Yasin: if you do not get into the pocket of the people, the crisis is not overcome
"The president ..." - starts to lead the program "Time" Anna Schatiloff next issue, but in mid-sentence sound disappears. She picks up the phone standing on a desk phone calls to the hardware, and reports that the microphone is not working. You can hear someone behind the scenes tells her again to start the air. She then read out the decree of Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev of the monetary reform. So, exactly 25 years ago on 22 January 1991, 9:00 pm Soviet citizens learned that the country's leadership has decided to exchange all are in walking 50 and 100-ruble banknotes 1961 issue - and it gives the citizens of the three days. And since 0:00 January 23, that is, three hours after the announcement of the decree, to pay these cash characters will not be anywhere.
"Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev issued a decree to stop receiving the payment currency of the State Bank of the USSR ..." - so sounded the first sentence of the news release that Anna Shatilova able to read only the second time.
The second thought of the decree relating to the freezing of accounts of citizens in the Savings Bank: Now you can remove only the amount not exceeding 500 rubles. It was at this point (and not later when the spring of 1991 the authorities have taken steps in the direction of price increases, and in January 1992 they just released) held, in fact, the population of parting with their contributions. Soon, because of inflation of 2600% APR, they depreciate.
Officially, the currency reform was carried out under the slogan of combating counterfeit rubles importing from abroad. Author reforms, Prime Minister Valentin Pavlov, did not dare to tell the people that the real reason - a huge, not the provision of goods the money supply accumulated citizens of the USSR "under the pillow" and in savings accounts.
"We did not pursue this case in any confiscation," - persuaded the official in an interview with the same issue of "Time". In fact, the reform was precisely confiscatory. Although able to remove at least 20% of the money supply target, hit the reform of thousands of people. A chain reaction followed - by the millions.
Was there an alternative to the Soviet authorities, or except through zalezanie the people's pocket to pass the time of total crisis of the economy was not possible? What mistakes the current Russian government is not worth repeating? This is what we decided to ask Yevgeny Yasin, scientific director of the Higher School of Economics. At that time he was head of the department of the State Commission for Economic Reform under the USSR Council of Ministers and with Grigory Yavlinsky and other economists developed a program for economic recovery.
With Yevgeny Yasin interviewed by Russian Service BBC siDmitry Bulin.
BBC BBC: Pavlovskaya reform was a robbery in broad daylight, or a forced measure, prepared by decades imbalances accumulate in the economy?
Yevgeny Yasin: It was a very tense situation. The country was a few steps away from the crash, it was necessary to save the situation. And do Pavlov for accusations that it has made any efforts against the interests of the population, I can not. But I want to remind you that a year from the liberalization of prices. And whatever it was, it brought success. But Pavlov did not want to categorically.
At one time we Yavlinsky prepared proposals for the reform of the market. In February and March 1990, it was. The document was sent to the Presidential Council, which did report [Prime Minister] Nikolai Ryzhkov. We proposed liberalization. However, a presidential council of our offers "wrapped". In the March document the proposed measures, which even if it caused some problems, it is still ultimately would lead to success. We saw this in the example of Yegor Gaidar in a year ...
BBC BBC: You mean the so-called program "500 days"?
E.YA .: No, it was already written in our team, together with [Nikolai] Petrakov and Yavlinsky later. The same program has been written before. Almost no one knows what it was. To discuss the document adopted by Pavlov in January 1991, a monetary reform, virtually meaningless. For the simple reason that he did not have a consistent view of the market, he feared the liberalization of prices and tight monetary policy, which would have had to carry out. He made a mistake. He turned this monetary reform in the elementary act of bureaucracy. I think that this reform does not deserve special attention. What is now to organize "holidays" in each case?
Zalezanie in his pocket [ordinary people] - common monetary policy steps
BBC BBC: Nonetheless, from that moment, many believe, the people who lived in the Soviet Union and unconditionally trust him, almost lost confidence in the government. Subsequently, this process continue to unfold in society. Repeats any errors of the time, you think the current Russian authorities in any case should not allow?
E.YA .: Now a completely different system. Now the market economy. No one on the dynamics of prices does not infringe. These are different things. Then it was the change of the political and economic regime of the country. Now this is not. But I must say that the current crisis is largely due to the fact that in 2003, measures were taken to limit the democratic development and political competition. In this mode, the country could be exactly as long as oil prices rose. And now need to go back to the fact that to make up market reforms.
