Yuri Boldyrev of the Russian Pension tragicomedy
Songs of the notes, but not the main thingA little more than six months ago, a scandal broke out quickly and then decayed by. Deputy Minister of Economy, who said last summer 2014, the year that he was ashamed of the state, once again freeze the transfer to the funded part of pensions, was quickly dismissed. Not for the fact that advocated "funded" scam, but just not made according to the order. Liberal (focused on financial and speculative capital) media extolled the "hero", who has decided to protest, have denounced the authorities, such as, once again put his hand into the pocket of future retirees. Decent response from any other flank then, in my opinion, was not followed. Limited and only meet assurances power that, say, pensioners will not be affected. Even Crimea to this issue for some reason, dragged, saying that money was spent, including on the necessary contingencies, but eventually all will be offset by future pensioners.
Now the question is again the center of attention - in connection with the application already president. According to RBC, in a closed meeting with media representatives of big business, "the president assured the businessmen that abolish mandatory funded pension system will not be."You can imagine how big business representatives are worried about their future "funded" pensions: so worried that even the president himself was dared to ask.Or something does not add up? Maybe there is a suspicion that it is not about their future pension bother oligarchs? But then what did? Surely the future of our pensions?The answer is not hard to find. The same reasoning leads RBC one of the officials of the government, "Cancel funded pension actually means the destruction of an entire sector of the economy."Now it is clear: "economy" they call compulsorily take us with you (on the pretext of allegedly raising concerns about future pensions) of our money and then they scroll private shops. And, as you might guess, is not small shops, an initiative by people from somewhere below, and those that are, or at least controlled by these same members of the above mentioned private meeting with the president of the oligarchs."Long money" and a short memoryRationale for use to finance development of pension funds has long been known. Like, it's really the only "long" money. Well, what is the objection? What could be the objection to a market economy, someone their impeccable work and behavior gained a tremendous reputation that we are happy to voluntarily would be exactly in his piggy bank to put these "long" money - their retirement savings. But I repeat: voluntarily. When the money is withdrawn from us and forcibly transferred to someone who has the appropriate reputation in our eyes is not won, yes, by the way, in any way, and we can not guarantee that this money will necessarily go exactly to our scientific and technological and industrial development, the how to call it? How does this relate to the pooling of resources for the development of a market economy?If admit that it is a known non-market instrument (our rulers, such as the "market", but for the sake of raising funds for development of the country which did not?), Then known tools and others. In particular, such an old memory, perhaps, in our country and not too popular, as forced treasury bonds. The question of how these funds are impaired loans during the Soviet era, it's a separate issue. But here's the reference to this tool is certainly no doubt about it, it's that borrowed money will not "cool" private desks on the financial and speculative market, and go straight to the case - the country's development.In our case, taking into account the two above examples, it is obvious: no forced fundraising is on the development - specific development projects (in Soviet times - in accordance with the five-year plans), which, of course, for the people hard and cumbersome, but at least it is clear that for which all or a genuine market mechanism fundraising voluntary. In the latter case, the reputation of specific competing companies, including the authors of the projects or even (though this is not a "true market") in the state-controlled projects under government guarantees as to maintain and increase the purchasing power of invested funds.And what we have?We have the power and the media controlled by the oligarchy over a dozen years, the citizens are fed tales about "people's IPO», future "funded" pensions and other options to reach the mass of happiness does not work, and financial manipulation.What will turn this deception? The fact that the "cumulative" part of pensions for decades, "accumulation", in the end, will inevitably turn to zilch. And future generations of workers will still have to allocate money from their income and budgets to feed the elderly.But if we have a day when I am writing this article (Saturday March 21, 2015, just a few months after the collapse of the ruble) on the main state television channel in all seriousness quoted Finance Minister Soluyanova who, without batting an eye, tells us that now "the ruble has indeed become one of the strongest currencies," then, you see, this is how the same population in the short memory of its strategy expects our government?Direct and indirect lossesAnd now about the philosophy of life. In particular, the philosophy of fraud, which we continue to fall.We have implemented "snag" with force "cumulative" pensions are not harmless. Harm from it, by and large, at least two.The first - the material. Money deducted from this or that more or less creative sphere (from the state budget or the budget of the family) and deliberately transferred to the sector of financial and speculative. Which, I remind myself not sow and reap and wealth, strictly speaking of, does not produce. The idea that the financial sector is an ideal controller, directing funds more effectively for the benefit of the whole society, than it would have done the people themselves with their money or the state as a whole (if the funds collected to the budget), it seems so obvious fraud that discuss it is hardly even worth it.Damage to the second - world. People drummed into the heads of the illusion that there is something more reliable than themselves, their children, they form a society and the state. Moreover, palming them as such property is not the sea and the sun, valleys and mountains, forests and fields, factories and universities, libraries and museums, yes, finally, even if gold and silver, but merely wrappers. Wrappers, stress has not sent down from above, but only the issuing State. Thus, the state in which they are so conditioned to believe somehow less than in the same state issued wrappers - money.Questionable assumptions and false conclusionsThe very idea of "accumulation" of pension schemes stems from two postulates and relevant conclusions.First, the state - is unreliable, deceive. Conclusion: it means that it is necessary to save "separate from the state."Second, our society is aging, and the day is near when a pensioner will have to work no more, and only one, or even less. Conclusion: one worker to feed several pensioners can not, then you need to save for old age itself, in advance.I characterize themselves postulates just as questionable - in the sense that they are not absolute but depend on us, on our attitude. This also applies to the reliability or, conversely, the unreliability of our state. A is and how many people in the future will be to feed one pensioner - this will agree, is also not certain given, sent down from above, but only a trend, ultimately depends on our collective behavior.Conclusions I characterize as unequivocally and even deliberately false - at least, not in relation to the individual and the mass behavior in the framework of a unified pension system.Fiction freedom of choiceWhat is the hoard "separate from the state"? This means that every action voluntarily at their own risk, and even desirable, zastrahovyvaya their savings from the encroachments of the state. The simplest example: he decided how much to defer, then translated ruble savings in pounds, francs or dollars and put it on your foreign bank account. Moral and political side of the issue is not being considered, but recognize that it is - really "separate from the state" (ours, but with voluntary becoming dependent on other countries, to release these dollars, francs and pounds). But what does this supposedly "separate from the state" has to state the same organized system of forced savings, and even in the same state dictated by the volume, shape and resources? Despite the fact that for the most simple and important - elementary maintain the purchasing power of savings - no state responsibility not accept. This seemingly self-evident responsibility of the organizer savings, leads us to the accumulation of a specific form, is replaced by the creation of a certain appearance of competition and the free market any private pension funds. The latter, of course, compete with each other to attract pension funds. But only a truly free competition can not be called: because the "service" is, strictly speaking, forcibly imposed on the citizens of the state, and the minimum amount of pension resources to "draw" these pension funds and the state is guaranteed, that is guaranteed to citizens seized and handed over to the collective financial speculators.What eats a pensioner?And second fallacy - that just one worker to feed as many pensioners can not, we must all pensioners save for old age themselves. But then, the question is: what to save? Perhaps what they will eat?For those who do not know who may be living away from the family pension age, reveal a terrible secret: the pensioner does not eat a penny or even dollars. Retired eat bread, vegetables, dairy products, and if revenues permit, and even fish and meat. But save the bread, butter and milk future retirees forty years ahead can not. So, to save money have. But the main question: what is the money of future retirees will be able to buy?In particular, whether our collective future pensioner, even if, say, he has accumulated (collectively, that is, all pensioners) and even a lot of a lot of rubles, however, to buy bread, butter, and milk more than made future collective worker, which, as we know from the study of pension reform, per retiree will be very little?The problem in the logic of the supporters of "accumulation" of the pension system here has become very clear, and then the sound of their last argument.Will the Chinese worker to feed the Russian pensioner?This last argument is as follows: that the world economy is a common, and therefore have a worldwide financial accumulation absolute value and therefore still allow our future pensioners receive a decent pension. What this means in the language of the illusory financial and speculative to normal common Russian?This means the assertion that our future pensioners, thanks to the remarkable 'funded' pension scheme, will feed the employee is not Russian, and American or Chinese. Or something else - of those, I think, the countries where such a wonderful "funded" pension scheme to introduce apparently just do not know?And if, God forbid, guess?And if you just ... do not want to feed us? If I am not mistaken, the guaranteed transfer of our forced retirement "savings" in hard currency, no one promised. And what will be tomorrow, the weight of our ruble savings in global financial markets?Theorize about it can be any number, but there is a practice, and it is more convincing. For example, we showed only that the implementation of our power collapse in their own half of the national currency? It is obvious: the possibility or impossibility of tomorrow for future retiree buy their forced "retirement savings" not manufactured by our employees coffee and bananas, and more importantly, imported medicines depends not on the success of the "individual management strategy" for its future pension savings. And from what? Yes, all of the same: will he, along with other future retirees, the ability to build their own state responsible. And timely to ask those with senior officials, who today have almost unlimited opportunity to rob us all with impunity.***From the point of view of the application - if it is only momentary adopting practical solutions - the above is enough. But the question of compulsory retirement "accumulation" goes beyond the momentary practical, because in the next article, we will continue this theme.Yuri BoldyrevSource: trueinform.ru
Songs of the notes, but not the main thingA little more than six months ago, a scandal broke out quickly and then decayed by. Deputy Minister of Economy, who said last summer 2014, the year that he was ashamed of the state, once again freeze the transfer to the funded part of pensions, was quickly dismissed. Not for the fact that advocated "funded" scam, but just not made according to the order. Liberal (focused on financial and speculative capital) media extolled the "hero", who has decided to protest, have denounced the authorities, such as, once again put his hand into the pocket of future retirees. Decent response from any other flank then, in my opinion, was not followed. Limited and only meet assurances power that, say, pensioners will not be affected. Even Crimea to this issue for some reason, dragged, saying that money was spent, including on the necessary contingencies, but eventually all will be offset by future pensioners.
Now the question is again the center of attention - in connection with the application already president. According to RBC, in a closed meeting with media representatives of big business, "the president assured the businessmen that abolish mandatory funded pension system will not be."You can imagine how big business representatives are worried about their future "funded" pensions: so worried that even the president himself was dared to ask.Or something does not add up? Maybe there is a suspicion that it is not about their future pension bother oligarchs? But then what did? Surely the future of our pensions?The answer is not hard to find. The same reasoning leads RBC one of the officials of the government, "Cancel funded pension actually means the destruction of an entire sector of the economy."Now it is clear: "economy" they call compulsorily take us with you (on the pretext of allegedly raising concerns about future pensions) of our money and then they scroll private shops. And, as you might guess, is not small shops, an initiative by people from somewhere below, and those that are, or at least controlled by these same members of the above mentioned private meeting with the president of the oligarchs."Long money" and a short memoryRationale for use to finance development of pension funds has long been known. Like, it's really the only "long" money. Well, what is the objection? What could be the objection to a market economy, someone their impeccable work and behavior gained a tremendous reputation that we are happy to voluntarily would be exactly in his piggy bank to put these "long" money - their retirement savings. But I repeat: voluntarily. When the money is withdrawn from us and forcibly transferred to someone who has the appropriate reputation in our eyes is not won, yes, by the way, in any way, and we can not guarantee that this money will necessarily go exactly to our scientific and technological and industrial development, the how to call it? How does this relate to the pooling of resources for the development of a market economy?If admit that it is a known non-market instrument (our rulers, such as the "market", but for the sake of raising funds for development of the country which did not?), Then known tools and others. In particular, such an old memory, perhaps, in our country and not too popular, as forced treasury bonds. The question of how these funds are impaired loans during the Soviet era, it's a separate issue. But here's the reference to this tool is certainly no doubt about it, it's that borrowed money will not "cool" private desks on the financial and speculative market, and go straight to the case - the country's development.In our case, taking into account the two above examples, it is obvious: no forced fundraising is on the development - specific development projects (in Soviet times - in accordance with the five-year plans), which, of course, for the people hard and cumbersome, but at least it is clear that for which all or a genuine market mechanism fundraising voluntary. In the latter case, the reputation of specific competing companies, including the authors of the projects or even (though this is not a "true market") in the state-controlled projects under government guarantees as to maintain and increase the purchasing power of invested funds.And what we have?We have the power and the media controlled by the oligarchy over a dozen years, the citizens are fed tales about "people's IPO», future "funded" pensions and other options to reach the mass of happiness does not work, and financial manipulation.What will turn this deception? The fact that the "cumulative" part of pensions for decades, "accumulation", in the end, will inevitably turn to zilch. And future generations of workers will still have to allocate money from their income and budgets to feed the elderly.But if we have a day when I am writing this article (Saturday March 21, 2015, just a few months after the collapse of the ruble) on the main state television channel in all seriousness quoted Finance Minister Soluyanova who, without batting an eye, tells us that now "the ruble has indeed become one of the strongest currencies," then, you see, this is how the same population in the short memory of its strategy expects our government?Direct and indirect lossesAnd now about the philosophy of life. In particular, the philosophy of fraud, which we continue to fall.We have implemented "snag" with force "cumulative" pensions are not harmless. Harm from it, by and large, at least two.The first - the material. Money deducted from this or that more or less creative sphere (from the state budget or the budget of the family) and deliberately transferred to the sector of financial and speculative. Which, I remind myself not sow and reap and wealth, strictly speaking of, does not produce. The idea that the financial sector is an ideal controller, directing funds more effectively for the benefit of the whole society, than it would have done the people themselves with their money or the state as a whole (if the funds collected to the budget), it seems so obvious fraud that discuss it is hardly even worth it.Damage to the second - world. People drummed into the heads of the illusion that there is something more reliable than themselves, their children, they form a society and the state. Moreover, palming them as such property is not the sea and the sun, valleys and mountains, forests and fields, factories and universities, libraries and museums, yes, finally, even if gold and silver, but merely wrappers. Wrappers, stress has not sent down from above, but only the issuing State. Thus, the state in which they are so conditioned to believe somehow less than in the same state issued wrappers - money.Questionable assumptions and false conclusionsThe very idea of "accumulation" of pension schemes stems from two postulates and relevant conclusions.First, the state - is unreliable, deceive. Conclusion: it means that it is necessary to save "separate from the state."Second, our society is aging, and the day is near when a pensioner will have to work no more, and only one, or even less. Conclusion: one worker to feed several pensioners can not, then you need to save for old age itself, in advance.I characterize themselves postulates just as questionable - in the sense that they are not absolute but depend on us, on our attitude. This also applies to the reliability or, conversely, the unreliability of our state. A is and how many people in the future will be to feed one pensioner - this will agree, is also not certain given, sent down from above, but only a trend, ultimately depends on our collective behavior.Conclusions I characterize as unequivocally and even deliberately false - at least, not in relation to the individual and the mass behavior in the framework of a unified pension system.Fiction freedom of choiceWhat is the hoard "separate from the state"? This means that every action voluntarily at their own risk, and even desirable, zastrahovyvaya their savings from the encroachments of the state. The simplest example: he decided how much to defer, then translated ruble savings in pounds, francs or dollars and put it on your foreign bank account. Moral and political side of the issue is not being considered, but recognize that it is - really "separate from the state" (ours, but with voluntary becoming dependent on other countries, to release these dollars, francs and pounds). But what does this supposedly "separate from the state" has to state the same organized system of forced savings, and even in the same state dictated by the volume, shape and resources? Despite the fact that for the most simple and important - elementary maintain the purchasing power of savings - no state responsibility not accept. This seemingly self-evident responsibility of the organizer savings, leads us to the accumulation of a specific form, is replaced by the creation of a certain appearance of competition and the free market any private pension funds. The latter, of course, compete with each other to attract pension funds. But only a truly free competition can not be called: because the "service" is, strictly speaking, forcibly imposed on the citizens of the state, and the minimum amount of pension resources to "draw" these pension funds and the state is guaranteed, that is guaranteed to citizens seized and handed over to the collective financial speculators.What eats a pensioner?And second fallacy - that just one worker to feed as many pensioners can not, we must all pensioners save for old age themselves. But then, the question is: what to save? Perhaps what they will eat?For those who do not know who may be living away from the family pension age, reveal a terrible secret: the pensioner does not eat a penny or even dollars. Retired eat bread, vegetables, dairy products, and if revenues permit, and even fish and meat. But save the bread, butter and milk future retirees forty years ahead can not. So, to save money have. But the main question: what is the money of future retirees will be able to buy?In particular, whether our collective future pensioner, even if, say, he has accumulated (collectively, that is, all pensioners) and even a lot of a lot of rubles, however, to buy bread, butter, and milk more than made future collective worker, which, as we know from the study of pension reform, per retiree will be very little?The problem in the logic of the supporters of "accumulation" of the pension system here has become very clear, and then the sound of their last argument.Will the Chinese worker to feed the Russian pensioner?This last argument is as follows: that the world economy is a common, and therefore have a worldwide financial accumulation absolute value and therefore still allow our future pensioners receive a decent pension. What this means in the language of the illusory financial and speculative to normal common Russian?This means the assertion that our future pensioners, thanks to the remarkable 'funded' pension scheme, will feed the employee is not Russian, and American or Chinese. Or something else - of those, I think, the countries where such a wonderful "funded" pension scheme to introduce apparently just do not know?And if, God forbid, guess?And if you just ... do not want to feed us? If I am not mistaken, the guaranteed transfer of our forced retirement "savings" in hard currency, no one promised. And what will be tomorrow, the weight of our ruble savings in global financial markets?Theorize about it can be any number, but there is a practice, and it is more convincing. For example, we showed only that the implementation of our power collapse in their own half of the national currency? It is obvious: the possibility or impossibility of tomorrow for future retiree buy their forced "retirement savings" not manufactured by our employees coffee and bananas, and more importantly, imported medicines depends not on the success of the "individual management strategy" for its future pension savings. And from what? Yes, all of the same: will he, along with other future retirees, the ability to build their own state responsible. And timely to ask those with senior officials, who today have almost unlimited opportunity to rob us all with impunity.***From the point of view of the application - if it is only momentary adopting practical solutions - the above is enough. But the question of compulsory retirement "accumulation" goes beyond the momentary practical, because in the next article, we will continue this theme.Yuri BoldyrevSource: trueinform.ru
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий