of the loan will increase by another quarter. Moreover, the company must bear all these tax expenses until the project reaches the payback point.
When using a loan to repair old equipment with a book value close to zero, virtually all of these costs are eliminated.
Therefore, it is necessary to return to the issue of restoring the investment incentive for capital investments, reducing the value added tax rate and reforming it, turning it into a value added tax, and not a turnover tax, as it currently is; exemption of new equipment from property taxes for several years (with mandatory balancing of interbudgetary relations).
Natural monopolies play a significant contribution and great importance for economic development. In natural monopoly areas, price regulation should be maintained. Limits on price increases and budgets of natural monopolists must be approved annually, simultaneously with the federal budget. It is also necessary to isolate from their activities and deregulate those areas that are non-core. It is necessary to sell non-core assets. Finally, free and equal access to their services must be ensured for all market participants, citizens and organizations.
At the same time, the most important task is to ensure competition in other industries and appropriate control over the actions of major market players. It should be understood that economic monopolization trends are a significant obstacle to the development of a market economy. At the same time, such control should not be an obstacle to consolidation in industries in which consolidation is the basis for the competitiveness of Russian companies in the global market.
Infrastructure development and support for new enterprises are of exceptional importance for the economy. However, it is obvious that in today's situation the state cannot limit itself to only this role. Russia is experiencing global modernization; it is actively looking for its place in the global division of labor, those niches in which its enterprises will be the most competitive. And, in addition, it is obvious that it must ensure the development of those industries that are necessary to ensure economic sovereignty and national security. Understanding this leads to the need to develop a unified industrial strategy, an industrial policy aimed at the development of such priority industries.
The point is not that the state should completely take over the development of such industries. Yes, it is necessary to increase meat production; but this does not mean that the state should build and manage pig farms. The state should provide support for such activities. In addition, where necessary, sovereign control over strategic industries, enterprises, resources and facilities must be guaranteed.
An important task of industrial policy is to timely inform business about existing development priorities. Stimulating the development of specific industries by the state should not be a surprise to entrepreneurs. Business must know the country's needs for the development of a particular industry.
Therefore, it is necessary to adopt a federal law on state industrial policy, which will set out priority industrial sectors, directions for their development and forms of support.
Enterprises should be able to build their activities on the basis indicative long-term planning systems, intersectoral material balances for domestic industrial products. In the current situation, investors respond only to existing market needs. To orient enterprises to the country’s economic development strategy, i.e. For future needs (taking into account regional markets within the country), clear and reliable long-term indicative plans are simply needed.
The indicative planning system should include products necessary for the production of strategically important goods, the stable import of which is impossible, as well as products with a low unit cost, the transportation costs of which will constitute too large a share of its cost, which predetermines the unprofitability of imports.
Which sectors are the priority?
First of all this industries ensuring the national sovereignty of Russia. These are high-tech industries, without the development of which it is impossible to talk about the state as an independent and equal subject of the world community. These primarily include the energy industry, electronics and the information services market, the aerospace industry, aircraft and shipbuilding, and the military-industrial complex.
Energy. Due to Russia's geographical location and cold climate, the development of this industry is not only an economic issue, but also a matter of national survival. The country has all the prerequisites to make this industry one of the leading ones; it is able not only to satisfy its needs for energy resources, but also to meet global demand for energy products. Moreover, it is very important that Russia does not become a raw material appendage to the rest of the world. We need to strive to export energy products that have undergone primary, and even better, secondary processing.
Today, the electric power system significantly hinders the development of the Russian economy, as it does not meet the needs of the market. To solve this problem you need to:
- provide legislative and other conditions for attracting investment in competitive segments of the industry, primarily in heat generation, and local distribution networks;
- provide investment to those industry segments over which the state retains control (nuclear and hydropower, transmission networks).
In energy segments related to hydrocarbon production, the state must provide support for investment projects of domestic companies abroad (both in the CIS countries and abroad).
The problem of transporting energy resources is particularly challenging. In implementing its trade policy, Russia is forced to deal with the same partners, who fiercely lobby for their own interests and seek better conditions for themselves. At the same time, the country is deprived of a choice - in the absence of alternative transport routes and “exits” to other energy sectors, we are forced to accept the buyers’ conditions, otherwise there will simply be no one to sell energy resources to. In addition, Russia is forced to pay for the transit of energy resources through pipelines running through the territory of foreign states. Thus, one of the main tasks at the present stage is the creation of alternative transport routes.
Finally, it is necessary to develop new energy sectors, in particular, nuclear energy based on high-tech achievements: safe new generation reactors, hydrogen and thermonuclear energy.
Electronics and information services. The strategic goal of the development of the domestic economy is the development of its own IT industry, electronics and components, and the development of software products. It is unacceptable that Russia’s information infrastructure, which ensures the functionality of defense tasks, government structures and education, today is based mainly on foreign software and equipment. This leads to serious dependence on foreign manufacturers, high prices for the purchase and maintenance of relevant products.
Today in the field of IT technologies there is a serious lag behind the leading world powers. It is impossible to raise this industry even with the active participation of the state in 3-5 years. Therefore, it is necessary to develop an industry development program for at least 10 years.
In particular, it is necessary to create appropriate infrastructure, as well as favorable tax conditions for financing innovation activities. Thus, it is necessary to exempt fixed assets used for scientific purposes from corporate property tax.
One of the directions for the development of the industry should be the development of small high-tech enterprises. As practice shows, it is very difficult for small businesses to develop alone. Out of 10 companies, only one or two remain. If they unite into technology parks or technology centers, their “survival rate” increases to seven-eight out of nine.
A technology park, as one of the forms of territorial scientific and technical education, should be used as an organizational mechanism. The activities of the technology park represent the transformation of scientific activity into a product, which is then sold on the market. Thus, an innovative chain of goods production is built.
Among other priorities for the development of the industry, it should also be noted the speedy creation of the Russian global navigation system GLONASS (in Russia it should begin to function by the end of 2007, on a global scale in 2009), as well as the development of nanotechnology (for which it is advisable to develop and provide funding for a special target program).
Aviation industry. The development of the domestic aircraft industry is of obvious strategic importance (from the point of view of ensuring defense capability). At the same time, taking into account existing developments, scientific and design schools, and production capacities, Russia can expect to eventually occupy a certain share of the world market not only in the military, but also in the civil aircraft industry.
To support and develop the industry it is necessary:
- complete the consolidation of disparate aircraft manufacturing assets into a holding;
- provide financial support to leasing companies (including from budget funds);
- provide state orders in the form of purchases of military and special equipment necessary for the state, and the development of promising models (“fifth generation aircraft”, etc.);
- preserve fundamental scientific schools and personnel training systems.
The domestic fleet is inexorably aging; to finance construction, loans are needed, long-term and cheap. But in Russia you can get a loan for the construction of a new ship only in the amount of 20-30% of the price of the ship, and the rates on these loans range from 15-20%. Abroad, similar loans are 2 times cheaper and are provided in the amount of up to 80% of the price of the vessel. Moreover, if these loans are issued to foreign companies for a period of up to 27 years, then Russian shipbuilders are obliged to repay them after 3-4 years. Thus, the lack of own funds and long-term credit does not allow shipping companies to expand their fleet.
Meanwhile, it is obvious that Russia needs its own shipbuilding industry. This does not mean that it is necessary to deploy and maintain production of ships of all types and classes. At the same time, in a number of segments, primarily in military and high-tech shipbuilding, such products from domestic enterprises may well be competitive.
One way to support shipbuilding could be the creation of a specialized leasing company, which will play the role of a kind of financial intermediary between the customer and the shipyard. In addition, the issue of consolidating shipbuilding assets into large holdings should be considered.
In addition to the industries that ensure the national sovereignty of Russia, important are industries that serve the domestic market.
A special role is played by industries that provide employment housing and communal complex.
The housing and communal services sector is not only one of the largest sectors of the country's economy, but is also of key importance for the stable socio-economic development of the country. Wide opportunities for the development of competitive market relations in the housing and communal services complex, the huge need for modernization and potentially low-risk investments make transformations in the housing and communal services complex the basis not only for a qualitative improvement in the lives of Russians, but also for the development of new types of businesses, technologies, and professions.
The most important direction of development of the industry is the attraction of private investment in housing and communal services and the development of competition in this sector. To do this, it is necessary to create a regulatory framework that guarantees:
- predictability and “political lack of motivation” of tariffs;
- safety of investments;
- real implementation of concession agreements into practice.
One of the new areas of government activity in the housing and communal services sector should be to support homeowners in carrying out modernization and major repairs of multi-apartment residential buildings through the formation of market-based credit financial mechanisms. State support measures should include the creation of specialized agencies to provide guarantees for loans for capital repairs (modernization) of the housing stock, budget subsidies on the principles of co-financing with homeowners depending on the condition of the building, as well as targeted social support for low-income families when paying expenses for modernization (major repairs) of housing within the framework of the housing subsidy program.
Housing construction. Housing construction has, on the one hand, a great social effect, and on the other, enormous prospects as a sector of the economy. At the same time, the lack of long-term and cheap credit resources in the country, monopolization of the market, as well as the presence of administrative barriers hinder the development of production.
Obviously, first of all it is necessary to ensure supply growth. It should be about 10% per year, and the ultimate goal is to achieve a level of 1 square meter per year per person.
To ensure supply growth it is necessary:
- using budgetary funds (including federal ones) to finance the development of infrastructure and engineering preparation of sites for mass construction;
- make the growth of housing construction one of the key elements in assessing the effectiveness of regional administrations;
- actively develop new forms for Russia, such as low-rise construction.
Agro-industrial complex. Russia's development needs require the development of clear approaches to agricultural policy. It should be carried out in the interests of both the population and the industry itself. The first steps in this direction have been taken: a priority national project in the field of agriculture has been put forward and provided with funding, specific deadlines and indicators have been outlined. A bill “On the development of agriculture” has been prepared.
However, it is not possible to say that all the problems in the industry have been resolved.
- There is still a shortage of long-term resources for capital investments. Therefore, taking into account existing priorities, it is necessary to continue the policy of providing preferential long-term loans, primarily for large livestock projects.
- There remains a shortage of equipment. At the same time, due to the lack of effective demand, agricultural engineering is developing poorly. One of the ways to solve this problem is state support for the development of leasing schemes.
- It is necessary to further develop the market infrastructure, which will solve the problem of “dictation of intermediaries.”
Speaking about industrial policy, we often have to turn to the topic of the lack of “long-lasting” and “cheap” resources in the economy. Obviously, we are talking about a very pressing problem for the economy. And this brings up the issue of monetary policy.
In fact, an enhanced “sterilization” of the money supply is now being carried out, the purpose of which is to reduce inflation. However, the success of this policy is questionable. A comprehensive analysis of the monetary base, money supply, GDP and inflation rate indicates that, in general, increased monetization of the economy through investment and lending leads not to an increase, but to a decrease in inflation. Moreover, the growth rate of GDP and the reduction of inflation directly depend on the level of growth of the monetary base and money supply operating in the real economy, the level of investment in the capital of enterprises.
The existing ratio of monetary aggregates allows us to speak of “financial degeneration” in the non-resource sector of the economy. Moreover, the situation is worsening - over the past two years, due to significant withdrawals to the stabilization fund, the ratio of the monetary base to GDP has decreased from 14.4% to 13.5%. Today, the level of monetization of the Russian economy is 3-5 times lower than that of developed countries (China - 7 times).
The policy of simple accumulation of state savings led to the fact that state resources amounted to about 80% (!) of the total resources of the population, enterprises and credit organizations. As a result, the shortage of funds operating in the real economy, caused by excessive government savings and sterilization of the money supply, leads to an increase in their value, which stimulates inflationary processes and an increase in lending rates.
It is necessary to stop the practice of withdrawing a significant money supply from commercial banks, since it is they who form the money supply that is actually in demand by the economy (not causing inflation). It is the banking system that should become the main instrument for implementing state investment policy.
Tyumen region
KHANTY-MANSI AUTONOMOUS DISTRICT-YUGRA
Department of Education and Science
SURGUT STATE UNIVERSITY KHMAO
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS
DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC THEORY
DAY CARE
TEST
DISCIPLINE: economic theory
ON THE TOPIC: “Features of the development of the Russian economy in XXI century"
Completed by student:
Sharikova I.V.
Checked by: Mikityuk L.M.
In the last quarter of the 20th century, humanity entered a new stage of its development - the stage of building a post-industrial society, which is the result of the socio-economic revolution taking place in the modern world. It is known that each socio-economic revolution is based on its own specific technologies, production and technological systems and production relations. For a post-industrial society, this role is played, first of all, by information technologies and computerized systems, high production technologies that are the result of new physical, technical and chemical-biological principles, and innovative technologies based on them, innovative systems and innovative organization of various spheres of human activity. Its final result, in our deep conviction, should be the creation of a new form of economic organization - innovation economy. Analysis of the results of research by domestic and foreign scientists on this issue convinced us that the creation of an innovative economy is a strategic direction for the development of our country in the first half of the 21st century.
The main goal of this work is to analyze trends in the development of the Russian economy in the 21st century. The set goal necessitated the solution of a number of interrelated tasks:
· consider the main directions of activity of the Russian economy of the 21st century;
· analyze the problems of Russian budget policy in the 21st century;
· explore the prerequisites for the globalization of the Russian economy;
· study the innovative direction of development of the Russian economy.
The first acquaintance with the text of the Main Directions of Activities of the Government of the Russian Federation for the period until 2008 makes a good impression. “The priority areas of activity of the Government of the Russian Federation to ensure high and sustainable rates of economic growth” are:
1. Improving the standard of living of the population, promoting the development of “human capital”.
2. Elimination of structural restrictions on economic growth.
3. Contributing to increasing the competitiveness of Russian companies and strengthening their positions in the domestic and foreign markets.
4. Social and economic development of regions of the Russian Federation.
5. Rational integration of Russia into the world economy.”
However, two points immediately attracted attention. Firstly, from the text quoted above, the idea arises that raising the standard of living of the population is carried out in order to achieve high and sustainable rates of economic growth. Indeed, a high standard of living means, in particular, a high level of income of the population. They, in turn, form effective demand and savings, taxes on personal income replenish budget revenues, etc. Both of these are necessary conditions for ensuring high and sustainable rates of economic development. However, is growth, and not concern for the welfare of the population, the highest goal for which the government works?
Secondly, why only an increase in living standards, and not primarily an increase in the population and its life expectancy?
A person does not live in order to produce more goods, but increases their volume and variety in order to live better. If the population dies out, then let alone double it, there may be no one to carry out simple reproduction.
Therefore, we must put people at the forefront and look at them as a goal, and not just as a means of economic growth.
To live, a person must create, produce. If production or its result is a product, profit, etc. - is absolutized, man is reduced from the image and likeness of God to the level of a living instrument of labor or a living machine. In society, such a transformation is wider and deeper, the more the use of human labor power is carried out not by its carrier, but by another person or social institution. What happened under the slave system, feudalism, and socialism of the 20th century is what happens under capitalism.
Natural questions arise: is the economic development really so dynamic, are revenues growing so quickly that the country does not have time to spend them, is the budgetary sector really so well financed that incoming revenues turn out to be excessive from the point of view of the feasibility of increasing expenses?
The absolute and relative values of the budget deficit or surplus reflect the quality of work to implement the principle of balanced budgets established by the Budget Code, i.e. equality of income and expenses, covering planned expenses with revenues mobilized into the budget.
An effective budgetary policy of the state is impossible without the rapid growth of socially and technologically oriented public expenditures, thanks to which the state is able to give the necessary direction to the entire industrial policy and change the structure of production taking into account the realities of international competition and its own needs. An active structural policy of the state may require planning budget deficits. The most sparing sources of covering the deficit are provided, primary incomes, which are traditionally less efficient, are redistributed, and the institution of state internal debt is used.
What's new in fiscal policy in the context of the transition from a deficit to a surplus budget?
Firstly, now a surplus is being formed, but still with a primary deficit. External loans are increasingly being replaced by internal loans, and the latter are becoming not very short-term, like GKOs, but long-term (at the beginning of 2004, Bonds with a circulation period of 5 to 30 years amounted to 455.8 billion rubles out of 682 billion . rub. total volume of domestic debt).
The problems that the world economy is currently facing are derivative of each other, and even the strongest economies on the planet cannot solve them alone.
Global debt, fragile global demand, slowing growth in China and low growth in Europe do pose a threat to sustainable global economic development. Years of quantitative easing in the United States and continued economic stimulation through loose monetary policies in the European Union and Japan have resulted in large amounts of assets accumulating on the balance sheets of their respective central banks, which in turn creates risks of economic imbalances for each designated region. That is why, taking into account all these negative factors, many experts talk about future low growth rates of the world economy and a large number of risks, and the International Monetary Fund for the third time in a year is revising its forecast for world GDP downward from 3.6 to 3.4 % in 2016.
Industrial Revolution
The world is suffering both from long-standing, structural problems and is also facing completely new challenges.
The world economy is currently experiencing a period of irreversible transformation. This is due to the fact that the world is now on the threshold of another industrial revolution, which will erase the usual technological boundaries and reform established technological and production chains. The new industrial revolution will be characterized by the merging of technologies and the blurring of boundaries between the digital, manufacturing and biological spheres. The digitalization of various spheres of life will increasingly gain momentum, which will be reflected in the emergence of “smart” cities, reducing the role of intermediaries in the economy, increasing competition between digital platforms and classical banking, etc. A completely new type of industrial production will emerge, which will be based on so-called big data and related analytics, full production automation, augmented reality technologies, the Internet of things and much more.
There are already many striking examples that show what the realities of the economy will be in the era of the fourth industrial revolution. For example, the emergence of financial technology platforms such as the Bitcoin cryptocurrency, Blockchain technology, etc. is completely reformatting the world of finance, reducing transaction costs between the lender and the borrower. The attractiveness of the business models of financial technology startups leads to the fact that their estimated value is often higher than the capitalization of traditional investment banking groups. For example, the capitalization of PayPal, trading on NASDAQ, is over $44 billion, while the traditional leader in global investment banking, Deutsche Bank, is worth about $21 billion.
alternative energy
An inevitable consequence of the fourth industrial revolution is the powerful development of alternative energy. The time of expensive oil was a time of profitable investments in “green” energy, in new technologies for generating, storing and transmitting energy. As a result, alternative energy has received a powerful impetus for development and now fits harmoniously into the landscape of new realities.
On the other hand, the development of alternative energy occurs against the backdrop of a full-scale crisis of oil producing companies around the world. Due to the dramatic drop in oil prices, oil and gas companies are forced to cut staff and costs for the development of new fields. This, in turn, often leads to structural changes at the level of the economies of entire countries, for example, Saudi Arabia is discussing the idea of privatizing part of the oil giant Saudi Aramco.
The Fourth Industrial Revolution opens up enormous growth opportunities for the global economy, but at the same time poses completely new challenges. The development of technologies and new production schemes breaks existing economic structures, companies are forced to adapt to the changing needs of consumers, but a paradox arises when the economy can grow, while unemployment increases due to new intelligent systems that replace the working population. Thus, according to analysts, automation of production in Germany alone could lead to a reduction of up to 610 thousand jobs in the medium term. An economy based on new realities needs more and more highly qualified specialists who create new technologies, and less and less in low-skilled workers. This trend is intensifying over time, spreading its influence not only to sectors of the economy of certain countries, but also to entire macro-regions.
Competition is fierce and global
One of the consequences of the “industrial revolution 4.0” and structural problems in the global economy is the intensification of competition at the geo-economic level. This indirectly confirms the thesis that in modern realities “business leads politics.”
Competition in the world contributes to the emergence of new, alternative integration and infrastructure projects, each of which is distinguished by great scope and ambition. We are talking about the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the New Silk Road Economic Belt (one belt - one road) and a possible Trans-Atlantic Partnership. Thus, if the Chinese New Silk Road strategy is successful, countries participating in the implementation of this project together with China will be able to receive additional economic benefits in the form of attracting financing for infrastructure in their territories, which will have a positive impact on their trade balances. The question here is whether these projects can successfully harmonize with each other and to what extent they will interact with the EAEU.
Old and new hotbeds of geopolitical tension will contribute to the intensification of migration processes, which is already evident in the example of the countries of the European Union. This, in turn, will impose additional obligations on the European economy, which is already in a difficult situation. Moreover, the consequences of such migration tsunamis can indeed acquire the most negative connotation, as evidenced, for example, by the statements of the Austrian leadership that this country is facing the most serious crisis since the end of World War II. The proposed referendum on Britain's exit from the EU, discussions regarding the suspension of the Schengen agreement and the restoration of border controls by some countries, and much more, are all consequences of the migration crisis that Europe is facing.
Countries with developing economies need to make enormous efforts not to remain on the sidelines of the new dynamic world, but to integrate into global value chains. Resource-based countries need to embark on a transition to a knowledge and innovation economy. Otherwise, the scenario of a rollback to fundamentalism is very likely, which will become a global problem for the new system of the world economy.
Place of Russia
In these difficult conditions, which objectively affect absolutely all countries of the world, Russia is forced to withstand an additional burden in the form of economic sanctions imposed by a number of countries. Despite all the difficulties that our economy has faced, we see that Russia has everything it needs to take a worthy position in the system of new realities. This includes developed human capital, an abundance of natural resources, an advantageous geographical location, transit potential and much more. We are confident that ultimately this will allow Russia to become one of the main drivers of global economic growth.
The country's economy is gradually transforming and beginning to correspond to new world realities. Russian non-resource exports and the provision of various types of services are growing, as can be seen from the growth of the portfolio of foreign projects of Russian companies such as Rosatom, Inter RAO, etc. More and more new companies are appearing, the estimated value of which is growing at a very rapid pace due to the attractiveness of business models , - Yulmart, QIWI and many others. Among other things, our country still has the opportunity to acquire assets in many technology companies through the use of funds placed in US Treasury bonds.
Our country does not seek to develop cooperation in only one direction. On the contrary, in spite of everything, it strives to build a multi-vector system of relations both with the countries of the East and with European, Latin American and American partners. Understanding this, representatives of the business community and officials from different countries are increasingly raising the issue of the need to lift mutual sanctions and, moreover, are preparing for this, since this promises great benefits for both parties.
Global challenges are becoming more defined, and finding answers to them requires the joint efforts of the world community. Many of these issues will be reflected and logically developed in the program of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum. The time has come when new tasks and new challenges require completely new, non-standard solutions.
The geostrategic position of Russia in the period after the collapse of the USSR allowed and encouraged the country's leadership to further develop the state by reviving its power and achieving the goal of becoming one of the leading powers of the multipolar world, confidently overcoming the opposition of traditional and newly emerged competitors and gaining reliable and numerous allies. How successful was Russia in solving the pressing problems of the first decade?
In one of his pre-election articles, Vladimir Putin writes: “Russia today, in terms of the main parameters of economic and social development, has emerged from a deep recession... we have reached and overcome the indicators of the standard of living of the most prosperous years of the USSR” (Putin V.V. “Russia is concentrating – challenges, which we must answer").
Results of the first decade
This cheerful conclusion, on the one hand, is pleasant, but on the other, it means that more than 20 years of our history have actually been lost. Over these decades, the rest of the world has moved far ahead, and we are glad that we managed to return to the level from which the decline began. What is more here – joy or sadness? What do statistics and other authorities say about this? Let's look at tables 1 and 2.
Table 1
As we can see, the available opportunities were not implemented in the best way. The indicators that characterize the main wealth are especially depressing - the population’s savings and quality of life, GDP growth is insignificant and the raw materials structure of the economy is still archaic, which slows down its development and ability to counteract the growing threats to the security of the country and each of its citizens.
table 2
Of course, the losses of the last decade of the last century were too heavy, associated with the dishonest privatization of public property and the mediocre conversion of military production, which caused great harm in all spheres of society. But there was no proper activity and creativity, especially on the part of those in whose hands the country’s fragmented wealth ended up. They reacted sluggishly to the call of the Russian President to double GDP within ten years, preferring not to invest in the real economy, but to export their income abroad. At the same time, the Ministry of Finance was skeptical about this call, projecting lower GDP growth rates and diligently transferring colossal revenues from commodity exports to the Stabilization Fund and the funds that replaced it. Real GDP growth often exceeded forecasts. By the end of the period, it slowed down, which was facilitated, firstly, by the withdrawal of very significant amounts from the economy into the “safety cushion” stored abroad, and secondly, by the global economic crisis.
“We need technology. It is short-sighted to hope that oil and gas will pull us through,” said Mikhail Eskindarov, rector of the Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation. “And money that doesn’t work doesn’t do any good.” In 2008, state budget expenditures amounted to 7.57 trillion rubles, while 7.6 trillion rubles lay idle in the Reserve Fund and the National Welfare Fund. If they had worked in the domestic economy, in its real sectors, then the doubling of GDP proposed by the president would have been achieved earlier, and investing in the real economy instead of a “safety cushion” would have doubled it a second time. But neither a second doubling nor reindustrialization occurred, and the crisis hit our economy much deeper than the economies of the United States and Europe.
Note that the situation has not changed: when discussing the state budget for 2013 in the State Duma, opposition parties noted the Ministry of Finance’s desire to underestimate real incomes, artificially show a deficit, and direct the additional funds received from oil and gas exports to the Reserve Fund, and not for investments and social needs , national defense and national security.
Define an economic model
Ten years ago, when assessing the geopolitical position of the country, general indicators of the economic, military and military-economic power of Russia and the largest countries of the world were given. Their analysis showed that the Russian Federation is superior only in terms of economic potential to Germany, France, England, Japan, and in terms of the size of its territory, it is also superior to China and the United States. However, the degree of realization of the economic potential of our state turned out to be significantly lower than those of these countries, therefore, according to general indicators of economic power, Russia was weaker than the states shown in the table. The internal system indicators of the military-economic security of our country were also disappointing, and the systems for providing structures for military counteraction to threats to national security, due to the extremely limited economic capabilities of the state, are inadequate to the military-economic needs of the forces resisting real and potential military threats.
Nevertheless, at that time we believed that the Russian Federation had, although reduced, still colossal economic potential. The revival of its power and return to one of the most developed and powerful powers in the world was possible, but only with full consideration of the main lessons of history - the consolidation of society around basic social values and the tasks of countering the internal and external threats that our state faced. It is especially necessary to emphasize the urgency of this task today, since threats to national security have increased significantly, and there have been no noticeable shifts in the balance of forces in favor of Russia.
Now Russia is focusing on adequately responding to the foreseeable challenges facing the whole world: a systemic crisis, a tectonic process of global transformation - the transition to a new cultural, economic, technological, geopolitical era. While we were trying to leave socialism and become “like everyone else,” these “everyone” came more and more thoroughly to the conviction that capitalism had exhausted itself. It is impossible to list all the obstacles and tasks; let us name those that have already been clearly identified.
In general, it is necessary to “complete the creation in Russia of such a political system, such a structure of social guarantees and protection of citizens, such an economic model, which together will form a single, living, constantly developing and at the same time sustainable and stable, healthy state organism” (V.V. Putin "Russia is concentrating - the challenges we must respond to"). Such an organism guarantees the sovereignty of Russia and the prosperity of its citizens. Vladimir Putin also mentions words about justice, dignity, truth and trust. What exactly is “such” an organism?
Let us touch on some aspects of concretizing only one of the named problems - the economic model.
Firstly, we need to get off the raw materials needle and switch to innovative development of industry, agriculture and other sectors of the real economy. Without this, it is useless to talk about solving problems of the economy and other spheres of life. And the main difficulty here is that in the economy that we are building, you cannot dictate. Other methods are needed. The private sector must be interested, and government officials must be selected who are politically and economically literate, professionally competent, creative and disciplined.
Secondly, it is necessary to destroy and eliminate the possibility of merging business with officials, to completely overcome corruption (since it is recognized as high treason), but at the same time not pushing the state out of the economy under the pretext of its alleged inefficiency, but expelling ignoramuses from the state apparatus, replacing them with honest ones , economically literate people, only then will the economy become smart and efficient. This requires a lot of creative work by lawyers and legislators in the field of improving commercial law and colossal organizational work.
Thirdly, like air, it is necessary to achieve social unity in the country. It cannot be achieved without changing the decile coefficient several times, which is 1:15 in Russia as a whole, and in Moscow 1:50, while in European countries it is 1:7. Such a gap already threatens a senseless and merciless rebellion. Social unity cannot be achieved either without a progressive scale of taxation, without a substantial compensation contribution from dealers in dishonest privatization and renationalization of that part of the property, the nature of which, as experience has shown, requires its withdrawal from private hands, as well as without the liquidation of offshore companies. A lot of withdrawals and innovations are required, but all this requires strong political will, and not vigorous election appeals and promises.
Thinking about the desired economic model, especially in terms of the defense industry, I suddenly came across the newly adopted federal law “On the Foundation for Advanced Research.” We read: “The fund has the right to carry out income-generating activities only insofar as it serves the purpose for which it was created and corresponds to this purpose.” We also read: “Federal government bodies do not have the right to interfere in the activities of the fund and its officials.” I think that this law would be very suitable for the entire economy; it is aimed at neutralizing the main defect of a market economy, which focuses its subjects not on the functional effect (result), but on profit. On the other hand, we see a desire to eliminate bureaucratic obstacles created by the often incompetent actions of government agencies.
I am convinced that in an extremely contradictory socially oriented market economy it is very important not to imitate either capitalist competition or planned socialism, but to see and observe in everything the measure that determines the transition of phenomena to a new quality, even to their opposite.
Look ahead 30–50 years
On the issue of restructuring and modernization of the economy, we often oversimplify the understanding of the relationship between the economy and national security, including national defense, repeating the wise statements of authorities of the distant past that finance is the artery of war, that war requires three things - money, money and money again. But since then, when this was said, major changes have occurred in the economy and military affairs.
The military development of the twentieth century showed that with the industrialization of the economy, money is very difficult to transform into military power, and that issues of the structure of the economy, advance economic mobilization and conversion in the processes of mutual transitions of economic and military power as elements of a system of power acquire a decisive role. The Soviet Union clearly demonstrated these processes on the eve of the Great Patriotic War and during the period of conversion of military production in the 90s. Chains of objective functional and temporary relationships between economic sectors predetermine these processes, and colossal success and shameful defeat, the opportunity to “cut corners” and fail the next SAP depend on understanding and taking into account these connections in military-economic policy.
Ignoring these relationships during the years of conversion of military production made inevitable the rapid and profound collapse of not only the defense industry, but also the entire Russian economy in the 90s. This is also the reason for the extremely weak, unstable process of economic revival in the first decade of the 21st century. This is the mystery of the failures of Russia's neoliberal military-economic policy.
Military power in modern conditions presupposes such weapons and military equipment, the production of which is possible only if the structure of the real economy contains the most modern branches of production that use high technology. We are in a hurry to worry about the problems of a post-industrial economy, but in fact we have slipped into a pre-industrial economy, having lost mechanical engineering, the electronics industry, high technology and highly qualified scientific personnel. The connection between other structures ensuring national security and the economy and its structure is similar. This connection cannot be lost sight of when talking about “smart” defense and protection from new threats, about the need to look 30–50 years ahead, allocating 23 trillion rubles for programs for the development of the Armed Forces and the modernization of the defense industry, but putting up with the dominance of a raw material orientation economic policy and the outflow of brains and capital abroad.
What are the indicators related to national defense and national security in the past decade and in the future? The data in Table 3 shed light on this question.
Table 3
As we can see, spending on national defense in the first decade of this century did not rise above 2.84 percent in GDP and 18.63 percent in state budget expenditures and tended to decrease, and spending on national security was 2.41 and 11.1 percent, respectively. . The indicators of the first years of the new decade do not indicate their growth.
Financial speculation is the trading of financial assets with the aim of making a profit as a result of taking market risk. This has become one of the main forms of financial activity, along with investing, hedging, insurance, etc. Since both investment and speculation achieve financial growth, there is some kind of clouding of thinking and degeneration of financial policy.
What is underfunding of the defense industry? This may be a necessary measure, a consequence of extremely limited resources. But this may also be a method used by corrupt officials to enrich themselves under the guise of servicing defense spending. In such a situation, military financiers have to take out loans from private banks at exorbitant interest rates. The state pays for them, enriching oligarchs and corrupt officials. How it was necessary to fight financial fraud in the field of underfunding of defense expenditures in the 90s of the last century is convincingly shown in the monograph of the former head of the Main FEU of the Moscow Region, Colonel General V.V. Vorobyov (Vorobyov V.V. “Financial and economic support of defense security of Russia: problems and solutions". St. Petersburg, 2003).
This is especially important to understand in the context of the country's transition to a socially oriented market economy with pluralism of forms of ownership. Since it is happening, it is necessary to gain knowledge and ability to work in market conditions without losing the colossal opportunities for the systematic regulation of economic processes. Almost an entire decade of the existence of the defense industry in conditions of underfunding and fragmentation in the interests of the privatization of its enterprises, the loss of much of what was necessary to ensure its adequacy to threats and reliable competitiveness, also determined the failure of the first three state armament programs in the past decade. This forces us to rethink our attitude towards financial and economic technologies, understand their enormous destructive and creative power, and skillfully use it for creation.
We are talking about the role and place of the military-financial component in the system of determining factors and how to prevent its separation from military, economic and military-economic policies, how to ensure the fulfillment of their functional purpose. The main thing is to achieve the adequacy of military-financial and military-economic interests, to exclude the exaggerated influence of narrow departmental and private interests. It is necessary to ensure a combination of functional goals and economic interests in the system of contracts of subjects of military-economic relations, developing rules of the game in economic law that are acceptable to the parties, and creating a coercion mechanism acceptable to them in the form of economic sanctions, norms of legal liability, introducing new forms of economic relations, institutional innovations, modern market technologies.
One of the most effective means and paths to the goal is the creation, and in fact the revival of large integrated structures in the defense industry, destroyed by privatization and conversion of military production.
The geostrategic position of Russia in the period after the collapse of the USSR allowed and encouraged the country's leadership to further develop the state by reviving its power and achieving the goal of becoming one of the leading powers of the multipolar world, confidently overcoming the opposition of traditional and newly emerged competitors and gaining reliable and numerous allies. How successful was Russia in solving the pressing problems of the first decade?
In one of his pre-election articles, Vladimir Putin writes: “Russia today, in terms of the main parameters of economic and social development, has emerged from a deep recession... we have reached and overcome the indicators of the standard of living of the most prosperous years of the USSR” (Putin V.V. “Russia is concentrating – challenges, which we must answer").
Results of the first decade
This cheerful conclusion, on the one hand, is pleasant, but on the other hand, it means that more than 20 years of our history are actually lost. Over these decades, the rest of the world has moved far ahead, and we are glad that we managed to return to the level from which the decline began. What is more here – joy or sadness? What do statistics and other authorities say about this? Let's look at tables 1 and 2.
Table 1
As we can see, the available opportunities were not implemented in the best way. The indicators that characterize the main wealth are especially depressing - the population’s savings and quality of life, GDP growth is insignificant and the raw materials structure of the economy is still archaic, which slows down its development and ability to counteract the growing threats to the security of the country and each of its citizens.
table 2 
Of course, the losses of the last decade of the last century were too heavy, associated with the dishonest privatization of public property and the mediocre conversion of military production, which caused great harm in all spheres of society. But there was no proper activity and creativity, especially on the part of those in whose hands the country’s fragmented wealth ended up. They reacted sluggishly to the call of the Russian President to double GDP within ten years, preferring not to invest in the real economy, but to export their income abroad. At the same time, the Ministry of Finance was skeptical about this call, projecting lower GDP growth rates and diligently transferring colossal revenues from commodity exports to the Stabilization Fund and the funds that replaced it. Real GDP growth often exceeded forecasts. By the end of the period, it slowed down, which was facilitated, firstly, by the withdrawal of very significant amounts from the economy into the “safety cushion” stored abroad, and secondly, by the global economic crisis.
“We need technology. It is short-sighted to hope that oil and gas will pull us through,” said Mikhail Eskindarov, rector of the Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation. “And money that doesn’t work doesn’t do any good.” In 2008, state budget expenditures amounted to 7.57 trillion rubles, while 7.6 trillion rubles lay idle in the Reserve Fund and the National Welfare Fund. If they had worked in the domestic economy, in its real sectors, then the doubling of GDP proposed by the president would have been achieved earlier, and investing in the real economy instead of a “safety cushion” would have doubled it a second time. But neither a second doubling nor reindustrialization occurred, and the crisis hit our economy much deeper than the economies of the United States and Europe.
Note that the situation has not changed: when discussing the state budget for 2013 in the State Duma, opposition parties noted the Ministry of Finance’s desire to underestimate real incomes, artificially show a deficit, and direct the additional funds received from oil and gas exports to the Reserve Fund, and not for investments and social needs , national defense and national security.
Define an economic model
Ten years ago, when assessing the geopolitical position of the country, general indicators of the economic, military and military-economic power of Russia and the largest countries of the world were given. Their analysis showed that the Russian Federation is superior only in terms of economic potential to Germany, France, England, Japan, and in terms of the size of its territory, it is also superior to China and the United States. However, the degree of realization of the economic potential of our state turned out to be significantly lower than those of these countries, therefore, according to general indicators of economic power, Russia was weaker than the states shown in the table. The internal system indicators of the military-economic security of our country were also disappointing, and the systems for providing structures for military counteraction to threats to national security, due to the extremely limited economic capabilities of the state, are inadequate to the military-economic needs of the forces resisting real and potential military threats.
Nevertheless, at that time we believed that the Russian Federation had, although reduced, still colossal economic potential. The revival of its power and return to one of the most developed and powerful powers in the world was possible, but only with full consideration of the main lessons of history - the consolidation of society around basic social values and the tasks of countering the internal and external threats that our state faced. It is especially necessary to emphasize the urgency of this task today, since threats to national security have increased significantly, and there have been no noticeable shifts in the balance of forces in favor of Russia.
Now Russia is focusing on adequately responding to the foreseeable challenges facing the whole world: a systemic crisis, a tectonic process of global transformation - the transition to a new cultural, economic, technological, geopolitical era. While we were trying to leave socialism and become “like everyone else,” these “everyone” came more and more thoroughly to the conviction that capitalism had exhausted itself. It is impossible to list all the obstacles and tasks; let us name those that have already been clearly identified.
In general, it is necessary to “complete the creation in Russia of such a political system, such a structure of social guarantees and protection of citizens, such an economic model, which together will form a single, living, constantly developing and at the same time sustainable and stable, healthy state organism” (V.V. Putin "Russia is concentrating - the challenges we must respond to"). Such an organism guarantees the sovereignty of Russia and the prosperity of its citizens. Vladimir Putin also mentions words about justice, dignity, truth and trust. What exactly is “such” an organism?
Let us touch on some aspects of concretizing only one of the named problems - the economic model.
Firstly, we need to get off the raw materials needle and switch to innovative development of industry, agriculture and other sectors of the real economy. Without this, it is useless to talk about solving problems of the economy and other spheres of life. And the main difficulty here is that in the economy that we are building, you cannot dictate. Other methods are needed. The private sector must be interested, and government officials must be selected who are politically and economically literate, professionally competent, creative and disciplined.
Secondly, it is necessary to destroy and eliminate the possibility of merging business with officials, to completely overcome corruption (since it is recognized as high treason), but at the same time not pushing the state out of the economy under the pretext of its alleged inefficiency, but expelling ignoramuses from the state apparatus, replacing them with honest ones , economically literate people, only then will the economy become smart and efficient. This requires a lot of creative work by lawyers and legislators in the field of improving commercial law and colossal organizational work.
Thirdly, like air, it is necessary to achieve social unity in the country. It cannot be achieved without changing the decile coefficient several times, which is 1:15 in Russia as a whole, and in Moscow 1:50, while in European countries it is 1:7. Such a gap already threatens a senseless and merciless rebellion. Social unity cannot be achieved either without a progressive scale of taxation, without a substantial compensation contribution from dealers in dishonest privatization and renationalization of that part of the property, the nature of which, as experience has shown, requires its withdrawal from private hands, as well as without the liquidation of offshore companies. A lot of withdrawals and innovations are required, but all this requires strong political will, and not vigorous election appeals and promises.
Thinking about the desired economic model, especially in terms of the defense industry, I suddenly came across the newly adopted federal law “On the Foundation for Advanced Research.” We read: “The fund has the right to carry out income-generating activities only insofar as it serves the purpose for which it was created and corresponds to this purpose.” We also read: “Federal government bodies do not have the right to interfere in the activities of the fund and its officials.” I think that this law would be very suitable for the entire economy; it is aimed at neutralizing the main defect of a market economy, which focuses its subjects not on the functional effect (result), but on profit. On the other hand, we see a desire to eliminate bureaucratic obstacles created by the often incompetent actions of government agencies.
I am convinced that in an extremely contradictory socially oriented market economy it is very important not to imitate either capitalist competition or planned socialism, but to see and observe in everything the measure that determines the transition of phenomena to a new quality, even to their opposite.
Look ahead 30–50 years
On the issue of restructuring and modernization of the economy, we often oversimplify the understanding of the relationship between the economy and national security, including national defense, repeating the wise statements of authorities of the distant past that finance is the artery of war, that war requires three things - money, money and money again. But since then, when this was said, major changes have occurred in the economy and military affairs.
The military development of the twentieth century showed that with the industrialization of the economy, money is very difficult to transform into military power, and that issues of the structure of the economy, advance economic mobilization and conversion in the processes of mutual transitions of economic and military power as elements of a system of power acquire a decisive role. The Soviet Union clearly demonstrated these processes on the eve of the Great Patriotic War and during the period of conversion of military production in the 90s. Chains of objective functional and temporary relationships between economic sectors predetermine these processes, and colossal success and shameful defeat, the opportunity to “cut corners” and fail the next SAP depend on understanding and taking into account these connections in military-economic policy.
Ignoring these relationships during the years of conversion of military production made inevitable the rapid and profound collapse of not only the defense industry, but also the entire Russian economy in the 90s. This is also the reason for the extremely weak, unstable process of economic revival in the first decade of the 21st century. This is the mystery of the failures of Russia's neoliberal military-economic policy.
Military power in modern conditions presupposes such weapons and military equipment, the production of which is possible only if the structure of the real economy contains the most modern branches of production that use high technology. We are in a hurry to worry about the problems of a post-industrial economy, but in fact we have slipped into a pre-industrial economy, having lost mechanical engineering, the electronics industry, high technology and highly qualified scientific personnel. The connection between other structures ensuring national security and the economy and its structure is similar. This connection cannot be lost sight of when talking about “smart” defense and protection from new threats, about the need to look 30–50 years ahead, allocating 23 trillion rubles for programs for the development of the Armed Forces and the modernization of the defense industry, but putting up with the dominance of a raw material orientation economic policy and the outflow of brains and capital abroad.
What are the indicators related to national defense and national security in the past decade and in the future? The data in Table 3 shed light on this question.
Table 3 
As we can see, spending on national defense in the first decade of this century did not rise above 2.84 percent in GDP and 18.63 percent in state budget expenditures and tended to decrease, and spending on national security was 2.41 and 11.1 percent, respectively. . The indicators of the first years of the new decade do not indicate their growth.
Financial speculation is the trading of financial assets with the aim of making a profit as a result of taking market risk. This has become one of the main forms of financial activity, along with investing, hedging, insurance, etc. Since both investment and speculation achieve financial growth, there is some kind of clouding of thinking and degeneration of financial policy.
What is underfunding of the defense industry? This may be a necessary measure, a consequence of extremely limited resources. But this may also be a method used by corrupt officials to enrich themselves under the guise of servicing defense spending. In such a situation, military financiers have to take out loans from private banks at exorbitant interest rates. The state pays for them, enriching oligarchs and corrupt officials. How it was necessary to fight financial fraud in the field of underfunding of defense expenditures in the 90s of the last century is convincingly shown in the monograph of the former head of the Main FEU of the Moscow Region, Colonel General V.V. Vorobyov (Vorobyov V.V. “Financial and economic support of defense security of Russia: problems and solutions". St. Petersburg, 2003).
This is especially important to understand in the context of the country's transition to a socially oriented market economy with pluralism of forms of ownership. Since it is happening, it is necessary to gain knowledge and ability to work in market conditions without losing the colossal opportunities for the systematic regulation of economic processes. Almost an entire decade of the existence of the defense industry in conditions of underfunding and fragmentation in the interests of the privatization of its enterprises, the loss of much of what was necessary to ensure its adequacy to threats and reliable competitiveness, also determined the failure of the first three state armament programs in the past decade. This forces us to rethink our attitude towards financial and economic technologies, understand their enormous destructive and creative power, and skillfully use it for creation.
We are talking about the role and place of the military-financial component in the system of determining factors and how to prevent its separation from military, economic and military-economic policies, how to ensure the fulfillment of their functional purpose. The main thing is to achieve the adequacy of military-financial and military-economic interests, to exclude the exaggerated influence of narrow departmental and private interests. It is necessary to ensure a combination of functional goals and economic interests in the system of contracts of subjects of military-economic relations, developing rules of the game in economic law that are acceptable to the parties, and creating a coercion mechanism acceptable to them in the form of economic sanctions, norms of legal liability, introducing new forms of economic relations, institutional innovations, modern market technologies.
One of the most effective means and paths to the goal is the creation, and in fact the revival of large integrated structures in the defense industry, destroyed by privatization and conversion of military production.