BBC BBC: But I would like to draw attention to the similarity of the overall situation in the economy at that time and now. And in the Soviet economy, and in the modern Russian accumulated structural imbalances for a long time. And then, and now align these structural imbalances, in fact, is due to the fact that the state reaches into the pocket of ordinary people. Then seized the excess money supply, and now the Russians withdraw unsecured revenue due to inflation.
E.YA .: Zalezanie in his pocket - common monetary policy steps. If you do not climb if you unnecessary expenses, you do not stop the crisis, and only make one more step towards its deepening. The fight against inflation, which is currently in the Central Bank of Russia through the transition to a floating exchange rate, and to counter inflation, now, in my opinion, insufficient.
The key rate at 11% - this is even less than the 13% inflation rate [at the end of 2015]. It is not enough! And if you take and prescribe is now 15-percent rate, then everyone will start screaming. In fact, the Central Bank, of course, need to raise rates. I do not belong to the category of people who believe that the people need to feel sorry for - through shifting subsequent tests on others. In this sense, I fully support the line Gaidar. And I think that in today's Russia, living in a market economy - albeit inefficient and far too over-regulated - such stories, which we experienced in 1991, is no more.
I do not belong to the category of people who believe that the people need to feel sorry for - through shifting subsequent tests drugihEvgeny Yasin
BBC BBC: So you propose to go through the ordeal today, to not have to worry even more severe test tomorrow?
E.YA .: The question is not that. Russia has a different purpose. I believe that we wrote "500 days", and then the Gaidar reform not to just loosen the tests that hang over Russia, survived the communist system.
This is a question with respect to recovery, to the effect that Russia could develop. Do not just weaken the contradictions continue to live in an agonizing situation, and this issue is beyond the normal functioning of the market economy, where the market is more trusted than official. From my point of view, stopping the crisis and subsequent recovery - is possible through the reforms that we have to do. Although they are, of course, will also have negative consequences.
"Excessive forbearance"
BBC BBC: Can you summarize that if we stand up to the position of an ordinary person, a simple Russian citizen who works, saves money, out of the situation for the country does not exist without this man would have been treated unfairly?
E.YA .: Why is unfair?
BBC BBC: He eventually lose their savings.
E.YA .: But it was necessary to vote in elections: Who is this Russian who chose. We had to worry about it. It was necessary to think. If he lives in the same way as a traditional peasant under serfdom, well, so what does he want? It can bring some sacrifices. Hopefully, it will go to a lesser extent in the common man. But the reforms have to finish.
BBC BBC: Here we come to such an important issue, which now many say that the solution to our economic problems lies in the political, noneconomic plane ...
If the Russians living in the same way as a traditional peasant under serfdom, well, so what does he want? Yevgeny Yasin
E.YA .: Absolutely.
BBC BBC: And if we go to the political plane, it's just a person gets very dosage, limited information about what is happening in the economy, and, on this basis, vote. It turns out that his choice - after all not his fault.
E.YA .: In one sense. In all democratic countries, human choice is not always his fault. I remind you, as the US President George W. Bush decided to invade Iraq. And Americans supported, all shouting: "Come on, we will win!". The Americans are in this sense like us. But what is the result?
No restraint in this country; They got Saddam Hussein, given Iraqis, because in America there is no death penalty - they executed him. Now what? The so-called "Islamic State" [forbidden in Russia] to capture the city of Mosul and the oil it produces and sells on the world market. I believe that it was a tremendous mistake of the US government.
Arab countries, in many cases, led by the military rulers and the military rulers are mainly suited for that audience and to the people who need to be controlled. Our Russian people you have something in common - not to the same degree, of course - these Islamic nations. It is characterized by excessive patience.
Source: www.bbc.com
This is not yet clear, the Liberal Yevgeny Yasin?
Yassin: the country needs a policy of liberalizing the economy
On the sidelines of the forum "Modernization of the economy and society," one of its main organizers, scientific director of the HSE Yevgeny Yasin shared with "NO" the vision of the processes occurring in the economy.
After the anti-crisis measures taken by the Government to return to growth in Russia will allow only structural reforms. We need to modernize the economy, productivity growth, increasing efficiency. It may provide a new institutional system that uses the benefits of the market economy. The country needs a policy of gradual liberalization of the economy, based on free enterprise, competition, the rule of law.
I believe that in 2012 Russia had a chance in the economic policy to the path of "decisive breakthrough", involving large-scale liberalization of the economy. This question is now off the agenda. Power all along adhered to the inertial scenario, based on the relation to the price of oil. Now the government is trying to script option mobilization, increasing role of the state, taking the policy of import substitution, increasing the growth of military production.
But the emphasis on import substitution under the constraint of external relations will only lead to a simplification of the structure of the economy, support inefficient enterprises and ultimately to the depletion of resources, and, after a brief recovery is likely to even deeper recession.
The only correct under the current conditions scenario is the option of gradual Liberalization development involves finding balance between the interests of the ruling elite, society and business. If this option is combined with the institutional, structural reforms, while Russia will be able after some time to return to growth.
Source: newizv.ru
Actual Archive 2008
The Russian government on Yasin.Modern Russian rulers and their ideologists today prefer not to dwell on that which we have a state, and whose it represents the interests of more speaking of GDP, rates of monetary units, the national projects, roads, debt, taxes, and so on, trying to as little as possible to touch this important question. Written in the Constitution that Russia - a democratic federal law state with a republican form of government and that's it.
The latter, who was marked by an attempt to approach the question of the state, from a cohort of leaders of the Communist Party and the post-perestroika times, was Mikhail Gorbachev. Then this figure, nothing new has failed to come up, pulled out into the daylight worn concept of "people's state", and began trumps them all, pretending that he has mastered and understood the modern state. In the end, this "people's state", somehow got into the crisis, the people did not want to defend "their" state, and it without any problems, thanks to the leaders of the CPSU, has become bourgeois, and even with an oligarchic form of government. After these transformations do not fit in the narrow-minded view of the state, our professors and politicians no longer have decided to raise this issue in order not to amuse people.
But suddenly, Yevgeny Yasin, scientific director of the Higher School of Economics and an active member of denationalization, the newspaper "Kommersant» №145, raised this issue and shared the errors of the state, giving them a scientific understanding than reiterated the well-known saying of Engels that the professor is not a scientist, and scientist Professor.
So what is in Russia for the state, according to Yassin? "Professional discussion (Professor in advance preparing a defense, trying to limit the scope of the discussion of its terminology, and its views on the state) implies recognition of all some parcels that are not the subject of the dispute, and its base.
There are only four. Firstly, the state of the economy is always present, and no one argues that it should leave at all. Secondly, differences of opinion are to those functions, which are recognized by the state. The main of them - to ensure law and order; macroeconomic stability; defense and security; forming the necessary social institutions; provision of public services (health, education and so on. n.); social protection; environmental security; promote the development of the economy (which is just referred to as structural and industrial policy); eliminating "defects of the market" (including through direct control of prices, wages, and so on. n.); state enterprise (production of goods and services that can be produced by private companies).
Third, they add up in life circumstances that make it appropriate for the State to any of these functions in a given volume. Sometimes it is necessary to increase the role of the state and brings a positive effect. But the government in order to better cope with their tasks better understand in what direction should focus. Finally, fourthly, the choice of the optimal level of state involvement in the economy must take into account the conditions and the stage of development of the country, its position relative to other countries, especially the national culture and institutions. "
That's how much the professor uttered platitudes about the state, but in fact nothing substantial to say. What begins! "First, the state of the economy is always present, and no one argues that it has to go at all." This statement may be added that the Volga flows into the Caspian Sea, the moon revolves around the Earth, and the Earth around the sun, etc. And not only begins but also throughout his article, Professor gives many obvious and meaningless statements, "capitalism had passed industrial stage and joined the post-industrial age", "large corporations have crossed national borders", and the like.
But then, when the professor is taken to talk about the functions that are recognized by the state, even more interesting. The main task, according to Yasin, performs the state - is "to ensure law and order." True. But most importantly, in the definition and understanding of the state, not the state to enforce the law and order, and then, in whose interest the laws are written, and which is supported by the procedure. I must admit that not only in Russia but also in Germany, in France and in Mexico there are republican form of government, but the results of this board are substantially different. Today in Russia we see that the existing laws, all the time, capable of enriching a small part of the population and the poverty of the majority of the people. To understand that there is no need to delve too much in theory. It is enough to impartially evaluate the events.
Whose interests on earth, protect prosecutors in Surgut, trying to influence the chairman of the trade union committee of the independent union of "Surgutneftegaz" Alexander Zakharkina demanding pay increases?
"The president ..." - starts to lead the program "Time" Anna Schatiloff next issue, but in mid-sentence sound disappears. She picks up the phone standing on a desk phone calls to the hardware, and reports that the microphone is not working. You can hear someone behind the scenes tells her again to start the air. She then read out the decree of Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev of the monetary reform. So, exactly 25 years ago on 22 January 1991, 9:00 pm Soviet citizens learned that the country's leadership has decided to exchange all are in walking 50 and 100-ruble banknotes 1961 issue - and it gives the citizens of the three days. And since 0:00 January 23, that is, three hours after the announcement of the decree, to pay these cash characters will not be anywhere.
"Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev issued a decree to stop receiving the payment currency of the State Bank of the USSR ..." - so sounded the first sentence of the news release that Anna Shatilova able to read only the second time.
The second thought of the decree relating to the freezing of accounts of citizens in the Savings Bank: Now you can remove only the amount not exceeding 500 rubles. It was at this point (and not later when the spring of 1991 the authorities have taken steps in the direction of price increases, and in January 1992 they just released) held, in fact, the population of parting with their contributions. Soon, because of inflation of 2600% APR, they depreciate.
Officially, the currency reform was carried out under the slogan of combating counterfeit rubles importing from abroad. Author reforms, Prime Minister Valentin Pavlov, did not dare to tell the people that the real reason - a huge, not the provision of goods the money supply accumulated citizens of the USSR "under the pillow" and in savings accounts.
"We did not pursue this case in any confiscation," - persuaded the official in an interview with the same issue of "Time". In fact, the reform was precisely confiscatory. Although able to remove at least 20% of the money supply target, hit the reform of thousands of people. A chain reaction followed - by the millions.
Was there an alternative to the Soviet authorities, or except through zalezanie the people's pocket to pass the time of total crisis of the economy was not possible? What mistakes the current Russian government is not worth repeating? This is what we decided to ask Yevgeny Yasin, scientific director of the Higher School of Economics. At that time he was head of the department of the State Commission for Economic Reform under the USSR Council of Ministers and with Grigory Yavlinsky and other economists developed a program for economic recovery.
With Yevgeny Yasin interviewed by Russian Service BBC siDmitry Bulin.
BBC BBC: Pavlovskaya reform was a robbery in broad daylight, or a forced measure, prepared by decades imbalances accumulate in the economy?
Yevgeny Yasin: It was a very tense situation. The country was a few steps away from the crash, it was necessary to save the situation. And do Pavlov for accusations that it has made any efforts against the interests of the population, I can not. But I want to remind you that a year from the liberalization of prices. And whatever it was, it brought success. But Pavlov did not want to categorically.
At one time we Yavlinsky prepared proposals for the reform of the market. In February and March 1990, it was. The document was sent to the Presidential Council, which did report [Prime Minister] Nikolai Ryzhkov. We proposed liberalization. However, a presidential council of our offers "wrapped". In the March document the proposed measures, which even if it caused some problems, it is still ultimately would lead to success. We saw this in the example of Yegor Gaidar in a year ...
BBC BBC: You mean the so-called program "500 days"?
E.YA .: No, it was already written in our team, together with [Nikolai] Petrakov and Yavlinsky later. The same program has been written before. Almost no one knows what it was. To discuss the document adopted by Pavlov in January 1991, a monetary reform, virtually meaningless. For the simple reason that he did not have a consistent view of the market, he feared the liberalization of prices and tight monetary policy, which would have had to carry out. He made a mistake. He turned this monetary reform in the elementary act of bureaucracy. I think that this reform does not deserve special attention. What is now to organize "holidays" in each case?
Zalezanie in his pocket [ordinary people] - common monetary policy steps
BBC BBC: Nonetheless, from that moment, many believe, the people who lived in the Soviet Union and unconditionally trust him, almost lost confidence in the government. Subsequently, this process continue to unfold in society. Repeats any errors of the time, you think the current Russian authorities in any case should not allow?
E.YA .: Now a completely different system. Now the market economy. No one on the dynamics of prices does not infringe. These are different things. Then it was the change of the political and economic regime of the country. Now this is not. But I must say that the current crisis is largely due to the fact that in 2003, measures were taken to limit the democratic development and political competition. In this mode, the country could be exactly as long as oil prices rose. And now need to go back to the fact that to make up market reforms.
BBC BBC: But I would like to draw attention to the similarity of the overall situation in the economy at that time and now. And in the Soviet economy, and in the modern Russian accumulated structural imbalances for a long time. And then, and now align these structural imbalances, in fact, is due to the fact that the state reaches into the pocket of ordinary people. Then seized the excess money supply, and now the Russians withdraw unsecured revenue due to inflation.
E.YA .: Zalezanie in his pocket - common monetary policy steps. If you do not climb if you unnecessary expenses, you do not stop the crisis, and only make one more step towards its deepening. The fight against inflation, which is currently in the Central Bank of Russia through the transition to a floating exchange rate, and to counter inflation, now, in my opinion, insufficient.
The key rate at 11% - this is even less than the 13% inflation rate [at the end of 2015]. It is not enough! And if you take and prescribe is now 15-percent rate, then everyone will start screaming. In fact, the Central Bank, of course, need to raise rates. I do not belong to the category of people who believe that the people need to feel sorry for - through shifting subsequent tests on others. In this sense, I fully support the line Gaidar. And I think that in today's Russia, living in a market economy - albeit inefficient and far too over-regulated - such stories, which we experienced in 1991, is no more.
I do not belong to the category of people who believe that the people need to feel sorry for - through shifting subsequent tests drugihEvgeny Yasin
BBC BBC: So you propose to go through the ordeal today, to not have to worry even more severe test tomorrow?
E.YA .: The question is not that. Russia has a different purpose. I believe that we wrote "500 days", and then the Gaidar reform not to just loosen the tests that hang over Russia, survived the communist system.
This is a question with respect to recovery, to the effect that Russia could develop. Do not just weaken the contradictions continue to live in an agonizing situation, and this issue is beyond the normal functioning of the market economy, where the market is more trusted than official. From my point of view, stopping the crisis and subsequent recovery - is possible through the reforms that we have to do. Although they are, of course, will also have negative consequences.
"Excessive forbearance"
BBC BBC: Can you summarize that if we stand up to the position of an ordinary person, a simple Russian citizen who works, saves money, out of the situation for the country does not exist without this man would have been treated unfairly?
E.YA .: Why is unfair?
BBC BBC: He eventually lose their savings.
E.YA .: But it was necessary to vote in elections: Who is this Russian who chose. We had to worry about it. It was necessary to think. If he lives in the same way as a traditional peasant under serfdom, well, so what does he want? It can bring some sacrifices. Hopefully, it will go to a lesser extent in the common man. But the reforms have to finish.
BBC BBC: Here we come to such an important issue, which now many say that the solution to our economic problems lies in the political, noneconomic plane ...
If the Russians living in the same way as a traditional peasant under serfdom, well, so what does he want? Yevgeny Yasin
E.YA .: Absolutely.
BBC BBC: And if we go to the political plane, it's just a person gets very dosage, limited information about what is happening in the economy, and, on this basis, vote. It turns out that his choice - after all not his fault.
E.YA .: In one sense. In all democratic countries, human choice is not always his fault. I remind you, as the US President George W. Bush decided to invade Iraq. And Americans supported, all shouting: "Come on, we will win!". The Americans are in this sense like us. But what is the result?
No restraint in this country; They got Saddam Hussein, given Iraqis, because in America there is no death penalty - they executed him. Now what? The so-called "Islamic State" [forbidden in Russia] to capture the city of Mosul and the oil it produces and sells on the world market. I believe that it was a tremendous mistake of the US government.
Arab countries, in many cases, led by the military rulers and the military rulers are mainly suited for that audience and to the people who need to be controlled. Our Russian people you have something in common - not to the same degree, of course - these Islamic nations. It is characterized by excessive patience.
Source: www.bbc.com
This is not yet clear, the Liberal Yevgeny Yasin?
Yassin: the country needs a policy of liberalizing the economy
On the sidelines of the forum "Modernization of the economy and society," one of its main organizers, scientific director of the HSE Yevgeny Yasin shared with "NO" the vision of the processes occurring in the economy.
After the anti-crisis measures taken by the Government to return to growth in Russia will allow only structural reforms. We need to modernize the economy, productivity growth, increasing efficiency. It may provide a new institutional system that uses the benefits of the market economy. The country needs a policy of gradual liberalization of the economy, based on free enterprise, competition, the rule of law.
I believe that in 2012 Russia had a chance in the economic policy to the path of "decisive breakthrough", involving large-scale liberalization of the economy. This question is now off the agenda. Power all along adhered to the inertial scenario, based on the relation to the price of oil. Now the government is trying to script option mobilization, increasing role of the state, taking the policy of import substitution, increasing the growth of military production.
But the emphasis on import substitution under the constraint of external relations will only lead to a simplification of the structure of the economy, support inefficient enterprises and ultimately to the depletion of resources, and, after a brief recovery is likely to even deeper recession.
The only correct under the current conditions scenario is the option of gradual Liberalization development involves finding balance between the interests of the ruling elite, society and business. If this option is combined with the institutional, structural reforms, while Russia will be able after some time to return to growth.
Source: newizv.ru
Actual Archive 2008
The Russian government on Yasin.Modern Russian rulers and their ideologists today prefer not to dwell on that which we have a state, and whose it represents the interests of more speaking of GDP, rates of monetary units, the national projects, roads, debt, taxes, and so on, trying to as little as possible to touch this important question. Written in the Constitution that Russia - a democratic federal law state with a republican form of government and that's it.
The latter, who was marked by an attempt to approach the question of the state, from a cohort of leaders of the Communist Party and the post-perestroika times, was Mikhail Gorbachev. Then this figure, nothing new has failed to come up, pulled out into the daylight worn concept of "people's state", and began trumps them all, pretending that he has mastered and understood the modern state. In the end, this "people's state", somehow got into the crisis, the people did not want to defend "their" state, and it without any problems, thanks to the leaders of the CPSU, has become bourgeois, and even with an oligarchic form of government. After these transformations do not fit in the narrow-minded view of the state, our professors and politicians no longer have decided to raise this issue in order not to amuse people.
But suddenly, Yevgeny Yasin, scientific director of the Higher School of Economics and an active member of denationalization, the newspaper "Kommersant» №145, raised this issue and shared the errors of the state, giving them a scientific understanding than reiterated the well-known saying of Engels that the professor is not a scientist, and scientist Professor.
So what is in Russia for the state, according to Yassin? "Professional discussion (Professor in advance preparing a defense, trying to limit the scope of the discussion of its terminology, and its views on the state) implies recognition of all some parcels that are not the subject of the dispute, and its base.
There are only four. Firstly, the state of the economy is always present, and no one argues that it should leave at all. Secondly, differences of opinion are to those functions, which are recognized by the state. The main of them - to ensure law and order; macroeconomic stability; defense and security; forming the necessary social institutions; provision of public services (health, education and so on. n.); social protection; environmental security; promote the development of the economy (which is just referred to as structural and industrial policy); eliminating "defects of the market" (including through direct control of prices, wages, and so on. n.); state enterprise (production of goods and services that can be produced by private companies).
Third, they add up in life circumstances that make it appropriate for the State to any of these functions in a given volume. Sometimes it is necessary to increase the role of the state and brings a positive effect. But the government in order to better cope with their tasks better understand in what direction should focus. Finally, fourthly, the choice of the optimal level of state involvement in the economy must take into account the conditions and the stage of development of the country, its position relative to other countries, especially the national culture and institutions. "
That's how much the professor uttered platitudes about the state, but in fact nothing substantial to say. What begins! "First, the state of the economy is always present, and no one argues that it has to go at all." This statement may be added that the Volga flows into the Caspian Sea, the moon revolves around the Earth, and the Earth around the sun, etc. And not only begins but also throughout his article, Professor gives many obvious and meaningless statements, "capitalism had passed industrial stage and joined the post-industrial age", "large corporations have crossed national borders", and the like.
But then, when the professor is taken to talk about the functions that are recognized by the state, even more interesting. The main task, according to Yasin, performs the state - is "to ensure law and order." True. But most importantly, in the definition and understanding of the state, not the state to enforce the law and order, and then, in whose interest the laws are written, and which is supported by the procedure. I must admit that not only in Russia but also in Germany, in France and in Mexico there are republican form of government, but the results of this board are substantially different. Today in Russia we see that the existing laws, all the time, capable of enriching a small part of the population and the poverty of the majority of the people. To understand that there is no need to delve too much in theory. It is enough to impartially evaluate the events.
Whose interests on earth, protect prosecutors in Surgut, trying to influence the chairman of the trade union committee of the independent union of "Surgutneftegaz" Alexander Zakharkina demanding pay increases?
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий