The economic crisis in the most negative way. Functions of the economic crisis

The global economic crisis is by far the most pressing topic discussed by politicians, economists, businessmen and society. Politicians try to guide countries through economic turmoil by distributing the resources accumulated by states; economists are looking for new anti-crisis recipes, for the first time faced with a crisis that has really engulfed all countries of the world; business seeks to preserve assets and minimize losses, and citizens, regardless of country, experience justified concern for their social status and well-being.

Parallels are drawn to the Great Depression, but what happened in 1929 and the current situation are vastly different. The uniqueness and depth of the current crisis lies in the fact that there has been a combination of cyclical, structural, credit, stock and banking crises. The situation that developed in this way was aggravated by a crisis of confidence, both on the part of commercial agents and on the part of the general population. Therefore, both the world community as a whole and individual countries will need considerable time to overcome the crisis of trust of commercial organizations and the general population in traditional financial institutions.

The crisis, as you know, is a payment for mistakes previously committed by both the state and business entities. It should be noted that the state sometimes acts contrary to the interests of economic actors, pursuing its own goals and performing actions that distort the economy to some extent. Business entities are also to blame, but it is the state, setting the rules of the game, that compels them (or allows them) to act accordingly. Consequently, crises are generated by the actions of the state, and the mistakes of business entities are secondary in relation to the mistakes of the state.

In this situation, it is of particular relevance to discuss the role of the state during the crisis, in particular, the various approaches and possible consequences of the increased participation of the state in business during the crisis.

The most common economic policy of the state during a crisis is a destructive policy, which consists in attempts to save enterprises, banks, industries and other groups of economic entities that have been seriously affected by the crisis or are considered “system-forming”. This policy is implemented through low discount rates to maintain real sector economies and credit institutions that need to increase liquidity; government orders for products, all kinds of subsidies to firms incurring losses in order to save required level production and jobs.

It should be noted that the current governments of most countries in the world, including the US, EU countries, Japan and China, are pursuing a destructive policy. This was confirmed by the summit of the G20 countries, at which their heads agreed on a package of joint anti-crisis actions providing for unprecedented government intervention in the regulation of market processes - from recapitalization and government support of banks' liquidity to its entry into their authorized capital.

But today there are examples that the destructive policy of the state led to fatal consequences (the policy of the US government in 1930, thanks to which the recession escalated into the Great Depression; the policy of the Japanese government after the 1990 crisis, as a result of which the economy throughout the subsequent period did not enter the trajectory of steady growth). Therefore, it provokes relevant discussions.

On the one hand, it is the state that should provide financial and institutional assistance to economic entities in a critical situation. On the other hand, by supporting old production facilities, we restrain the positive impact of the crisis on the change in the structure of industry. We do not speed up the way out of it, but, on the contrary, contain and deepen the crisis. Indeed, it is during a crisis that it becomes most understandable how the economy actually works. And the crisis, accordingly, performs an important economic function - the function of correction. Therefore, you should not invest in something that cannot be sold, in the production of cars that no one buys. During a crisis, money must be invested in something that generates new values.

There are examples of situations when government actions saved the economy (the policy of the British government during the crisis of 1979–1980, the policy of the South Korean government during the 1997–1998 Asian financial crisis). The essence of such a policy, called constructive, is to help citizens and reduce the role of the state in the economy. Responsible authorities in a crisis must first of all solve two short-term tasks aimed at preserving the country's payment system and helping citizens.

That is, government measures should primarily be aimed at preventing humanitarian disasters and making it easier for citizens to adapt to the new structure of the economy. It is not the enterprises that need to be helped, because the owners who made the wrong investment decisions, the incompetent managers themselves must bear the burden of responsibility. We need to help people - citizens, consumers. Raise unemployment benefits, pensions. Provide retraining of personnel, subsidize the interest rate for new self-employment. In depressed regions, to exempt citizens from taxes. By involving citizens in economic relations, the state can thus solve structural transformations in the economy.

And it is not officials who will then make decisions based on their own understanding of economic feasibility, but citizens, participating in economic activities as entrepreneurs, will take on the risks of transformations and bear responsibility for them. They can be helped by lending them, lowering the interest rate, giving them money for some projects, but through economic mechanisms, through bank lending, and not through other forms. Well, in order for them to conduct their entrepreneurial activity in the new normal conditions, it is necessary to reduce government regulation, weaken the antitrust pressure on business, and minimize the number of inspections.

In general, the state, regardless of the crisis, should help its citizens as consumers within the country and its producers abroad. And the whole policy should be aimed at this.

Doctor of Economics I. OSADCHAYA.

(This work was carried out with the financial support of the Russian State Science Foundation (Russian State Science Foundation) within the framework of the project No. 06-02-02043a "Russian transitional economy in the mirror of world economic thought."

Wassily Kandinsky named his 1917 composition "Twilight".

1. The depositor transfers money to the bank. 2. It takes its own contribution - the deposit. If the mass withdrawal of deposits exceeds the deposits, the first streak of liquidity difficulties arises. 3. The borrower receives a loan.

The diagram shows the main actions of the state to support the country's financial system.

The diagram shows payments on corporate external debt, including interest (Russia).

This is how the indices of the Russian stock exchanges (the Moscow Interbank Currency Exchange - MICEX and the Russian Trading System - RTS) changed over the course of three months.

Today, the economies of developed countries (they are usually called post-industrial) are shaken by the blows of the most severe financial crisis, comparable in scale and destructive impact to the crisis of 1929-1933 - it went down in history as the "Great Depression". Over the past years, it would seem that these countries have acquired an arsenal of means that are quite capable of protecting them from such misfortunes. Yes, and deep crises over the post-war fifty years in developed countries, in fact, was not observed. There were downturns in growth rates, recessions, and “soap bubbles” bursting in financial markets. True, there were serious crises in rapidly growing countries, and it was just the post-industrial giants that had to save them. But such disasters, such as these countries are now experiencing, have never happened. The seriousness of the situation required active and unconventional intervention by states.

World financial crisis 2007-2008 ...

The year 2007 was the starting point for the crisis, which was initially viewed as a purely American event (it broke out on the mortgage market of this country) and did not seem to pose a threat to other economies. However, the course of events, like the domino effect, began to draw ever new financial structures into the orbit of the onset of the crisis, acquiring the character of a global, seriously aggravating financial difficulties, first of all, post-industrial countries. One of the American researchers M. Spelman notes: "Today's crisis was the first, the origins of which are not in developing, but in developed countries."

In this it differs greatly from the crises that periodically hit the rapidly growing newly industrialized countries of the world in the 90s of the last century. (The Mexican crisis of 1994-1995; Brazilian 1998-1999; a series of Asian crises of 1997-1998, which engulfed Thailand, Indonesia, the Philippines, South Korea. The 1998 default in Russia was from the same series.) Then it was the post-industrial countries The West, together with international organizations, primarily the IMF, helped these countries with their financial injections of tens of billions of dollars. Now the victims of the crisis are the countries of the post-industrial economy.

What are the similarities and differences between these crises? What they all have in common is that they all developed in the context of globalization and a sharp increase in the financial interdependence of countries. However, the financial crises of rapidly developing countries are largely due to the weakness of their financial systems. Lack of economic development, lack of tough financial discipline, budget deficits, huge loans and, consequently, an increase in public debt - all this ultimately caused the collapse of confidence, massive sale of public and private valuable papers, capital flight. Those were growth crises associated with the lagging of the financial infrastructure behind the development of the economy as a whole.

The current post-industrial crisis, on the other hand, is caused by the fact that the financial infrastructure of developed countries (primarily the United States), carried away by the construction of speculative pyramids and “blowing bubbles” (that is, artificially inflating economic growth based on speculative transactions and price increases), has exceeded the real development of their economy. The consequences, however, turned out to be the same as in countries of rapid growth: loss of confidence in the global financial markets, panic on the stock markets, capital flight, the onslaught of depositors on banks and the collapse of the largest of them. The starting point of the catastrophe this time was the most developed economy in the world.

The crisis has forced the governments of the United States and other post-industrial countries to use many unconventional economic rescue measures, including nationalization and buybacks of bankrupt securities, and not just turn to proven macro economic policy but to establish truly effective methods of international cooperation between governments and central banks.

The next crisis recession in the post-industrial countries, which began in 2007, at first did not cause much alarm: as before, especially in the EU countries, the growth rates slowed down. Macroeconomic stabilization responses, with their main regulatory instruments - fiscal and monetary mechanisms - were common. True, they had to be applied in the face of revived inflationary threat. For many years after the oil crisis of the 70s, all post-industrial countries had rather low inflation rates, not exceeding 2-3% per year. However, the second half of 2007 was marked by a significant increase in the prices of consumer goods, caused by the rise in oil prices (especially for gasoline and other energy sources), as well as an increase in world prices for food products.

Thus, the taken measures of macroeconomic regulation depended on which priority was given: fighting inflation or limiting the crisis recession. For example, in the EU countries they were more afraid of growing inflation. Therefore, here, despite the possibility of the development of the crisis, monetary policy was aimed at further tightening the screws: for example, in the first half of 2007, the refinancing rate of the European Central Bank was increased from 3.5 to 4%. (Refinancing is the repayment of borrowed capital by obtaining new loans, usually at a lower rate.)

In the United States, facing the threat of a deep recession, that is, a decline in production, government agencies turned to both an incentive monetary policy and stimulus budgetary measures. Since September 2007, the Federal Reserve System has repeatedly lowered the refinancing rate, bringing it to 2% by the end of 2008. And trying to stabilize the mortgage market, they reduced the reserve rate for large real estate companies. At the same time, the government decided to subsidize private demand: of the $ 168 billion package of economic subsidies, it was decided to spend $ 100 billion on raising the income of the middle class in order to increase its consumer demand, the rest - to help small and medium-sized businesses.

Nevertheless, the crisis turned out to be unusual; it developed into a global financial crisis of an unprecedented scale. Let us list only the most significant episodes of its deployment and those "rescue operations" that the governments of developed countries began hastily to undertake.

The initial impetus for its development was the following situation in the real estate markets in the United States. The economic recovery that followed the 2001-2003 crisis pushed mortgage banks on the risky expansion of mortgage loans for unreliable, “problem” borrowers. The goal of this move is to expand markets for booming construction companies. So, if in 2001 the share of second-class loans (subprime loans) was 9% of all loans, and the share of ordinary loans - 57%, then by 2005 the situation has changed radically: the share of the former increased to 20%, and the latter dropped to 35%. And on the basis of these mortgage bonds, a trillion-dollar pyramid of secondary assets (derivatives) grew, which were acquired by banks of other countries, who invested very solid funds in these seemingly highly reliable and profitable securities. As a result, the outbreak of the mortgage crisis in the United States gave rise to a chain of non-payments and bankruptcies that spread not only throughout the country, but also beyond its borders. Liquidity crisis (that is, an acute shortage of means of payment to pay off debts and service the normal functioning of the economy) covered more and more banks and countries. (The diagram above shows how a liquidity crisis occurs.)

By September of this year, three of the top five investment banks, including the largest Lehman Brothers, had gone bankrupt in the United States. The two largest mortgage companies, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mas, are on the verge of bankruptcy, accounting for half of all mortgage debt in the country. The US government was forced to take control of them, and in fact nationalize them. The entire top of the bankrupt companies had to resign. The cost of this operation, according to experts, ranged from $ 25 billion to $ 100 billion. (Not to mention that the mortgage crisis has already cost investors and consumers hundreds of billions of dollars.)

This was followed by a completely unusual operation. After a long debate, the US Congress passed a law on the allocation of $ 700 billion for the Treasury to buy out mortgage-backed securities and other problematic assets that have lost their value from the largest banks and others. financial institutions, including non-resident banks with a significant volume of operations in the United States. The amount is colossal: after all, $ 700 billion is 5% of the US GDP, an amount 1.5 times higher than the country's defense budget. It also means an increase in government debt to 82% of GDP.

In September, the financial crisis hit Europe and Japan. Serious financial problems have arisen in Russia as well. All stock markets were in a fever. The British government was forced after bankruptcy to nationalize one of the largest banks in the country - "Bradford & Bingley". The Benelux countries pooled their finances to bail out another major Belgian bank, Fortis. The same problems arose in Germany, where one of the country's largest creditors, Hypo Real Estate, faced a liquidity crisis, for which the German government, together with a consortium of large banks, allocated a significant amount of money.

To ease liquidity problems, a group of central banks (which consists of the European Central Bank (ECB), banks in England, Canada, Japan, Switzerland and the Federal backup system USA) made a decision to allocate more than 640 billion dollars. Their next serious step is a one-time reduction in refinancing rates by 0.5%: in the USA - from 2 to 1.5%; in the euro area - from 4.25 to 3.75%; in England - from 5 to 4.5%.

A new step towards salvation financial system European countries should be considered an emergency meeting of the EU countries, at which a decision was made to coordinate the actions of all governments of the euro area (as well as England) and their central banks under the leadership of the European Central Bank. The governments of the leading European states have announced the allocation of a fairly large sums(1.3 trillion euros) to save the most important financial institutions, on whose work the functioning of the economy of each of these countries depends. Moreover, it is assumed that each of the participating countries will use the allocated funds at their own discretion, depending on the severity of the situation. At the same time, everyone agreed that the state would not go along the line of nationalizing problem banks, but would buy up their depreciating shares.

Both in the United States and in Europe, problems began in the real sector of the economy. According to IMF forecasts, in 2009 GDP growth in the United States will amount to only 0.1%, about the same in Europe, and even a slight contraction in growth is expected in England.

Time will show to what extent all the above-mentioned measures of state support, comparable in scale only with what governments took during the Great Depression of 1929-1933, will have an effect. But today many world financial and political leaders are increasingly talking about the need to radically reform the world financial system, which should reflect the realities of the globalized world of the 21st century. The complete inconsistency of the financial system with current realities is manifested, in particular, in the fact that developing countries have accumulated significant financial reserves and have become creditors of the developed world. The roles have changed.

Crisis and Russia

The Russian economy did not immediately feel the troubles of the crisis. Back in the summer of 2008, we heard our experts say that this crisis, it seems, is not terrible for us. So, in July, the Chairman of the Development Bank and foreign economic activity(Vnesheconombank - VEB) V. Dmitriev, in one of his articles in the Expert magazine, wrote: “Russia found itself relatively isolated from the financial crisis, which had only an indirect impact through the narrowing channels of foreign lending”. True, the author wrote further, "the crisis that has occurred is a warning for the future."

And this future was not long in coming. Exactly half a month later, the same magazine reported with alarm that the crisis had already hit our economy with a falling capital inflow into the country, and a reduction in domestic liquidity, and a rapid decline in the profitability of Russian business amid rising inflation. The negative effects grew like a snowball. Two circumstances made the situation worse. On the one hand, non-residents began to rapidly withdraw their capital from the money markets of Russia (money was required in the investing countries themselves), and on the other hand, access to Western loans, which, due to lower interest rates than within the country, was used by our corporations with might and main, was reduced. , including banks. There was nothing to pay off the huge accumulated debts (the external debt of banks and corporations by this time amounted to $ 500 billion, of which $ 30 billion was short-term debt).

The liquidity crisis began to develop, stock exchanges became feverish. Since September, there has been an almost continuous fall in stock indices on both our stock markets (MICEX and PTC). During September and October, trading on stock exchanges was suspended and then reopened in order to bring down the heat of passions, fueling panic waves of selling and massive dumping of depreciating stocks.

It was necessary to start rescue operations like those carried out by the governments of developed countries. Already in mid-September, the Central Bank and the Ministry of Finance took measures to pump funds into the banking system. Of great importance was the decision of the Ministry of Finance to allocate budget deposits to the amount of 1.1 trillion rubles to three systemically important banks - Sberbank, Vneshtorgbank and Gazprombank. At the same time, the Central Bank lowered the rates of contributions to the Mandatory Reserve Funds (ORF) and lowered interest rates on its own loans. These measures are believed to have added an estimated RUB 300 billion to the banking system.

In early October, there was a message about new gigantic injections into the country's banking system. By the decision of the president, adopted after a meeting with leading government economists, she was allocated from The central bank subordinated loans for a period up to 2019 - see the diagram on the previous page. (Let me explain: a subordinated loan is a loan attracted by a credit institution for a period of at least 5 years, which cannot be claimed by the lender before the end of the contract.) These funds will be distributed between Sberbank (500 billion rubles), Vneshtorgbank (200 billion rubles), Vnesheconombank ( 50 billion rubles) and Rosselkhozbank (25 billion rubles). In addition to the $ 50 billion that the Central Bank will place with Vnesheconombank (VEB) in order to finance corporate debts that are obliged to urgently pay off external debts, we should add 450 billion rubles in deposits from the National Wealth Fund.

This, of course, is not about any company that wants to get a loan. The selection is based on strict guidelines. I will cite them: “The borrowing company should conduct its main activity on the territory of Russia in the real sector of the economy. Such activities should be important either for the region's economy or for strategic industries. Only those loans that were attracted for implementation will be refinanced investment projects or the acquisition of assets in Russia. And, finally, assistance will be provided to those companies that independently attract co-financing and share the risks with the state. "

The Central Bank also received the right to lend without collateral for a period of no more than six months to commercial banks with a high reliability rating. The purpose of this step is to alleviate the position of small and medium-sized banks lending to small and medium-sized businesses.

Among the latest decisions to deal with the financial crisis, it is worth noting the following: it is assumed that the depreciating shares of some important companies for the country (primarily state-owned) will, as in Europe, be bought up for public money (in agreement with these companies). However, experts say, this "will not mean either nationalization", much less a return to socialism. "

At the same time, in an effort to reassure ordinary bank depositors, a law was passed increasing sum insured a deposit from 400 to 700 thousand rubles (by the way, similar measures have been taken in other countries affected by the crisis).

The crisis began to affect both the real economy and the level of employment. Problems can arise in construction, trade, in the service sector. Many Russian companies are already planning to cut staff by an average of 10-15%. As in the West, many of our automobile enterprises, just starting to rebuild their production from the ruins. The projected GDP growth rate for 2009, according to the most optimistic estimates, is expected to decline from 6.7% to 5.5% (IMF estimate). However, more sober-minded experts believe that this figure will be significantly lower.

The main problem now is how to channel loans to the real sector of the economy, to prevent a reduction in production, moreover, to ensure the implementation of the programs that have already been outlined by the government. Experts believe that the most important here is the reduction of taxes on enterprises (in particular, VAT) and the freezing of tariffs for natural monopolies.

In "rescue operations" aimed at overcoming the current financial crisis, we have one important advantage that was not present during the 1998 default. These are the so-called "airbags" created during the years of rapid growth oil prices and high GDP growth rates in the last decade. First of all, we are talking about the stabilization fund, designed to protect the country's economy from fluctuations in oil prices - the law on this fund was adopted in 2003 after long discussions. In addition to this main task, the fund is intended to serve as a reliable tool for sterilizing excess money flowing into the country in the form of a flow of petrodollars when the price of oil rises above the threshold value.

Over time, it was decided to divide it into two parts: the Fund for Future Generations (the stabilization fund itself) and the National Welfare Fund, the main goal of which is to stabilize pension system including covering the deficit The Pension Fund RF. This fund, which currently amounts to 2.3% of GDP, began to be “printed” to solve the problems of the financial crisis.

Another "safety cushion" is a significant amount of gold and foreign exchange reserves. At present (despite its slight decrease due to the Central Bank's operations to maintain the exchange rate national currency against the backdrop of capital outflow and the weakening of the ruble), it is still an impressive figure of more than $ 500 billion.

On the role of the state in market economy

So, the governments of the countries affected by the current crisis are increasingly conducting "rescue operations" to get out of it. Long-standing disputes about whether the state should or should not interfere in the activities of the economic mechanism stopped for a while. As supporters state regulation And his opponents in the West and in our country are unanimous as never before - it is necessary to intervene, and the sooner and on a larger scale, the better. The position retreated: the market, they say, will put everything in its place. Indeed, the state, even in a normally functioning market economy, has universally recognized fundamental functions.

The largest specialist in the development of the theory that substantiated the need for government intervention in some areas of the economy, the American economist R. Musgrave wrote: “One market mechanism cannot perform all economic functions. State policy is necessary to manage, adjust and supplement certain aspects of it. This fact is important to understand because it means that the appropriate size of the public sector is largely a technical rather than an ideological issue. "

The last remark is especially important: the presence of a state (or public) sector does not depend on the predominance of certain parties in the government, on the dominance of a reformist or conservative ideology. As practice has shown, we can only talk about the scale of this sector, about the forms and methods of government intervention. Let me briefly recall them.

The economic and social functions of the state were born with the development of the needs of a civilized market system, with the provision of freedom of competition and fair partnership. Hence the first (and, perhaps, the main) function of the state - the legislative function, which provides for the protection of personal freedom, property and entrepreneurship - that which forms the basis of the market. In other words: the state is, first of all, the law and its implementation.

As for the direct involvement of the state in economic life, it is different in different countries and at different stages of their development. Much depends on specific economic circumstances, historical conditions and traditions, on the dominant ideology, on the parties in power. However, there are areas of social reproduction where the market obviously fails to meet the needs of society or exacerbates social problems, - the so-called "market failures". In such cases, the state acquires special functions, their implementation can take different forms - from complete nationalization to state control (or partnership with private entrepreneurship). These areas include:

Production of "public goods"; their main feature is joint consumption (defense, law enforcement, education to a large extent, construction of public facilities, water supply, garbage collection, etc.);

Protection of society from the "external effects" of market activity (first of all, protection of nature, air and water environment);

Regulation of production in industries where conditions of "natural monopoly" arise (production and distribution of electricity, telecommunications, transport, communications, water supply, etc.);

Correction of the unfavorable consequences of a market economy that give rise to social inequality, unemployment, poverty;

Stabilizing the economy with the help of macroeconomic policy instruments designed to save it from crisis recessions and inflationary price increases.

The state, supplementing and ennobling the market, straightening out its individual "failures", works with it in one team. It was this symbiosis that pulled capitalism out of the Great Depression of 1929-1933. These functions are a necessary complement to the market system. Only together they form what is now called not just a market, but a civilized mixed economy.

However, government intervention has its flaws (by analogy with "market failures" they were called "government failures"). This is both an increase in the tax burden, which negatively affects production and labor incentives, and an increase in government spending... Excessive government intervention stimulates the struggle of interest groups for their own benefits ("political rent"), which causes an increase in budget deficits. And the expansion of the public sector - often unprofitable or ineffective - reduces the country's competitiveness. The hypertrophy of the state apparatus and the growth of the bureaucracy make it inert, inactive, working for itself rather than for the economy. (The magazine spoke in detail about the role of the state in a market economy in No. 6, 2006)

Listing the responsibilities of the state to regulate the market economy, I called the last function of economic stabilization, designed to smooth out or prevent cyclical fluctuations, to protect it from crises and inflationary surges. Developed country governments carry out this function through macroeconomic policies. Its main regulatory instruments are budgetary and monetary mechanisms. However, under the influence of new processes in the world, significant changes have occurred in their use (as well as in theoretical justification). In the context of globalization, the general interdependence of the economies of individual countries complicates the problem of anti-crisis management. The presence of global capital markets (when capital can easily flow into a country and just as easily flow out of it) hinders measures to stabilize the economy in individual countries, regardless of others.

Having given birth to the connectedness and interdependence of the world's economies, globalization also required new instruments of macroeconomic regulation - primarily coordination at the level of governments, central banks, and international institutions. But this has proven to be the most difficult and difficult to achieve, since differences in interests and development goals come into play. Although, when a complete collapse threatens, coordination still manages to be carried out. This was the case during the "suppression" of crises in rapidly developing countries. The same coordination had to be resorted to during the current crisis.

And yet a crisis is a crisis. Trust is easy to break, but not easy to restore. It takes time, responsible policies and joint action by governments and central banks, and international agreements. However, like any crisis, it will be overcome, first of all, thanks to the measures taken by the entire international community, including Russia.

Changes in people's incomes, their opportunities and needs during a crisis can be called a fundamental factor in the well-being of the population. "Modern economic crises are mostly caused by global hyper consumerism - the uncontrollable craving of people to consume." The main problem of the economy is that a person, as a rule, does not measure his desires and needs with his own capabilities. For most people, desires are unlimited, needs change both quantitatively and qualitatively: one desire has come true, and on the threshold the next is waiting for its turn. However, unlike needs, options are limited. The contradiction between needs and disabilities in society will always exist, but in the conditions of the economic crisis, this contradiction intensifies and further strengthens its negative impact on a person.

The economic crisis entails not only material losses: economic crises are dangerous not only for the wallet, but also for health. Financial losses or simply the cessation of income indexation, anxiety about your future and the future of your loved ones and families reduce life expectancy. A sharp decline in the purchasing power of a family, the need to refuse those goods and services that were previously available, negatively affects the emotional background of a person, which can potentially lead to stress and depression. Generally, short-term and rare stressful situations carry little risk. However, in the event of a global economic crisis, a person can be under stress for a very long time. Of no small importance is the fact how a person relates to stress itself. Belief in yourself and in your strengths allows you to adequately respond to all these problems, find new solutions that will help to overcome difficulties.

The nature and degree of the impact of the crisis on a person is determined by his character and personal characteristics and may have different outcomes. Some people give up from despair and piled up problems, others find the strength to change, adapt, develop further and be a support for their loved ones. It is at such moments that the help of relatives and friends, that is, of such a social institution as a family, can be indispensable. The family is of paramount importance in overcoming the crisis, however, the situation may develop in such a way that the crisis will affect the family in the opposite direction. Some families are even more rallying, supporting the victim of the crisis, while others are falling apart, due to the inability to cope with the accumulated contradictions, which were intensified by the crisis. Even in a strong and stable family, where the support of its members is encouraged, the victim of a crisis cannot always receive adequate help. This happens because the family system cannot be rebuilt quickly, which means that its support is not adequate to the ongoing changes in the economy or is simply insufficient. In a crisis, the family becomes a field of positive changes aimed at its integration, which are extremely necessary for each of its members.

An important role in the formation of a positive outlook in conditions of the economic crisis is played by such a social institution as education. The role of education only increases over time. Education is the most powerful driving force behind the economic growth of the country's economy, increasing the efficiency and international competitiveness of the national economy. Education is one of the most important factors national security and the welfare of the country. A high level of education makes it easier for a person to adapt to changing economic conditions, which are often associated with an increase in the requirements for the qualifications of personnel.

Some part of the population in the conditions of the economic crisis finds support in such a social institution as religion. Religion performs the function of uniting, rallying or integrating members of society. She does this by developing universal human norms and values. If a person has not found support in the institution of the family, he can, with the help of religion, come to rethink himself and his position in society and the world.

In addition to family, religion, a person's worldview is influenced by such a social institution as the media (mass media) and public opinion. It is the media that should form a positive outlook in a crisis.

The mass media are currently the main source of information for the majority of citizens. It depends on the media and journalists whether people will learn about the existing problem, how they will react to it, whether this problem will arouse interest in society and what solution can be found and applied to overcome the problem.

On the one hand, the crisis is seen as a negative phenomenon in the economy, but if you look from the other side, the economic crisis can be defined as an impetus to a new round of development.

In modern conditions, perhaps, such an interpretation of the crisis as a chance to change life for the better, because in a crisis sometimes a person is forced to radically change the scope of his activities. In addition, during the economic crisis, specific income opportunities arise.

Economic crises primarily affect the commodity, currency and stock markets, which contributes to instability in the global economy. As for gold, this is one of the few stable and safe objects for investment, since the price for it always tends to grow, which is used by reliable investment companies... Gold not only protects against such negative consequences as the financial crisis, but also allows you to earn decent money from it. The main thing is not to forget that investing in precious metals is long term investment.

You can save and increase your savings by investing in precious metals indirectly by purchasing precious coins. Coins are divided into 2 classes: investment and collectible. Most of the coins issued by the Bank of Russia are collectible. Increase your capital by investing in given type Money quite problematic, unless the person is a professional in this area. To keep your savings, you need to invest in investment coins. The Bank of Russia issues such funds in fairly large circulations, the quality of their minting is usual. They are made using a simplified technology. The pattern on their surface is simple in design and does not change over time. For collectors, numismatists, these coins are of no value, but they are a means of payment. When purchasing them, VAT is not included in the price. In addition to the above methods of investing money, one can name another one - this is investing money in commemorative coins.

The meaning of making money during an economic crisis is to focus not on getting the maximum profit, but in using your time, knowledge, energy to create and provide something truly valuable, in demand, and useful. Find ways to give people what they want, what they really need.

Thus, we can conclude that the economic crisis is capable of exerting not only a negative impact on a person, but also a positive one. The economic crisis is a time to rethink your life, reassess your capabilities and use them for the benefit not only yourself, but also in society as a whole.

World economic crisis

It began in the United States in the fall of 1929, then spread to Latin America, Western Europe and other countries in Asia and Africa. The grandiose stock market crash then, on "Black" Tuesday, October 29, 1929, marked the beginning of the crisis, or "Great Depression" of 1929-1933. The fall in prices was accompanied by a sharp decline in production, a deep crisis of the entire banking system took place, currencies devalued, enterprises went bankrupt, an exorbitant level of unemployment appeared, mass poverty, disillusionment of the population with the existing order - and this is far from complete list misfortunes that have befallen the economies of states that were not long ago considered the richest and most prosperous.

The main reasons for the world economic crisis (1929-1933) were the over-monopolization of production, the absence of any regulation of it, the disproportion between the growth of production volumes and the level of income of a significant part of the population. The population's ability to pay decreased, and it was unable to buy goods, the number of which was increasing.

The industrial crisis came together with agrarian overproduction. The agrarian crisis hit the peasants perceptibly. Due to extremely low prices, agricultural production became unprofitable, a massive decrease in food production began, and a massive ruin of rural and farm enterprises began. And this could not but affect the state of the domestic market.

The crisis has dealt a tangible blow to world trade. The decrease in trade turnover led to the curtailment of international relations. The competition between international monopolies actually grew into an open trade confrontation between countries. Trade disputes have violated the traditional foundations of financial relationships between countries.

The crisis of the 1930s forced the governments of these countries to make serious attempts to influence economic development and prevent their destructive consequences.

The Great Depression showed the inability of traditional approaches to solving socio-economic problems. In search of effective anti-crisis remedies, most countries came to the conclusion that it is impossible to get out of the crisis without government intervention. The government and business circles of the developed countries of the world made extraordinary efforts to get out of the crisis. The state became one of the factors of stability and progress in these countries, more and more economic functions were concentrated in its hands, which expanded due to side methods of economic regulation. For this purpose, credit, subsidies, loans from the state budget were widely used, the tax system was regulated. Most countries followed a policy of protectionism. The joint efforts of the state and entrepreneurs not only overcame the consequences of the crisis, but became a kind of guarantor of future stability. The transition to the broad powers of state regulation made it possible to restore the expanded reproduction of capital, find new opportunities for building up economic and technical potential, and ease the severity of social conflicts. Economic crisis 1929-1933 turned out to be world-wide. He violated all International economic ties, led to a massive reduction industrial production and other sectors of the economy of almost all states.

Closed in the USA a large number of banks, deflation appeared and real estate prices collapsed, industrial production halved, unemployment rose to 12 million people, many farmers went bankrupt, grain crops fell by half. In the UK, by contrast, the Great Depression boosted economic recovery and increased investment in older industries. For France, this period ended with the loss of its leading positions in world markets. In Germany, as a result of the depression, the National Socialists, led by Hitler, came to power, and in Italy he laid the foundation for the formation of fascism, other European countries also suffered significantly from this world crisis. As a result, we can say that the Great Depression, which began in the United States, led to the Second World War, which caused unheard of suffering to millions of people on Earth.

Causes of the economic crisis

The causes of the crisis can be external and internal. The former are associated with trends and strategies of macroeconomic development or even the development of the world economy, competition, the political situation in the country, the latter with risky marketing strategies, internal conflicts, shortcomings in the organization of production, imperfect management, innovation and investment policies.

Causes of crises:

Financial and economic situation in the country;
intense competition;
non-professional management ( erroneous decisions);
risky development (strategy);
crisis management (creating conflicts, crises);
difficult socio-political situation;
natural disasters.

In understanding the crisis, not only its causes are of great importance, but also various consequences: it is possible to renew the organization or its destruction, recovery or the emergence of a new crisis. The way out of the crisis is not always associated with positive consequences. It cannot be ruled out that a transition into a state of a new crisis, perhaps even deeper and more prolonged, is possible. Crises can occur as a chain reaction. There is a possibility and conservation of crisis situations for quite a long time.

The aftermath of a crisis can lead to dramatic changes or a soft, lasting and consistent exit. And post-crisis changes in the development of an organization are long-term and short-term, qualitative and quantitative, reversible and irreversible.

Different consequences of the crisis are determined not only by its nature, but also by anti-crisis management, which can either mitigate the crisis or exacerbate it. Management capabilities in this regard depend on the goal, professionalism, management art, the nature of motivation, understanding of the causes and consequences, responsibility.

A disruption of the established economic state in a particular country or on a global scale, which is characterized by a decrease in various financial indicators and the general state of the economy, is usually called a crisis.

It leads to massive bankruptcies of enterprises, a decrease in the level of production, and a deterioration in the life of the population.

The main features that characterize the economic crisis can be identified:

Recession in production;
massive rise in unemployment;
depreciation of the national currency;
imbalance in financial spheres;
imbalance between supply and demand in market relations;
decrease in the paying capacity of the population;
decline in GDP;
outflow of foreign capital;
an increase in the balance of payments deficit;
a sharp and significant drop in prices in the commodity industry.

The causes of the economic crisis are so diverse that it is difficult for a non-specialist to understand the primary sources and possible consequences. Decline can arise as a result of a cyclical process requiring modernization and improvement of the management system or its revision and fundamental change. So, after natural, social disasters, due to military events with the participation of a party experiencing a turning point in the economy.

It often happens to observe a combination of several factors that mutually affect the decrease in macro economic indicators... The emergence of a crisis in the country can be triggered by external and internal factors.

Over the entire history of the existence of our planet, we had to observe economic changes of local and global significance more than once. They can be studied from textbooks and library archives. Contemporaries keep fresh memories of some of them in their memory. And the younger generation can familiarize themselves in detail during lectures at specialized events.

The term "crisis" comes from the Greek word crisis. Its meaning is a turning point or a definite decision in a doubtful situation. In ancient times, it was used only in medicine and had a clear definition of the patient's condition, after overcoming which, it will become clear whether he will recover or the disease will finally destroy him.

Thus, we can say that the economic crisis is a turning point, which will show in the future how the situation will turn. And it depends on an adequate assessment by the country's leadership of the situation, the reasons and possible consequences. As well as the correctness of the actions taken by them to improve all indicators that have fallen into decay.

The concept of "crisis" was applied to the processes taking place in society about 400 years ago. And only in the 19th century it spread to the economic sphere.

Historian Philip Kay has suggested that the world's first economic crisis occurred in the Roman Empire eighty-eight years before our era. Closer to our time with a vast geography, it covered England, France and the United States in 1825. It spread simultaneously to several branches of production.

The Russian economy has found itself in similar situations more than once. The crisis of 1812-1815 can be considered a striking example.

Historians have identified the following main reasons for it:

A huge amount was allocated for the costs of the conduct of hostilities with Napoleonic France;
the ban on trade relations with Great Britain caused great damage to the Russian economy;
huge expenditures were required for the restoration of the western provinces, benefits for residents of cities affected by the devastation;
the decline of peasant farms during the Patriotic War.

Agriculture has suffered the most. At that time, peasant households were the backbone of the Russian economy. Therefore, their ruin and caused such serious consequences for the country's economy. Complete depletion of material and military resources, post-war devastation, total losses exceeded 1 billion rubles. This amount was simply enormous, given that the annual revenues of the state at that time amounted to about 100 million rubles. Historians also testify that in order to further reduce economic performance, French intelligence imported paper counterfeit rubles.

The tariff charter of 1810 saved Russia at that time from collapse in the financial and economic sphere. He was able to ensure the dominant volume of exports of goods over imported products. Significant support in a decent settlement of the current situation was provided by financial aid England.

The crisis trend in Russia was also observed in 1899. Its beginnings struck light industry and spread to heavy industry. Then about 3 thousand enterprises went bankrupt. Gross oil production declined, while the production of railroad cars and steam locomotives halved. The crisis of that time smoothly turned into a depression for our country, which ended only in 1909. Trying to increase labor productivity during this time, Russia was able to carry out technical re-equipment of enterprises. Thus, a decent number of people got the opportunity to work and earn money again.

Russia found itself in a state of default in 1998. Government bonds have depreciated, and the ruble exchange rate has decreased three times in just 6 months.

These crises, together with the world 2008-2009 that came to Russia, have a common motive - the fall in oil prices. The main industry that gives profit to the state is suffering. Even the current protracted crisis, which lasts throughout 2014-2015, which has already come into its own in 2016, has the same reason. Of course, the current situation is aggravated by a slight decline in production and a slowdown in economic growth. This is due to a sufficient measure with the sanctions that were applied by some countries in relation to Russia.

And if in 1998, in a similar situation, the reforms that were difficult for the country were passed, and many states and international funds helped to overcome the decline, today the situation is different. Important reforms are ahead, and many former partner countries are more than careful about Russia.

Undoubtedly, the way out of the economic crisis is not a lightning-fast process. This will require an integrated approach of the country's leadership to the problem and responsible adoption of many decisions. There are many people for whom such an event and the search for compromise or radical solutions to the problem is a daily job. And when everyone is doing their own thing, everything must ultimately be resolved in the best possible way.

It will be interesting and important for ordinary citizens to know about the fact, proven by scientists, of the influence of the psychological mood of society on the duration of the course, the form of the crisis and its consequences. Your behavior can be as much a "trigger" and "calming" for the country's economy. Therefore, you should not fuss once again, sow confusion and provoke panic among fellow citizens. A calm and balanced attitude to life, respectable relationships with people can play an important role in resolving a difficult situation within the country.

Socio-economic crisis

Under the new conditions, a discrepancy between the value orientations of certain groups of the population and the objective socio-economic conditions of their life is manifested. This discrepancy is expressed in the contradiction between the desire for material wealth and the low economic status of the family, as well as between the desire for high spiritual values, for spiritual development and limited opportunities due to material disadvantage and the commercialization of culture.

Socio-economic changes cover various aspects of people's lives, become universal. Through the channels of culture, knowledge, values ​​and norms are transmitted that set the widest masses a way of life that contradicts the ideas, models and stereotypes of the majority. Under these conditions, culture becomes a mechanism for the adaptation of the population to social changes, a mechanism for regulating behavior and activity, an institution for the socialization of the individual.

This role of culture largely determined the changes in the contacts of the population with it. The consciousness of the majority of people turned out to be not ready for the perception of the spread values ​​and norms. The study of contacts of the population with culture will make it possible to judge its real impact, the depth and nature of changes, to identify the strata of the population who are most involved and accept or not accept them. This will also provide an opportunity to find out the national and regional specifics of the impact of traditional and rational ways of regulating behavior and activities. Representatives of various strata and groups of the population are guided in different ways by certain methods of transferring socio-cultural information, which determines the different impact of culture on a person and her activities.

In this regard, it is supposed to take into account not only the interaction between socio-economic development and the nature of the functioning of culture, but also the problem of social differentiation of society. In the context of the transition to market relations, the social differentiation, there was a division into haves and have-nots. There is a connection between a person's position in society and his interests, values ​​and norms of life. On the basis of value orientations, a person develops his own personal position in life, an attitude towards society, ongoing changes, to various social situations, models of sociocultural information. All this makes it necessary to study the structure of the population from the point of view of the social position of people, the characteristics of their life attitudes, the prevailing value orientations. These characteristics were taken into account before, but they have become especially significant in connection with the new socio-economic situation.

Economic crisis in Russia

In the article we will analyze what caused the crisis phenomena in the country's economy at different times, and what consequences these events had for Russians.

The 1998 situation, which is more often referred to as the "Default", was a consequence of the domestic economic policy of 1992-1998 and the "Asian" crisis. Experts believe that one of the main reasons for the default was the unstable political situation in the country. Yeltsin, together with the government, tried to form a market economy and minimize government influence on business development, and the State Duma sought total control over financial flows.

As a result of internal strife, the country's economy suffered. In order to contain inflation, the money supply in circulation was reduced. The population was not paid wages and pensions, were not fulfilled financial liabilities front budgetary organizations... At the same time, high taxes remained. Most enterprises have switched to a barter form of remuneration.

The Duma adopted unbalanced budgets, in which expenses were not covered by revenues. To eliminate the imbalance, GKO obligations were issued, under which the state debt grew. In 1998, the GKO system turned into a pyramid, because old obligations were covered only by attracting new ones. In addition, restrictions on the export of capital from the country were lifted.

The internal and external debt of the state increased, and the possibilities for its return were reduced. By the end of 1997, rates on loans and government obligations began to rise sharply, and began to fall stock market... The government tried to get additional loans from the IMF and the World Bank.

At the same time, commodity prices fell significantly, and a serious financial crisis erupted in Southeast Asia. As a result, on August 17, 1998, a technical default was announced on government bonds of the Russian Federation. The policy of containing the ruble in a narrow band was deemed untenable and was replaced by a floating exchange rate. The ruble / dollar rate jumped from 6 to 22 rubles in six months.

Unprofessional management of the economy and the confrontation of political forces led to a severe crisis. The inflation rate was forcibly reduced, but production fell into decay. Investors began to leave Russia, and capital flowed abroad.

As a result, the standard of living of the population has decreased, and inflation has acquired a galloping character. The confidence of the people and investors in the state and the banking system fell for many years. Many banks and enterprises went bankrupt, and the population lost all their savings.

In world history, there have not previously been cases when the state declared a default on its domestic debt in the national currency. Money was usually printed and repaid domestic debt.

Among positive consequences default is an increase in the competitiveness of enterprises and the efficiency of exports, a general strengthening of the economy and monetary system... Monetary regulation became much softer, the amount of money in circulation was no longer limited, and budgetary discipline increased, which led to a normalization of the financial situation.

The 2008 crisis in Russia was the result of the global financial decline.

However, the American credit collapse affected our economy more than developed countries, due to the country's dependence on oil, which fell to $ 40 per barrel, unprofessional government actions and aggressive policy towards Georgia.

Economists believe that the recession began in May 2008, when Russian stock indices stopped growing. After that, the market began to fall. The deterioration of the investment climate in the country was noticed after the attack on Mechel, the authorities' protests against foreign and domestic business and the aggression in Georgia. During the Georgian conflict, our stock exchange experienced one of the worst drops in the last ten years.

The war in Georgia pushed investors to flee the country, while the general instability of world stock markets and the fall in oil prices exacerbated the situation. Huge external debt Russian companies and the inability to access Western loans led to the fact that many organizations turned to the government for help. Unemployment increased, and the devaluation of the ruble began.

At the beginning of 2009, it became clear that a second wave of problems awaited us, connected with loan defaults and a drop in oil prices. According to Forbes magazine, from May 2008 to February 2009, the number of Russian dollar billionaires decreased from 110 to 32 people.

However, in December 2009 the government announced the end of the active phase of the crisis. The consumer price index in 2009 increased by 8.8% - this is the lowest inflation rate in the entire recent history country. The fall in GDP in 2009 was 7.9%, which was the worst result among the G8 countries.

In March 2010, Forbes noted that the number of dollar billionaires doubled again and amounted to 62 people (although, before all this there were 110). The improvement in the situation is associated with the rise in oil prices and the stabilization of stock markets.

There is an opinion that our economy never got out of the pit of 2008-2009. Structural problems accumulated, and at some point had to break out. Starting in 2013, the economy began to slow down, and the foreign policy of the country's leadership led to an aggravation of the situation and financial decline.

The peculiarity of the 2014-2015 crisis is that it developed only in Russia. The countries of Europe showed little economic growth, and the United States was in the prime of its investment attractiveness. Against this background, the fall of the Russian economy looked the most gloomy.

The main source of income in our country is the sale of energy resources, and production is on the sidelines. The problems of 2014 were exacerbated by the fact that oil prices began to plummet, reaching $ 57 per barrel at the end of the year. When forming the budget for 2014, the government proceeded from the cost of $ 93 per barrel, so such a sharp drop had a detrimental effect on the financial condition.

Another factor that pushed us towards the abyss was the annexation of Crimea and aggression against Ukraine. As a result of the actions of the Russian authorities, the countries of Europe, Canada, Japan, New Zealand, Australia and the United States have imposed economic sanctions against a number of companies, credit institutions and individuals. Financial blockade and closure of access to international capital put many businesses and banks at a disadvantage, depriving them of cheap money.

In response to Western sanctions, the Russian government imposed a moratorium on the import of certain types of products from abroad, which spurred inflation and worsened the economic situation.

Thanks to foreign policy and retaliatory sanctions, capital outflows began. The devaluation of the ruble and growing inflation caused panic among the population, which rushed to buy up the currency. Inflation in 2014 was 11.4%, in January 2015 in annual terms it reached a maximum since May 2008 - 15%, and in monthly terms - a maximum since February 1999 - 3.9%.

The policy of the Central Bank also contributed to the rise in prices. Enhancement key rate in December 2014, from 9.5% to 17% provoked a collapse of the foreign exchange market, as a result of which the US dollar and euro reached historic highs. In addition, the rate increase led to an increase in the cost of loans.

As a result of the crisis, Russia lost its status as a promising market. A swift way out of a difficult situation and a return to high rates economic growth, as it was in 1999 and 2009, was impossible.

Diversifying the economy requires political reforms and structural changes. The likelihood of increased sanctions is also high, which, against the backdrop of an outflow of investments and falling oil prices, excludes the possibility of economic growth in the coming years.

In 2015, due to the depreciation of the ruble, freezing wages and rising tariffs, the level of consumption fell sharply, which, combined with a halt consumer lending led to a drop in GDP and a crisis in the financial sector. The inflow of funds from export-import operations decreased, and this slowed down construction, real estate prices fell.

The main problems of the Russian economy remain low oil prices, a tougher economic sanctions regime, as well as internal problems (high levels of corruption, poor investment climate).

The good news, however, is that the worst is over. 2016 was the last year of economic downturn, and 2017 saw modest economic growth. If the government does not take any steps to dramatically worsen the situation, the economy will remain in stagnation, demonstrating low rates of economic growth while maintaining the current level of real incomes and the quality of life of the population.

2018 for the population and enterprises is the time to finally calmly conduct a SWOT analysis and move from a survival mode to a growth and development mode. One has only to take into account that the situation in the economy will remain bad and plan your own future based on the current state, just in case, keep in mind the possible deterioration of the situation.

Ordinary people shouldn't despair either. Yes, the country lives poorly and will live even worse, but this does not mean that the same fate awaits everyone!

Read an article on how to survive the current economic crisis for ordinary people, as well as our material on how to make your first million dollars, and remember that a crisis is a time of opportunity.

The economic crisis of 1929-1933

The Great Depression is a prolonged recession in the world economy that occurred in 1929 and finally ended in the late 1930s. At the same time, the recession spread to most of the Western countries and other countries around the world. In essence, the Great Depression is a global economic crisis, and the term itself is usually used in relation to the United States of America.

By the time the crisis began, 1% of Americans had super-high incomes, 42% were super-low. In 1929, about 100 large corporations controlled half of America's corporate finance, and banking system was in a wild state banks often promised their depositors 4-5% of income per day.

Since the mid-1920s, the US stock market has been completely dominated by bulls - bulls who play on the rise in stock prices. In 1923 stock index The Dow Jones was at 99. In August 1929, it soared 400% to 380, and on September 3, the index hit a record 381.17 - one of the reasons for this rise was the activity of stock speculators.

The amount of savings that US residents kept in banks rose sharply. Interest rates then were low, so bank loans were available to very many Americans who expected to repay them in the future. Speculators took out bank loans in order to invest this money in stocks.

The state of affairs in the industry seemed brilliant. Industrial companies reported profits and preferred to invest them in the production of new types of products. This prompted market players to actively buy up their shares. However, in 1929 it became clear that stocks did not provide a high level of dividends, and the profit forecast of many issuing companies turned out to be overestimated. Issuing companies faced declining sales while their stock prices rallied.

October 24, 1929 (this day went down in history as "Black Thursday") on the New York Stock Exchange there was a sharp decline in shares, marking the beginning of the largest in the history of the world economic crisis.

“Bulls” were replaced by “bears” - players for a fall. Investors began to sell shares en masse, attempts to hold stock prices were unsuccessful.

The cost of securities fell by 60-70%, business activity dropped sharply, and the gold standard for major world currencies was canceled.

The most solid shares - the American Telephone and Telegraph Company, the General Electric Company and the General Motor Company - lost up to two hundred points within a week. By the end of the month, shareholders had lost over $ 15 billion. By the end of 1929, the fall in securities prices reached a fantastic amount of $ 40 billion. Firms and factories were closed, banks collapsed, millions became unemployed.

In the first three years of the depression, 4,835 banks went bankrupt. And the panic-stricken population tried at the first opportunity to withdraw their savings from the surviving banks, as a result of which the amount of money in circulation grew from $ 454 million in 1929 to $ 5699 million at the end of 1932.

The crisis raged until 1933, and its effects were felt until the late 1930s.

Industrial production during this crisis fell by 46% in the United States, 24% in the UK, 41% in Germany, and 32% in France. Industrial stocks fell 87% in the US, 48% in the UK, 64% in Germany, and 60% in France. Unemployment has reached colossal proportions. According to official figures, in 1933 there were 30 million unemployed in 32 developed countries, including 14 million in the United States.

The "New Deal" of President Franklin Roosevelt, the essence of which was to carry out state-monopoly regulation of the economy, made it possible to gradually normalize the situation in the country. The New Deal policy included price regulation, initiating a union of producers in large enterprises, the social program, the establishment of a minimum wages, the maximum working week, the introduction of pensions for employees who have reached the age of 65, etc.

As a result of this crisis, the US created the Securities and Exchange Commission to set the rules of the game and punish violators. A law was also passed that prohibited links between investment and commercial banks, and introduced government insurance bank deposits in an amount not exceeding $ 100 thousand (for this purpose, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation FDIC was formed).

The market recovered to pre-crisis values ​​only after 39 years - only in 1954 the Dow Jones index exceeded the level on September 3, 1929.

Development of economic crises

The concept of the economic crisis is associated with the concept of the cyclical development of the economy by N.D. Kondratyev. A crisis is one of the successive phases of the cycle along with recovery, depression and recovery.

Marxist theory considered crises to be an integral part of only the capitalist economy. Non-Marxist economic theories initially denied the inevitability economic cycles, proving the possibility of overcoming cyclicality within the framework of traditional market mechanisms.

In the first half of the XX century, the idea arose that the cyclical nature, and, consequently, the reasons giving rise to crises, can be overcome by state regulation of the market economy. These representations are associated with the name of J.M. Keynes.

Recently, the position of a number of specialists has been determined, according to which state intervention in economic processes does not always lead to a smoothing of cyclicality and anti-crisis regulation, but often turns into a directly opposite result, expressed in maintaining and provoking cyclicality.

They also tried to explain the reasons for the cyclical nature and emergence of crises in economic development from various positions.

In particular, P. Samuelson cites the following theories as the most famous:

Monetary theory, which explains the occurrence of crises by the lack (compression) of bank loans;
- the theory of innovations sees cyclicality in the periodically arising need to use important innovations in production;
- the psychological theory sees the reason for the cyclical nature in the presence of the will of the pessimistic or optimistic mood of the population;
- the theory of underconsumption interprets the reasons for the cycles of too large a share of income that settles in very thrifty people and is not invested in the economy;
- the theory of overinvesting states that the causes of cycles, on the contrary, lie in overinvestment.

Financial and economic crisis

Moreover, let us ask ourselves a question: a systematic increase in public debt and the printing of unsecured dollars - can this be considered a reasonable financial policy, can it continue indefinitely ?! The answer is obvious - of course not, sooner or later it will lead to collapse, to disaster. What to do? Before giving an answer to this question, let us discuss the main features of financial policy in the world in general and, in particular, in Russia, the United States and Europe.

The 2008 global financial crisis led to a slowdown in the economy, but gradually faded away. Many financiers and politicians have already begun to say that the threat has passed, the crisis is over, etc. But then a new threat of a crisis came in August this year. This threat has not been eliminated today, but only pushed back by a year and a half by the decision of the United States to raise the level of public debt.

Today there is a very paradoxical situation in the development of modern society. Indeed, humanity has conquered space, created computers and a global information network, begins to clone organisms, build ordered nanostructures from individual atoms with new, fantastic properties, etc. etc. Our planet still has enough natural resources, humanity is ready to consume more and more new types of products. And, most importantly, the intellectual breakthrough of mankind into the depths of matter and into the field of new technologies continues to develop at an unprecedented pace. Of course, there are also problems - crime, terrorism, radioactive waste, ecology, alcoholism, drug addiction, etc.

However, against the background of the achievements listed above (and I have mentioned only a small fraction of them), any sane person has a question: excuse me, what kind of crisis can we talk about? So, there shouldn't have been any crisis with a reasonable development of the economy. But humanity, or rather, those of its representatives who influence decision-making at the world level, has driven itself into a dead end and continues to scoff at itself with sadistic pleasure.

How is the crisis that began in 2008 usually characterized? This is an avalanche-like increase in non-payments on loans, especially on mortgages, a catastrophic shortage of money, as a result - a sharp drop in demand from the population and, accordingly, a drop in production, bankruptcy of enterprises and banks, mass unemployment. Is it so? Yes, so, but all these are not causes, not essence, but only consequences, external manifestations of the crisis. The essence of the matter is in monetarism, in the separation of the financial system from the real sector of the economy, in financial pyramids ah, in the speculative nature of the financial sector.

Money is essential modern economy and life, money is needed by everyone and always. And, nevertheless, they are not the primary, true value. The true value is the material and intellectual wealth of both an individual person and each country as a whole.

Financial pyramids play a special role in the crisis today. Undoubtedly, the birthplace of pyramid schemes is the United States. It is with deep regret that I have to put Russia in the second "honorable" place in this row. I will list just a few of the major US financial pyramids: the dollar paper pyramid, fantastic mortgages, the Madoff pyramid, etc. etc. By the way, the volume of the Madoff pyramid is 65 billion dollars.

I will list several financial pyramids in Russia: the Mavrodi pyramid; the GKO pyramid (government short-term bonds) by Chubais, which led to the default in 1998 and to the depreciation of household deposits in banks by several times; numerous financial pyramids in construction, which burst with a bang, leaving people who have invested money in the construction of their own apartments with their noses (for example, in the summer of 2006, 80 thousand families became defrauded investors).

Today's crisis can be compared to the Great American Depression of the early 20th century. Let us recall how the great American President Franklin Roosevelt began his struggle with this depression. (The following description follows from the memoirs of Roosevelt himself). On the morning of March 5, 1933, newly elected President Roosevelt woke up for the first time in an unfamiliar bedroom in the White House. He had breakfast in bed, got dressed, and then the valet took him in a wheelchair to the Oval Office. When Roosevelt was left alone, he leaned back in his chair and suddenly screamed desperately, realizing the tragedy of the situation in the country and the burden of responsibility that lay on him. Recovering himself, he decided that time was running out. The first thing Roosevelt did immediately was to issue a proclamation to close all banks by March 9th. An extraordinary session of Congress was called on this day.

On March 9, 1933, Congressmen and Senators met at the Capitol, and the President proposed to Congress an "Emergency Banking Act" that would only open banks after being revised to be "healthy." By the way, at the same time, the export of gold was prohibited. The law in the House of Representatives was passed unanimously, and in the Senate - 73 votes against 7. So, after the adoption of this law, over 2 thousand American banks were not recognized as "healthy" and closed forever.

Let's go back to the present. On October 7, 2008, one day, all the banks of little Iceland were nationalized, the next day, October 8, 2008, part of the UK banks were nationalized. I will not continue this list.

And what happens to banks in Russia in last years? The state rushed to save banks, investing in them significant budget resources... And the Minister of Finance A.L. Kudrin proudly said that thanks to these measures, it was possible to stabilize the financial system, and Russia went through the crisis with the least losses. Alas, in fact, the situation is exactly the opposite. It is well known that many banks invested in them budget funds were either transferred abroad, or allowed to speculate in the foreign exchange market, or gave loans, but in a very small volume and at an unacceptably high percentage (about 15-25%, while in In Europe, credit to enterprises in the real sector of the economy is given at 1-2%, or even at zero).

In general, if you grasp the essence of the work of banks, it seems to me that they can quite be compared with the old woman-pawnbroker from the famous novel by Dostoevsky, and therefore the state must strictly control the banks.

Now let us consider, perhaps, one of the most important moments of recent times. The main, original cause of the global financial crisis is the fact that the world currency is the dollar, and the United States has been printing dollars in unlimited quantities since 1971, and these dollars are not backed by anything and are not tied to anything. And today the United States is increasingly expanding the uncontrolled emission of the dollar, which already amounts to trillions and tens of trillions. The US government debt today exceeds $ 14 trillion, which is roughly equal to US GDP.

And here I will express my suggestions. To eliminate the root cause of the global financial crisis, it is necessary to abandon the dollar as a world currency and switch to another currency. Of course, such a step will be very difficult for many countries, but it is absolutely necessary, because the alternative is collapse.

Do I need to introduce some new world currency? Fortunately, in my opinion, this is not necessary. Today, a unique political organization has been built and is successfully functioning - the European Union with a population of about 500 million people, with its common currency - the euro. It is this currency that needs to be made the only world currency.

Compared to the dollar or any other currency, the euro has the huge advantage that today the international procedure for distributing the emission of the euro among various European countries has already been worked out. In this sense, as in a number of others, the euro is a unique currency. The idea of ​​switching to the euro has been expressed more than once.

What is needed for this? First of all, the first step must be a political decision at the global level. In my opinion, the most appropriate format for such a decision is the G20 meeting with the further approval of this decision at the UN General Assembly.

The second step should be the announcement of a transitional period, during which dollars are gradually withdrawn from international circulation and replaced by euros.

As a third step, the European Central Bank should tighten its policy, namely, to prevent the emission of euros without collateral, to tie the permission for the emission of euros to various countries to their GDP, while taking into account such significant indicators of the country's budget as inflation, budget deficit, state duty. A separate question in this case is how to calculate GDP. In my opinion, in such a calculation, it is necessary to exclude income associated with speculative activities.

The fourth step should be the gradual expansion of the euro area, the admission to this zone of both new European and non-European countries that meet the relevant requirements. In the future, the euro zone should be extended to the whole world.

The fifth step, which should be taken simultaneously with the beginning of the fourth step, should be the creation within the UN, similar to the Security Council, of a World Financial Center, which should consist of permanent members (for example, from the G20), and re-elected members from among the rest of the countries. This Center should take over in the world those functions that are carried out today in Europe by the European Central Bank, i.e. regulation and control of emissions and money supply euro and the distribution of euro emission quotas across countries in proportion to their GDP. It would be reasonable to choose one of the cities of Europe as the permanent residence of this Center.

Of course, the most painful rejection of the dollar and the transition to the euro will be, first of all, for the United States. But they must understand that this step is absolutely necessary for the world economy, otherwise there will be a collapse, social upheaval, etc.

It is also worth emphasizing that the United States cannot endlessly issue unsecured dollars and flood the world economy with them - this bubble will burst sooner or later. Therefore, one of the possible scenarios is that the US will default, depreciating the dollar many times and practically getting rid of all its debts. But this default will bring down the entire world economy, under the rubble of which, in a short time, the US economy will inevitably collapse. So a default scenario, if it comes true, would be an extremely short-sighted move. The US must change its fiscal policy and live within its means. For them, this is the only reasonable way out of this situation.

It should be noted that today there are serious financial and economic problems in the European Union. Nothing is perfect in the world. But the European Union, unlike the United States, is taking sensible real steps to address these problems.

Back to Russian problems... It has been 20 years since communism collapsed in Russia and the country began to build a capitalist society. 20 years is a long time, it’s time to sum up some results. Yes, of course, there are certain positive results today. These include, first of all, the elimination of the total deficit of communist times, the filling of counters with goods, the freedom of citizens to travel to foreign countries and a number of other points.

However, there is hardly anything good to say about the welfare of the population and the development of the economy. And the primary goal of any state, including Russia, is to ensure the well-being of the population and build a strong state with a powerful economy based primarily on innovation and high technologies.

When the transition to capitalism began 20 years ago in Russia, naturally, one of the top priorities was the issue of property and, accordingly, privatization. In theory, privatization pursued three goals: creating an effective owner, creating a middle class in the country and replenishing the state budget. None of these goals have been met. Is it really possible today to assert, as Chubais and his associates do, that although privatization was carried out with certain mistakes, it was on the whole necessary, and it was necessary to act quickly in those conditions? The overwhelming majority of the current oligarchs who got their fortune during that privatization are not effective owners; today they make money either from the export of Russian energy resources, or from financial transactions speculative type.

Personalities play a huge role in human history. Therefore, I will dwell especially on the figure of the person who led the privatization in Russia, who is called the "father of privatization." A.B. Chubais is a modern herostrat who has not received a single positive result in the course of his work in many areas (of course, I mean the results for Russia, and I will not now talk about the results for Chubais's own pocket). Is it worth talking about it? After all, it is generally accepted that criticizing Chubais is common place that he still occupies any chair so firmly that no one will ever be able to touch him with a finger. This seems to be the case.

And yet, in my opinion, the situation is not so hopeless. Let me give you an analogy from the events of last year. Moscow Mayor Yu.M. Luzhkov and his wife ruled the capital of Russia for almost 20 years, managed the budget of Moscow as his own, created a bureaucratic pyramid riddled with corruption, and at the same time seemed absolutely unsinkable.

However, we must pay tribute to the President of Russia D.A. Medvedev - he decided to remove Luzhkov. Generally speaking, it would be necessary to bring the ex-mayor and his wife to criminal liability for causing damage to the country in particular large sizes.

So, I really hope that the same fate awaits Chubais, only I would like it to happen as soon as possible. After all, the scale of Luzhkov's activities is Moscow, the scale of Chubais's activities is the whole of Russia!

It so happened that Chubais and I crossed paths in life. When he carried out his privatization, I was a people's deputy of Russia. From the very beginning, I resolutely publicly opposed the privatization of Chubais. At the end of 1991, I prepared my own privatization program, which is completely different from the one that was later carried out by Chubais. In September 1992, on behalf of the parliamentary faction, "Civil Society" published in a number of central newspapers the statement "Vouchers are a deception of the people." On September 25, 1992, speaking at a session of the Supreme Soviet of Russia on the issue of the upcoming privatization, he came down from the rostrum and in protest threw Chubais, who was sitting in the government box, a small notebook with blank leaves, which symbolized the fact that the voucher was an empty piece of paper.

I foresaw and publicly warned about the 1998 financial collapse associated with the GKO (government short-term bonds) pyramid, built by the same Chubais. He proposed real urgent measures to prevent this crisis, which were not implemented by the authorities. On May 18, 1996 (more than two years before the default), he published an article on this topic in the newspaper "Soviet Russia" entitled "Mad money (a time bomb in the Russian economy)", and on August 3, 1998, two weeks before the default - in the "Novaya Gazeta" article entitled "Debt Everest".

After the default of 1998, Chubais's activities continued in that direction. He was appointed head of RAO EU. And on May 25, 2005, a dress rehearsal of the apocalypse took place in Moscow - a global power outage. So how did this power outage happen? It's very simple. One of the worn-out Moscow power substations, Chagino, failed, the equipment on which had not been updated for decades. And then, as the leadership of RAO ES, headed by Chubais, explained to us, there was a cascade power outage. Every engineer, every sane person understands that if in a certain system, built of homogeneous elements, some of its elements fail, then it should not interfere with the operation of the entire system, it must be excluded from work in one way or another. This is how the whole building has been built for hundreds of years. engineering systems... But the head of RAO EU was Chubais, a professional revolutionary, a prominent representative of monetarism. Why should he know such little things ?! After all, the main thing is money!

And here's the result. The official estimate of losses in Moscow (I am sure sharply underestimated) is 5 billion rubles. And a month later, at the end of June 2005, the annual meeting of RAO EU is held. There are two points to note here. Firstly, the state again puts Chubais at the head of RAO EU, and secondly, members of the Board of Directors receive annual bonuses, each of 1 million US dollars. Top managers from the elite club of monetarists are appreciated in our country! I think that soon the results of Chubais's work in the field of nanotechnology, which he now heads in Russia, will also have an effect. The chain: privatization, the GKO pyramid, RAO EU, Rosnanotechnology continues to develop successfully.

In the light of financial problems, it makes sense to dwell on the most important issue of the welfare of the Russian population. It is, in short, very deplorable. The salaries of state employees are very low. It is sometimes said that low salary population ensures the competitiveness of manufactured goods. This is a very short-sighted position, because, not even speaking about the standard of living, low wages mean low demand from the population for goods and, accordingly, a decrease in production, i.e. leads to a fall in the economy.

What should be done in Russia today in order to get out of the pit of the financial and economic crisis? I will briefly list only the most necessary measures, without pretending to be a complete list.

First of all, the whole history over the past two centuries shows that the market economy, of course, gives serious positive results, but, being left to its own devices, sooner or later inevitably leads to the dictates of monopolies and to crises. In Russia today, the market economy is given too much freedom, and therefore the state should actively intervene in the economy.

How should this be expressed? We need to use government levers to pursue an active antimonopoly policy, prevent the creation and dictatorship of monopolies, pursue an active and flexible tax policy, and regulate duties.

Special attention should be paid to the results of privatization and it is necessary, within a certain framework, to carry out deprivatization and nationalization. First of all, this concerns the natural resources of Russia, such as energy resources, minerals, etc. All this is a national treasure and should not be in private hands. The world already has experience in this regard - for example, revenues from oil production in Norway go to the accounts of all citizens of the country. Further, it is necessary to completely eliminate private ownership of land, because it leads to frenzied speculation and wild criminalization of society. At the same time, of course, it is necessary to leave the right to life-long use of land, for example, for owners of summer cottages, even with the right of inheritance, but categorically - without the right to sell. By the way, opponents of deprivatization can say that at one time, after the rule of the "iron lady" Margaret Thatcher ended in Great Britain, she was very strongly criticized for bias towards privatization, and in the classical country of capitalism - in Great Britain - it was certain scales, deprivatization.

The state should completely suppress the creation of all kinds of financial pyramids, sharply limit speculative activities of all kinds, and prevent the confluence of power and business, which inevitably leads to rampant corruption.

Of course, the state must ensure a decent life for its citizens, bring their welfare closer to world standards, build an economy based not on the export of natural resources, but on high technologies and innovations, raise medicine, education, science and culture to the proper level.

Consequences of the economic crisis

Closer to the Marxist position are economists who consider disproportionality, or "imbalance", to be the cause of crises. Crises are caused by the lack of correct proportions between industries, spontaneous actions of entrepreneurs. The theory of disequilibrium is combined with another widespread view of crises as a product of external conditions - political, demographic, natural.

By now, economic science has developed a number of different theories explaining the causes of economic cycles and crises. P. Samuelson, for example, as the most famous theories of cycles and crises in his book "Economics" notes the following: the monetary theory, which explains the cycle by expansion (contraction) of bank credit (Hawtrey et al.); the theory of innovations, explaining the cycle by the use of important innovations in production (Schumpeter, Hansen); a psychological theory that interprets the cycle as a consequence of waves of pessimistic and optimistic mood covering the population (Pigou, Bejgot, etc.); the underconsumption theory, which sees the cause of the cycle in too much of the income going to rich and thrifty people in comparison with what can be invested (Hobson, Foster, Catchings, etc.); the theory of overinvestment, the supporters of which believe that the cause of the recession is, rather, overinvestment, rather than underinvestment (Hayek, Mises, and others); sunspot-weather-harvest theory (Jevons, Moore).

If we understand the crisis in this way, then we can state that the danger of the onset of a crisis always exists, that it must be foreseen and predicted. In understanding the crisis, not only its causes, but also its consequences are of great importance: it is possible to renew the organization or its destruction, recovery or the emergence of a new crisis - perhaps even deeper and more prolonged. Crises can occur as a chain reaction.

There is a possibility of conservation of crisis situations for quite a long time. This can also be explained by certain political reasons.

The consequences of crises are closely related to two factors: their causes and the ability to manage the processes of crisis development.

The consequences of the crisis can lead to abrupt changes or a soft, prolonged and consistent way out of it. Crisis changes in the development of an organization are long-term and short-term, qualitative and quantitative, reversible and irreversible.

Different consequences of the crisis are determined not only by its nature, but also by the nature of anti-crisis management, which can either mitigate or aggravate the crisis. Management capabilities in this regard depend on the goal, professionalism, management art, the nature of motivation, understanding of the causes and consequences, responsibility.

Practice shows that crises differ not only in their causes and consequences, but also in their essence.

There are general and local crises. General ones cover the entire socio-economic system, local ones - only a part of it. Depending on the problematics of the crisis, macro- and micro-crises can be distinguished. The macro-crisis is characterized by rather large volumes and scales of problems; the micro-crisis captures only a separate problem or a group of problems.

Depending on the structure of relations in the socio-economic system, the differentiation of the problems of its development, separate groups can be distinguished.

Economic crises reflect sharp contradictions in a country's economy or the economic condition of a firm. These are crises in the production and sale of goods, relations between economic agents, crises of non-payments, loss of competitive advantages, bankruptcy, etc.

Social crises arise when contradictions or clashes of interests of various social groups or entities: workers and employers, trade unions and entrepreneurs, workers of various professions, personnel and managers, etc.

Organizational crises are manifested as crises of division and integration of activities, distribution of functions, regulation of the activities of individual units, as a separation of administrative units, regions, branches or subsidiaries.

Psychological crises are crises of a person's psychological state. They manifest themselves in the form of stress, acquiring a massive character, the emergence of a feeling of insecurity, panic, fear for the future, dissatisfaction with work and social status.

Technological crises arise as crises of new technological ideas in the face of a clearly expressed need for new technologies (a crisis of technological incompatibility of products, a crisis of rejection of new technological solutions).

As expected, crises can be predictable and unexpected. Predictable - come as a stage of development, can be predicted and are caused by objective reasons for the accumulation of factors for the emergence of a crisis - the need for restructuring production, a change in the structure of interests under the influence of scientific and technological progress. Unexpected - are often the result of gross errors in management, or any natural phenomena, or economic dependence, contributing to the expansion and spread of local crises. There are also crises, explicit (occurring noticeably and easily detected) and latent (latent, proceeding relatively unnoticed and therefore the most dangerous).

In addition, crises are acute and mild. Acute crises often lead to the destruction of various structures of the socio-economic system. Mild crises are more consistent and painless. They can be foreseen and easier to manage.

In general, the consequences of the crisis can be divided into two large groups:

The first group is the current consequences. They are a prompt response to a crisis. Their analysis makes it possible to assess the state of the economy and society in the short term. The most tangible of these consequences are unemployment, inflation, the rate of decline in economic indicators;
The second group of consequences is the changes that await us in the long term. At this stage, the assessment of such consequences of the global financial crisis belongs rather to the field of forecasts. But it is precisely on the extent to which the crisis will affect the world economy, how its content will change, its entire future will depend.

The global nature of the crisis does not mean, however, that its consequences will be the same for all countries and all sectors of the economy. As in the case of the causes of the crisis, its consequences vary greatly depending on the level of industrial development of states and the anti-crisis measures that are being taken by the authorities. This is clearly seen in the examples of the current consequences - the rates of GDP decline in different countries for comparable periods differ very significantly, it is natural to assume that the long-term consequences are also unlikely to be the same for them.

In addition to the economic ones, they also turned out to be very strong social consequences crisis. The inhabitants suffered the most, as always. Someone went bankrupt on stocks, someone on a mortgage, someone was fired in connection with the bankruptcy of an enterprise or due to staff reductions. In 2008, 1.1 million Americans tried to commit suicide.

Economic and political crisis

The dissatisfaction of the peasants with the surplus appropriation system, which continued to increase every year, led to a reduction in acreage, a decrease in yields, and a decrease in the supply of grain to the state.

A wave of peasant uprisings and anti-Soviet riots swept across the country: in the Ukraine, Siberia, Central Asia, in the Tambov, Voronezh and Saratov provinces. The military anti-communist rebellion of sailors in Kronstadt in March 1921 was a socio-political crisis that threatened the existence of Soviet power.

The turn to the New Economic Policy (NEP) was carried out under the tough pressure of general discontent in the country for the normalization of internal economic, social, and political relations.

Initially, the NEP laid the duality and contradiction between socialist and market principles, politics and economics, etc. the activities of the Rabkrin, the opening of the State Bank, the beginning of the stabilization of the currency), the concentration of production, the expansion of distribution relations (between the leading industries, the largest enterprises). For the development of this direction, all the power of state institutions and ideological support were used within the framework of the concept of building socialism.

The second direction of reforms is the activation of market, private capitalist relations. For this, a bloc of relations that were new in comparison with war communism was formed. For the development of this direction, a set of measures was carried out to facilitate the functioning of commodity-money relations: the transition from the surplus appropriation to the tax in kind, the permission of free trade and private industry, the leasing of state-owned enterprises, concessions, and the granting of freedom to the peasantry in the use of land, implements, and workers.

The prospects for this direction of reforms were limited in volume (mainly in the sphere of small-scale production), time (for a long time, but not forever), growth potential (without a threat to the interests of the political domination of the dictatorship of the proletariat).

The first step in the transition to NEP was the decisions of the X Congress of the RCP (b) (March 1921), at which the issue of "Replacing the appropriation in kind with a tax in kind" was discussed. V.I. Lenin, and with a co-report - A.D. Tsyurupa. IN AND. Lenin drew two main conclusions: first, "only an agreement with the peasantry can save the socialist revolution in Russia until the revolution in other countries occurs"; secondly, "we should not try to hide anything, but should say straight out that the peasantry is not happy with the form of relations that we have established with them, that they do not want this form of relations and will not continue to exist like that." At the Tenth Congress, Lenin's proposal was adopted to replace the appropriation system with a tax in kind.

The tax in kind was introduced for 13 types of foodstuffs, industrial and fodder crops. Everything that remained with the peasants after the delivery of the tax was completely at their disposal. The tax in kind was almost two times less than the appropriation allotment, and the bulk of it was collected from the wealthy peasantry. The poorest peasants and collective farms were exempted from tax or received more significant benefits. The size of the tax in kind was communicated to the peasant in advance, that is, on the eve of the sowing campaign, so the peasant could expand the sown area, get more food surpluses and then sell them at a free price on the market.

With the introduction of the tax in kind, the way was opened to free trade, initially limited by the framework of local turnover, that is, the residence of the peasants. But already in August-September 1921, the authorities were forced to abolish the state exchange of goods, to take the path of emancipating commodity-money relations, the widespread use of market methods of management. Trade became the main form of link between town and country. For the further formation of the market, it was necessary to revive the industry, to increase its output. To this end, during the transition to NEP, the privatization of small and, in part, medium-sized enterprises was carried out. On May 17, 1921, a resolution of the Council of People's Commissars was adopted, according to which it was proposed to take measures to develop handicraft and small-scale industry both in the form of private enterprises and in the form of cooperatives.

On August 9, 1921, the Council of People's Commissars adopted the Order on the Implementation of the Beginnings of a New Economic Policy, containing the initial principles of the industry's work under the conditions of NEP: the development of industry was supposed to be carried out within the framework of a single general economic plan under the leadership of the State Planning Commission; the restructuring of the management of the national economy was carried out, its excessive centralization was weakened; instead of labor mobilization, workers began to be recruited; material incentives were introduced for them, wages were calculated depending on the qualifications and the amount of products produced. State-owned enterprises were transferred to cost accounting, which expanded their rights, it became possible to independently resolve issues about the procurement of raw materials and sales finished products... In the city, it was allowed to open or lease cooperatives, partnerships, other associations or individuals, small industrial and commercial enterprises.

On October 6, 1922, the Land Code was adopted. The peasants received the right to freely leave the rural community and choose the forms of land use. The lease of land and the use of hired labor were allowed to a very limited extent. Individual peasants gave 98.5% of all production Agriculture... By 1922, the card system had largely been abolished. By the spring of 1923, on the whole, the transition of the economy to a market economy was completed.

In 1922-1924. was implemented monetary reform(Its main authors were the Council of People's Commissars of Finance G. Sokolnikov and Professor L. Yurovsky). A hard currency was introduced - the chervonets. The new currency was used primarily for wholesale trade. One ducat was equated to ten tsarist gold rubles, but it was exchanged for gold only for settlements with foreign partners. The rapid development of the market made it possible by the beginning of 1924 to eliminate the budget deficit. The need for the emission of Soviet signs has disappeared. In the retail trade, where they circulated, they were replaced by treasury notes (in rubles), which have a certain ratio with the chervonets. The exchange proceeded from the following calculation: one ruble of treasury bills was equal to 50 thousand rubles in Soviet notes. One hard convertible currency appeared in the country, which was accepted for circulation on Western exchanges that had ties with the USSR.

The country's economic successes during the NEP period were obvious. By the beginning of 1922, the rise of the national economy was clearly visible, the country was fed and dressed. Cooperation was gaining strength. In 1925, the gross grain harvest was 10.7% higher than the average annual harvest in 1909–1913. By 1927, the pre-war level in animal husbandry was reached. The consumption of food products in 1927 exceeded the level of pre-revolutionary Russia. This advantage applied to the villagers. In general, the national economy of the USSR in the 1927-28 economic year reached the level of industrial production in Russia in 1913.

At the same time, many complex problems began to arise during the NEP period. One of them is the cyclical nature of the economy with serious crises in 1923, 1925 and 1927–1928.

In the fall of 1923, the so-called sales crisis broke out. Rural population the purchase of manufactured goods, which they badly needed, with which all warehouses and shops were crammed, was unavailable at the current prices. This situation provoked a response from the peasants: they began to delay the transfer of grain to state storage facilities under the tax in kind. Soon the Bolsheviks were forced to restore price parity, lower industrial prices for sale, and the sales crisis was eliminated.

Grain procurement crises in 1925 and 1927–1928 were also caused by imbalances in the structural and pricing policies of the government in relation to the city and the countryside. The Bolsheviks saw a way out of crisis situations mainly through the prism of administrative methods of regulating the economy.

V Russian society the second half of the 1920s. dissatisfaction with NEP on the part of various social groups began to manifest itself more and more clearly.

The new economic policy was met with hostility by the party and state apparatus, as it had to abandon the method of ordering decisions. Commodity-money relations required a flexible professional policy, knowledge and experience. However, the apparatus did not have sufficient incentives for this, since its own social guarantees(and quite good ones) he had regardless of the efficiency of his work.

In addition, the NEP objectively led to an increase in unemployment, including among managers: by January 1924, among 1 million unemployed there were 750,000 former employees. This problem was very painful and exacerbated social contradictions in the country.

In the countryside, the stratification of the peasants intensified, hired labor was permitted, and exploitation increased in the countryside. The New Economic Policy undermined the social security of those who were accustomed to living on the principle of mutual responsibility when there was a community. That part of the peasantry, which was associated not with commodity production, but with subsistence farming, was significantly reduced during the NEP years. The huge number of immigrants pouring into the city dissolved the industrial proletariat. Wealthy peasant kulaks were also dissatisfied with the NEP policy, which was identified with high taxes, “scissors” in prices between industrial and agricultural products.

The working class did not become the social support that would fight and defend the principles of NEP. Self-financing did not reach jobs, it was purely trust-based and was supported by administrative means. Therefore, the worker saw no material benefit from the end results.

As a result, those dissatisfied with the NEP in the “lower classes” (the poor and farm laborers in the countryside, the unemployed, low-skilled workers and employees) were united in its rejection with the “upper classes” (the party and the state apparatus). The fate of NEP was a foregone conclusion.

The beginning of the economic crisis

Let us recall the cyclical nature of economic crises. Since the 1960s. seven obvious failures can be distinguished, the lowest points of which were in the following years: 1967, 1971, 1975, 1982, 1991, 2001, 2009. At the same time, the rate of growth of world GDP did not necessarily go into negative territory (this happened only in 2009). So, seven crises, of which the last four occurred at intervals of 7-10 years.

How many years have passed since the last crisis? Getting ready?

Yes, today there are suggestions that cyclicality is a thing of the past, that the dynamics of modern world economic development is generally one continuous crisis, etc., etc. But this has not yet been verified in practice.

Crises occur because capital has striven and continues to strive in the areas of its most profitable application. Previously, all this led to a banal overproduction of goods in certain markets. Today everything has become more complicated and we are talking, as a rule, about the growing crisis imbalances in certain financial markets. Let's say, in 2008-2009. the recession was triggered by the US mortgage crisis, which is directly caused by the overheating of the US real estate market. Well, the trigger of the crisis is the collapse of the investment bank Lehman Brothers. In 2000-2001. the global recession was the result of the IT stock market crisis. The trigger for the crisis is the drop in the indices of high-tech companies.

The crises that have occurred in recent decades had a fundamental reason - the global overcapitalization of markets. This is the background reason, so to speak. How can you measure the degree of this capitalization and try to answer the question whether this very overcapitalization of the economy has been achieved or not? In 2008, we (FBK Grant Thornton) used the “capital intensity of GDP” indicator (our name) for these purposes. This indicator is calculated as the ratio of the total capitalization of the market for shares of national companies to the volume of nominal GDP. The economic meaning of the indicator is in terms of the size of the stock market and the economy. The working hypothesis was that a certain threshold value of the indicator of the capital intensity of GDP corresponds to a certain level of economic development, with a clear and stable excess of which the economy goes into crisis. Crises 2000-2001 and 2008-2009 showed that the threshold value of the capital intensity of world GDP was in the region of 120%, after reaching it, a decline began, which had more immediate reasons. The correlation between the indicators of the capital intensity of GDP and the growth rate of world GDP, if you look at the last 20 years, is very strong.

What is happening with this indicator today? The capital intensity of GDP fell below 60% in 2008, then began to grow gradually, reaching almost 100% by the end of 2016. The indicator has not yet reached the threshold value (120%), but is moving towards it.

Looking at national economies, which have their own thresholds, the cause for concern may increase. In the United States, the economic decline began when the capital intensity of GDP was 140–150%; today, this level has been practically reached. And the US economy is the leading one in the world, it is it that largely predetermines the dynamics of world economic development.

By the way, the correlation between the capital intensity of GDP and the rate of its growth is characteristic precisely for developed economies and the world economy as a whole. The Russian economy has not yet been seen in such a stable and strong relationship. But if the next world economic crisis breaks out, it will not seem enough to us. Our economy does not belong to the developed one, also because it is institutionally underdeveloped. The same is true for other emerging markets.

Almost eight years have passed since the last economic crisis, and the capital intensity of the world economy is approaching its approximate limit of 120%. This means that we are simply obliged to conclude that the world economy in the next three years is unlikely to be able to avoid a crisis. But there must be an immediate cause and some kind of trigger? The answer to this question seems to be the most difficult today. We will risk making some assumptions about possible critical imbalances, bubbles, which in the context of global overcapitalization of markets can become the direct cause of the next world economic recession.

First, the likely overheating of the US stock market. The current indicators of the capital intensity of the US economy are already close to historical highs. If the promised tax cuts and a significant increase in budget spending on the construction of transport infrastructure, defense, social needs, etc., begin, all this will only spur the growth of stock indices.

Secondly, the likely collapse of the oil market. Efforts to cut oil production have met with limited success. And then there is a possible slowdown in the growth of the Chinese economy, an accelerated transition of automakers to electric vehicles, etc. There are risks of a significant drop in world oil prices.

The main risk factors are: the US stock market and the global oil market. It is quite possible that both factors will work at the same time. In addition, there are a lot of possible "black swans": increasing games of protectionism, geopolitical instability, etc.

The world economy will not be able to avoid another crisis in 2-3 years. For the Russian economy, which is also weighed down by the sanctions confrontation, this will be a powerful additional negative factor.

The essence of the economic crisis

By now, economic science has developed a number of theories explaining the causes of economic cycles and crises.

The classical cycle of social reproduction consists of four phases.

The first phase is a crisis (recession). There is a decline in production and business activity, falling prices, overstocking, rising unemployment and a sharp increase in the number of bankruptcies.

The second is depression (stagnation). The phase of adaptation of economic life to new conditions and needs, the phase of finding a new balance (duration 1.5 - 3 years).

The third is revitalization. Recovery phase. Investments begin, prices, production, employment, interest rates rise.

Fourth is the rise (boom). The acceleration of economic development is found in a series of innovations, the emergence of a mass of new goods and new enterprises, in the rapid growth of capital investment, stock prices and other securities, interest rates, prices and wages. The rise, taking the economy to a new level in its progressive development, prepares the basis for a new, periodic crisis.

The initial "impetus" (cause) of a new periodic crisis is a reduction in aggregate demand, and again a decline in production begins, a drop in employment, a decrease in income, a decrease in costs and demand.

Taking into account the variety of reasons for cyclical reproduction and partial violations of traditional phases, scientists of various directions offer the following types of cycles:

Kondratyev's cycles are long-wave cycles, lasting 40-60 years; their main driving force is radical changes in the technological base of social production, its structural restructuring.
Kuznets cycles, their duration is approximately 20 years; the driving forces are shifts in the reproductive structure of production (these cycles are often called reproductive or construction cycles).
Jagler's cycles, their frequency is 7-11 years; which are the result of the interaction of a variety of monetary factors.
Kitchin's cycles, their duration of 3–5 years, are generated by the dynamics of the relative size of inventories in enterprises.
Private business cycles covering a period from 1 to 12 years and existing in connection with fluctuations in investment activity.

The influence of cyclicality on the socio-economic development of society:

1. cyclicality is recognized as a multidimensional phenomenon, a number of its forms are of a worldwide nature;
2. cyclicality as a whole, including its most destructive phase - the economic crisis, is recognized rather as a peculiar form of ensuring the progressive development of the economy in conditions of market relations; fluctuations in economic activity are assessed as one of the conditions for renewal and growth;
3. Cyclicity is recognized as a form of progressive development of society: movement occurs not in a circle, but in a spiral;
4. it is necessary to deepen objective knowledge about cycles, their causes and find effective methods and means to smooth out their negative consequences.

The role of crises in social and economic development:

Periods of economic crises

The financial and economic crisis of 1857-1858 can be safely called the first world crisis. Starting in the United States, it quickly spread to Europe, affecting the economies of all major European countries, but Great Britain, as the main industrial and commercial power, suffered the most. Undoubtedly, the European crisis was aggravated by the Crimean War, which ended in 1856, but nevertheless, economists call the unprecedented growth of speculation the main factor that caused the crisis.

The objects of speculation were mostly shares of railway companies and heavy industry enterprises, land, grain. The researchers note that even the money of widows, orphans and priests went into speculation. The speculative boom was accompanied by an unprecedented accumulation of money supply, an increase in lending and an increase in stock prices: but one day it all burst like a soap bubble. In the 19th century, they did not yet have clear plans for overcoming economic crises. However, the inflow of liquid funds from England to the United States helped at the beginning to weaken the consequences of the crisis, and then to completely overcome it.

The outbreak of the First World War gave impetus to a new financial and economic crisis. Formally, the cause of the crisis was the total sale of securities of foreign issuers by the governments of Great Britain, France, Germany and the United States in order to finance military actions. Unlike the crisis of 1857, it did not spread from the center to the periphery, but arose simultaneously in many countries. The collapse occurred in all markets at once, both commodity and money. It was only thanks to the intervention of the Central Banks that the economies of a number of countries were saved. The crisis was especially deep in Germany. Having captured a significant part of the European market, England and France closed access to German goods there, which was one of the reasons for the outbreak of war by Germany. By blocking all German ports, the British fleet contributed to the 1916 famine offensive in Germany. In Germany, as in Russia, the crisis was aggravated by revolutions that abolished the monarchical power and completely changed the political system. These countries have been recovering the longest and most painful of all the consequences of social and economic decline.

October 24, 1929 became Black Thursday on the New York Stock Exchange. A sharp decline in share prices (by 60-70%) led to the deepest and longest economic crisis in world history. The "Great Depression" lasted for about four years, although its echoes made themselves felt until the outbreak of World War II. The US and Canada were most affected by the crisis, but France, Germany and the United Kingdom were also severely affected by the crisis. It would seem that nothing foreshadowed the crisis. After the First World War, the United States embarked on a path of stable economic growth, millions of shareholders increased their capital, and consumer demand grew rapidly. Everything collapsed overnight. For some week, the largest shareholders, according to the most conservative estimates, have lost 15 billion dollars. In the United States, factories were closed everywhere, banks collapsed, and about 14 million unemployed were on the streets, and the crime rate rose sharply. Amid the unpopularity of bankers, bank robbers in the United States were almost national heroes. Industrial production during this period in the United States decreased by 46%, in Germany by 41%, in France by 32%, in the UK by 24%. The level of industrial production during the years of the crisis in these countries was actually pushed back to the beginning of the 20th century. In the opinion American economists Ohanian and Cole - researchers of the "Great Depression", if the US economy had abandoned the Roosevelt administration's measures to curb competition in the market, the country could have overcome the consequences of the crisis 5 years earlier.

The 1973 crisis has every reason to be called an energy crisis. Its detonator was the Arab-Israeli war and the decision of the Arab OPEC countries to impose an oil embargo on the states supporting Israel. Oil production fell sharply, and during 1974 the price of "black gold" rose from $ 3 to $ 12 per barrel. The oil crisis hit the United States the hardest. For the first time, the country faced the problem of a shortage of raw materials. This was also facilitated by the Western European partners of the United States, which, in favor of OPEC, stopped the supply of oil products overseas. In a special message to Congress, US President Richard Nixon called on fellow citizens to save as much as possible, in particular, not to use cars if possible. Government agencies were advised to save energy and reduce car fleets, and airlines were instructed to cut back on flights. The energy crisis severely affected the Japanese economy, which seemed to be immune to global economic problems. In response to the crisis, the Japanese government is developing a number of countermeasures: increasing imports of coal and liquefied natural gas, and embarking on an accelerated development of nuclear power. The 1973-75 crisis had a positive effect on the economy of the Soviet Union, as it contributed to an increase in oil exports to the West.

On August 17, 1998, Russians first heard the terrible word default. This was the first case in world history when the state declared a default not on external, but on internal debt denominated in the national currency. According to some reports, the country's internal debt amounted to $ 200 billion. This was the beginning of the most difficult financial and economic crisis in Russia, which launched the process of devaluation of the ruble. In just six months, the value of the dollar has grown from 6 to 21 rubles. The real incomes and purchasing power of the population decreased several times. The total number of unemployed in the country reached 8.39 million people, which was about 11.5% of the economically active population of the Russian Federation. Experts cite many factors as the cause of the crisis: the collapse of Asian financial markets, low purchase prices for raw materials (oil, gas, metals), the failed economic policy of the state, the emergence of financial pyramids. According to the calculations of the Moscow Banking Union, the total losses of the Russian economy from the August crisis amounted to $ 96 billion: of which the corporate sector lost $ 33 billion, and the population lost $ 19 billion. However, some experts consider these data to be clearly underestimated. In a short time, Russia has become one of the largest debtors in the world. Only by the end of 2002 did the Russian government manage to overcome inflationary processes, and from the beginning of 2003 the ruble began to gradually strengthen, which was largely facilitated by the rise in oil prices and the inflow of foreign capital.

2008 economic crisis

The 2008 economic crisis was the result of a more specific phenomenon - the US mortgage crisis, which began to develop in 2006, but seriously affect the real estate market, and then began to invest in 2007.

There are different points of view among economists regarding the causes of the crisis. Someone stubbornly talks about economic cycles that mortgages simply fell under the wheels of these inevitable processes. We will consider a more rigorous theory. This theory is of the opinion about several reasons that are detrimental to the US mortgage market.

The first reason is the provision of loans for 120% -130% of the cost of housing. In Russia, for example, banks are ready to finance on average up to 85% of the cost of an apartment or house. For the borrower, this loan is very promising - with the money you can not only buy a house for yourself, but also carry out repairs in a new house or apartment. For the bank, this loan was quite risky. If the borrower does not return it, the collateral (the bought house) will be sold for an amount less than the loan amount, that is, the investment in the event of a default becomes unprofitable.

Nevertheless, the number of such risky offers grew - they were popular among borrowers, banks were happy to issue them, and investors could not help but pay attention to the new growing market. Eventually mortgage agencies and banks received funding from investment banks.

The big problem was the provision of the same mortgage at floating interest rates, depending on the LIBOR index, which was the national average. The clear benefit of such a proposal is obvious. Borrowers can count on the fact that if the situation improves, the rate will go down (percent, for example, by 0.15 - this was still tolerable) or, at best, will be kept at the same level. Lenders can count on its slight increase, which will slightly increase interest.

In essence, the whole "bubble" mortgage lending In 2006-2008, the USA kept on the expectation that the rate would either decrease, but slightly, or slightly increase, or, in the ideal case for both sides, it would be the same.

In practice, the LIBOR rate changes quite often, and significantly. Since the beginning of the 2000s, there has been a downward trend in the indicator, which influenced the success of such mortgage loans. But in 2004 this indicator began to grow. In 2006, it was 4.29% per annum, and by the end of 2007 it reached 6% and continued to grow steadily. Naturally, borrowers were no longer able to pay on loans. As a result, from the beginning of 2007 the number of default borrowers began to grow, and all capital investments of banks began to melt before our eyes.

In the same 2007, everyone learned about the first victim of the crisis - then just the American crisis of the only industry. It was American Home Mortgage, the tenth largest venture in the market, with a 2.5% market share. Her loan portfolio in 2007 was $ 4 billion.

The company's shares fell by 45% after the monthly dividend payment was not made - the stock markets felt that something was wrong with the company. In the end, it became known that the fund went bankrupt. It was necessary to lay off 90% of the staff (out of 7,000 there are just over seven hundred left) in order to cut costs. The company began looking for buyers of its assets in order to somehow pay off investors and creditors. But for the global market, AHM's problems were far more dire. The main investors in the fund were the world's largest banks - Deutche Bank and JPMorgan. They have seriously lost in share value and incurred serious expenses.

Ultimately, this will result in a massive closure of investment banks in the United States - to date, about 350 such organizations have been closed. Another crisis began - a global economic one, and this crisis led to the closure of Lehman Brothers, the sale of Merrill Lynch and a change in direction from banks such as Goldman Sachs, which sought to receive funding from the Fed during the crisis.

Consider more global market- world. In addition to the scale, we will change the objects sold on it. This is not a housing market, but oil and various industrial resources.

In 2008, a trend that had been going on since about the beginning of the 2000s began to fade. It was associated with the rise in prices for agro-industrial goods and oil. The cost of "black gold", in particular, reached $ 147 per barrel. The indicator was reached in July 2008, but the maximum has never been reached since then. Against the backdrop of rising oil prices, gold prices are growing - investors already then began to suspect an unpleasant outcome of the whole situation.

Soon the decline begins - and in October 2008 the price of a barrel of oil was only $ 61, and in November it fell by another $ 10. This was the first reason - a natural decline in prices and indices associated with a decrease in consumption in the United States and the mortgage crisis there.

Along with the decline in Europe, there are some bad news. For example, the process associated with information about the misappropriation of funds by a trader of Societe Generale Bank, the largest French universal bank- his investment specialist Jerome Carviel became, on the one hand, a villain who actually ruined the company, on the other, an unwitting Robin Hood, who showed the main shortcomings in the work of the largest in his country financial institution... His case showed how freely traders were allowed to dispose of the liabilities of the company that hired them. In 2011, this story will repeat itself in England. Information about such numerous financial problems of European and American companies (for example, the unexpected discovery of the financial pyramid by Bernard Madoff) only threw fuel on the fire of the crisis panic, which supported the negative trend taken by world indices in the summer.

Agflation also begins - an increase in prices for agro-industrial goods. This is the second reason for the global crisis. In contrast, the FAO price index has been steadily rising. But the agflation indicator reached the highest positions already in 2011.

Against the background of this movement of indicators, since the summer of 2008, the value of shares of large enterprises began to decline - international indices let's go down. This was largely due to the fact that companies, in search of profits, participated in too risky deals, which ultimately caused irreparable damage to them. The volume of purchased products from the automotive industry began to decline. In 2008, the volume of purchased cars fell by 16%, and in the United States - by 26%, which led to a decrease in demand for metals and a decrease in metallurgy production, and hence to layoffs in the mechanical engineering and metallurgy sectors and other related industries.

This situation is explained by the financier J. Soros. The crisis in the US mortgage market and the ruin of a mass of large banks after it detonated, - he believes, - the global economic crisis. Having reached a maximum, the price of oil went down against the background of unpleasant news from the American market, opening a new economic trend. Following it, the financial indices of European, American and international financial exchanges went down.

Financiers, characterizing the situation on the stock market in Russia, usually say that in our country the crisis was caused by the "overheating" of the economy - a situation of excessively rapid economic growth with abundant investment and lending. In April 2008, the Ministry of Finance and the IMF expressed such concerns. Overheating led to an increase in inflation in Russia - in April 2008 it was 14%. In the spring, financiers were talking about the fact that with such an economic growth, "overheating" could not be avoided.

But there was a final, global reason. It was associated with an increase in the LIBOR rate in the United States - the rate grew because the dollar fell in price from 2002 to 2008. It continues to fall in price even now, but in 2008 the whole world suddenly realized that against the backdrop of growing economies and investment markets, no one thought that it was necessary to have a spare alternative to the dollar.

After 2008, a large-scale economic recession began in the world, the recovery of the world economy began only in 2014-2015.

In some countries, the crisis has affected more than even the United States.

Greece, as a result of problems in the world economy, was unable to cope with the budget deficit and the accumulated debt burden. The Greek debt crisis erupted in 2010 and is still far from over.

In 2013 erupted banking crisis in Cyprus, the country's banking system was, in fact, rebuilt again, many companies and individuals lost more than half of their savings stored in bank deposits.

The US and EU economies also continue to experience problems, economic growth remains weak, and households are holding back consumption.

Economic system crisis

Modern economic crises are associated with deepening contradictions in the global economy and the complexity of the mega-regulation of the world economy.

The Greek word for crisis means solution. In the future, the concept of crisis has expanded and is applied to any abrupt transition, to all changes perceived by people as a disruption of continuity.

There are many definitions of crisis in the economic literature. The crisis is viewed as an extreme aggravation of contradictions in development, the growing danger of bankruptcy, liquidation; mismatch in the activities of the economic, financial and other systems; a turning point in the processes of change. So, according to M. A. Sazhina, a crisis is a difficult transitional state of the economic system, during which the foundations are laid for the restoration of the violated laws of economic movement and its further development.

E. M. Korotkov defines the crisis as an extreme aggravation of contradictions in the socio-economic system, threatening its viability in environment.

The socio-economic system is understood as an integral set of interrelated and interacting social and economic institutions (subjects) and relations regarding the distribution and consumption of material and non-material resources, production, distribution, exchange and consumption of goods and services. The socio-economic system (like any other) is characterized by systemic qualities.

The socio-economic system has certain historical, geographical, ethnic, spiritual, political and economic boundaries, therefore, it can be embodied in specific state-political formations or in the form of other, smaller in scale, socio-economic organizations.

As globalization intensifies, it is legitimate to consider all of humanity as a socio-economic system. This determines the historicity of the study: any studied system, on the one hand, is inevitably historically conditioned, and on the other hand, all categories and laws of this system are historically conditioned.

Coping with crises in social and economic development is largely a managed process.

The socio-economic system is generally self-regulating (stable). A stable system is a system in which mechanisms of control and restoration of all equilibrium operate.

Management exists, on the one hand, because it is part of these mechanisms, on the other hand, in order, relying on these mechanisms, to ensure less painful and more consistent development of the socio-economic system. This is possible only if the patterns of development of the socio-economic system, its essential characteristics and signs of its state are known. In the economic system, processes occur that depend on each other and affect the state of the internal and external environment. Therefore, the elements in the functioning system also change.

Crisis functions:

1) elimination of outdated elements of the dominant system, which has exhausted its potential;
2) creating conditions for the approval of new elements of a new (emerging) system;
3) testing the strength of those elements of the old system that accumulate and move into the new system.

The danger of a crisis always exists, even when it does not exist, therefore it is necessary to distinguish between symptoms, factors and causes of crises.

Symptoms do not always reflect the causes of the crisis, since the reasons often lie deeper than the external manifestation of crisis signs.

The crisis is going through several stages in its development:

1) latent, hidden, when its prerequisites mature, but do not appear;
2) collapse, i.e. the rapid exacerbation of contradictions and a sharp deterioration in all indicators in dynamics;
3) mitigating the crisis and creating the prerequisites for overcoming it.

A symptom of a crisis is an initial, external manifestation of crisis phenomena, which do not always characterize the true causes of the crisis, but for which these reasons can be established. The symptoms of the crisis are recorded in indicators and in their trends, reflecting the functioning and development of the socio-economic system. Symptoms of a crisis are differentiated primarily by a hundred typological affiliation - the scale, problems, severity of the course (depth), area of ​​development, causes, possible consequences, phase of manifestation.

A crisis factor is an event, a fixed state or an established trend that indicates the onset of a crisis.

The factors behind the emergence of crises in the socio-economic system can be different. But it is very important to see the first symptoms of crisis development in order to be able to promptly launch anti-crisis management methods or programs.

The cause of the crisis is the events or phenomena as a result of which the factors of the crisis appear. The reasons can be objective, for example, related to cyclical needs for modernization and restructuring, and subjective, reflecting errors in management.

Crisis recognition is the process of identifying the symptoms, factors and causes of the crisis, determining its content and nature of its course. It is made according to the signs and indicators of crisis development in the process of monitoring anti-crisis development.

Monitoring anti-crisis development is the control of development processes and tracking their trends according to certain criteria.

For this purpose, the following should be determined:

1) a set of signs and indicators of crisis development;
2) the methodology for their calculation;
3) the methodology for using them in the analysis.

Predicting crises is possible only on the basis of a special analysis of situations and trends.

Crisis management involves knowing:

1) trends in the behavior of the socio-economic system and its development;
2) all characteristics;
3) signs of her condition;
4) the onset of certain phases of this state and stages of development.

Of decisive importance in crisis management is the development of a well-thought-out management strategy based on a preliminary analysis of the external and internal environment of the socio-economic system, identifying those factors and threats that are of key importance for undermining its stable dynamic development.

US economic crisis

Let's take a look at the main crises that have taken place in the economy of the United States of America and their features:

1. The first world economic crisis, 1857. In the fall of 1857, there was a collapse in stock market quotations in the United States. It was caused by speculation in the securities of the railway companies and the further collapse of the entire banking system of the United States. Financial problems soon gripped England, as its banks invested in the securities of American companies. The crisis also affected the economies of other countries in Europe and Latin America.
2. The Second World Economic Crisis, 1873. The crisis was caused by the credit recovery in Latin America, as well as the collapse of the stock market in Vienna as a result of the speculative growth of the real estate market in Germany and Austria. The second world economic crisis in the United States affected the panic in the banking sector, as German banks refused to roll over (extend the term by taking a new loan instead of the old one) their loans. This crisis was the longest in the history of capitalism, it lasted five years.
3. Great Depression, 1929-1933. The development of this crisis in the United States is associated with deflation (falling prices) and recession that manifested itself after the end of the First World War, as well as banking and currency crises that affected many others besides the United States. European countries... As a result, while production was growing, there was a shortage of money supply, the value of shares fell by 60-70% and business activity began to decline sharply. Many firms, factories and banks were closed, millions of unemployed appeared in the United States.
4. The first energy crisis, 1973. The reason for this crisis in the United States and the countries-allies of the United States was the actions of OPEC. The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries has imposed an energy embargo on the United States of America, increasing selling prices by 70%. The reason for this step was the support provided by the Western world to Israel, who fought with Egypt and Syria. As a result, due to a lack of fuel, the US authorities called for a total economy of citizens and organizations, as well as in the country there was an increase in the cost of almost all goods and services.
5. Black Monday, 1987. October 19, 1987 saw the largest drop in the Dow Jones index in its entire history. It fell by 22.6% in one day. As a result, by the end of the month, stock exchanges collapsed not only in the US, but also in Australia, Canada, Hong Kong and the UK. The crisis that happened in 1987 smacks of mystery, since there were no apparent reasons for the collapse, no important news and events took place at the time of the collapse. Black Monday challenged the foundations of modern economics in general.
6. US mortgage crisis, 2007. It is caused by the rise in bad home loans, which american banks issued to unreliable borrowers. This crisis in the United States began in 2006, but its catastrophic consequences appeared only in 2007. The outbreak of the mortgage crisis was the first sign of the 2008 global financial crisis. The first casualties of the 2007 crisis were individual mortgage companies, which stopped lending, laid off many workers, and plummeted their shares. Later, the crisis spread to banking in general, including on foreign banks who invested in American mortgage companies. One of the results of the mortgage crisis was a 20 percent drop in the value of real estate in the United States, due to which American homeowners as a whole became poorer by almost $ 5 trillion.
7. World financial crisis, 2008-2011. In 2008, the financial crisis began in the United States and in general in most developed countries. It manifested itself in the form of an extremely strong decline in the main economic indicators, as well as in the form of the global recession that came at the end of 2008. Gradually, the crisis began to lead to a widespread decrease in production volumes, a drop in demand and prices for raw materials, and an increase in unemployment. The consequences of this crisis have not been overcome and continue to manifest themselves to this day in different countries of the world.

Features of the economic crisis

World Bank economists note that if by the beginning of the current global financial crisis Russia did not have a significant budget surplus and a huge amount of resources accumulated in the stabilization fund and foreign exchange reserves, the consequences of the crisis would have affected much earlier and would have been much more serious than now. Equally important, the Russian government would have had much less time, resources, possible options for economic policy and freedom of maneuver in order to limit the impact of the crisis on the real sector.

The national peculiarities of the Russian crisis consist in a combination of the following components: the global demand for export commodities has dropped sharply, on the one hand, and, on the other hand, many Russian companies have heavily over-credited on world financial markets. Thus, the credit and financial dependence was superimposed on the export of raw materials. The peculiarities of the Russian crisis include the fact that Russia has not yet recorded a recession, that is, a drop in production for two quarters, although the recession officially began in the United States and in many European countries. In the US and Europe, the recession is taking place under the threat of deflation - for industrialized countries the inflation forecast is 0.5%, in Russia the inflation forecast is 13%, and according to some experts, 15-17%. Another specific feature of the Russian crisis is the choice associated with the availability of reserves: the National Welfare Fund, the Reserve Fund, and the Central Bank's gold and foreign exchange reserves. It has now become quite obvious that the crisis will be protracted, and the reserves must be spent more sparingly, otherwise they may end by the end of 2009.

A fundamentally important difference between the current Russian crisis and the 1998 crisis is its confidently predicted long duration. If the events of ten years ago can be compared with one powerful blow (as you know, a month after the default of August 98, a slow, but still economic recovery appeared), today the “protracted suffocation” has begun.

So, the fundamental reason for the current crisis in Russia is the resource-based development of the domestic economy with an inevitable correlation with the crisis in the developed countries that consume raw materials. The crisis for Russia is proceeding according to the algorithm of the raw materials component, which will never again return to the price indicators of the times of the oil boom, because it was caused by monetary reasons, the extra money that flooded the stock markets, and it is quite obvious that the new economic world, which is possible it will be possible to build on the ruins of financial pyramids, will arise only under the condition of strict strict state control over the conformity of the commodity and money supply, which in itself contradicts the inflated prices for oil and gas.

This means that the restored (existing) export-raw material structure of the Russian economy will turn out to be unviable in the post-crisis period. And in comparison with the global economic system, our way out of the crisis will be more costly, more labor-intensive, more demanding of systemic restructuring and will take longer.

In this regard, any anti-crisis measures should contribute to the diversification of the economy. One can start at least with the transition from the prevailing export of energy resources to the in-depth processing of oil, gas, coal, timber, as well as primary agricultural products. Russia came out on top in the world in the export of hydrocarbon raw materials, but this did not enrich it. According to the calculations of the Russian Union of Chemists: "If 1,100,000,000 tons of its exported raw materials were processed at the same depth as in the United States, Russia's economy would be the second in the world." In 1990, the capacities for pyrolysis of raw gas in Saudi Arabia and Russia were approximately the same; in 2006, processing in Saudi Arabia more than tripled. It is assumed that by 2012 the gap will widen 6 times. This is the result of the structural policy of Saudi Arabia, which itself has huge reserves of hydrocarbons.

In the plan of US President Barack Obama to stimulate the economy, great attention is also paid to the use of new energy sources. Obama's plan is not only a plan to fight the current crisis, but also a kind of bridge that is being thrown into the future. In Russia, most of the resources are directed to survival, to rescue, and the incentive program is still lacking in sufficient volume. And the measures that were taken were not designed for the depth of the crisis.

The US President stressed that if they want to be competitive tomorrow, they must provide the best educational opportunities for children today. The plan is not only aimed at tackling unemployment, but at ensuring that the jobs that those who lose it receive are geared towards building the future of the United States.

What is made up of total amount$ 787 billion? To get people back to work and at the same time reduce America's dependence on foreign oil, it is proposed to invest in the production of renewable energy resources and modernization of public buildings so that their maintenance becomes less energy-intensive ($ 345 billion). Another 22 billion will be spent on "smart" investments - science and advanced technologies.

A separate line is the modernization of the entire transport infrastructure. Just as Roosevelt pulled the country out of the Great Depression by starting to build roads, so Obama is going to overcome the crisis by rebuilding these roads.

They will not spare money for "education in the 21st century" either. Obama is confident that every American student should receive such an education in order to compete with any worker in the world in the future. Tax subsidies to schools and colleges, tax deductions for citizens, financing of all kinds of educational programs - 85.2 billion dollars. The item "health care" costs 21 billion. They will help both the unemployed and "mortgages". Obama stressed that the economic stimulus plan is only the first step. Another similar plan will be announced in the second half of 2009.

In this regard, it is interesting to see who the Russian government is helping. At the end of 2008, the government approved a list of 295 strategic enterprises. For those on this list, the government has pledged to “maintain their sustainability by using more than just credit instruments but also other measures such as state guarantees, subsidized interest rates, restructuring of tax arrears, government orders, customs and tariff policy ... "Many companies that are on the list are not Russian, are registered in offshore zones, for example, Alisher Usmanov's Metalloinvest belongs to the Cypriot offshore company Evraz Holding Roman Abramovich is registered in Luxembourg, etc. Cypriot offshores own the largest coal company SUEK, Integrated Energy Systems, a leading Russian producer of thermal energy. Why are many of our "strategic" businesses registered offshore? For more convenient taxation, so that it would be easier to pay dividends without having to report again to the Russian state. So that you can safely buy yachts and football clubs and relax in Courchevel. In general, so far everything is good - they are independent and offshore, as it became bad - already strategic and almost state-owned.

Analyzing the proposed measures to overcome the crisis, it can be stated that to date, not a single country and not a single national government has emerged a clear action plan, such that people can breathe a sigh of relief: "This is the true path to economic salvation!" It seems that no one has a clear idea of ​​what needs to be done. Russian government conducts a course on maintaining stability in the short term. If only to hold out, there is no longer any talk of a large-scale modernization of the country's economy. If only it didn't get worse. The infrastructure, technological, informational and social backwardness of the country is being preserved.

The World Bank proposes to create a "vulnerability fund" for weaker countries in crisis, as the funds of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank are insufficient. The World Bank proposes to create a "vulnerability fund" in as follows: When rich countries approve their plans to stimulate financing for their own countries, they should set aside an additional 0.7% to help stabilize the economies of poor countries.

There is a tremendous need for international coordination of responses to the risks and escalation of the crisis. Individual countries pursue different policies and take different approaches to overcoming the crisis. Harmonization of national responses to banks in difficulty during the crisis would also be helpful. Now the main efforts of the leading countries are aimed at developing solutions based on a common understanding of the nature of the crisis and ways to overcome it. This position also meets the interests of Russia, which is interested in creating a clear balanced international financial system with transparent regulatory mechanisms. In Russia, the discussion about reforming the financial system is just beginning - it will have to be rebuilt both for the needs of the country's development and for the expected changes in the global financial architecture. Provided that the situation in the financial sector is stabilized, a sharp increase in trade (and financial) protectionism is prevented, government action is coordinated, and a deep recession is prevented in a large group of countries, the global recession can be kept within “reasonable limits”. The current crisis marks the end of the era of financial capitalism that has flourished since the early 1980s. The regularities that have become habitual have lost their force, otherwise there would not have been such a deep crisis.

During a crisis, costs and business structure are optimized, innovative solutions are sought and found. The crisis is not only a problem, but also a stepping stone for development.

The problems of the economic crisis

A feature of the crisis of 1847 was that it was necessary to suspend the Act of 1844, specifically adopted by the Bank England to prevent violations of monetary circulation. The Banking Act of 1844, named after the then Prime Minister as the "Peel Act", set a limit of £ 14 million for the issuance of banknotes not backed by gold. The Peel Act completed the formation of the British monetary system in which the Bank of England became responsible for maintaining the entire national currency; banknotes served as gold coins during the period of shortage of cash, and money circulation was based on the gold standard - circulation, along with metal paper money, freely exchanged for gold.

The gold standard system, introduced in 1821, was substantiated by D. Ricardo, who proceeded from the need to comply with the proportionality of the issue of banknotes to the volume of gold reserves in order to avoid price increases and the resulting outflow of gold abroad. Ricardo followed the quantitative theory of money and G. Thornton's concept of the impossibility of determining the number of banknotes required by the needs of trade, since "trade is tireless in requests."

Immediately after the introduction of the gold standard, a controversy arose between supporters of different understandings of the monetary factor in maintaining the stability of credit and economic turnover in general. And at the head of different directions were economists, who together with Ricardo founded the Club political economy, - R. Torrance and T. Took. Retired Colonel Robert Torrance (1780-1864), in line with Ricardo's position, was a supporter of tight control over the monetary base as a way to ensure sufficient control over the entire issue of credit. R. Torrens and the "monetary school" behind him believed that regulating the issue of banknotes would be a means of preventing or mitigating trade crises. The legislative expression of this approach was the banking act of 1844, designed to prevent the introduction of unnecessary banknotes into circulation and, thereby, price increases that generate speculation in goods, which, in turn, further increases prices even in extreme cases. leads to a trade crisis.

The merchant and author of "The History of Prices and Currency Circulation" (in 2 volumes, 1838) Thomas Tooke (1774-1858) criticized the quantitative theory of money, the position of the "money school" and Peel's act. Referring to his research on price fluctuations (1793-1837), Tooke noted that in every "outstanding case" the rise or fall in prices preceded, rather than followed, the expansion or reduction of banknotes. From positions close to the doctrine of real bills of A. Smith, Took argued that bank issue can not cause a rise in prices and depreciation of money and be the cause of a trade crisis.

J. St. Mill largely agreed with this, but suggested a broader and, as usual, compromise approach.

Mill put forward the proposition of the existence of two states of the market: calm, or static, and speculative, or a state of expectation. For the first state, the "law of reverse inflow" is valid: any increase in the number of bank notes either returns to banks, or remains unused in the hands of society, without producing a rise in prices. Otherwise, in a state of expectation: speculators seek to build up stocks in order to take advantage of the expected rise in prices, and those who have already purchased goods - to obtain additional loans in order to be able to refrain from selling for a while; traders place speculative orders with manufacturers who also look to banks for more loans. If these increased loans are issued in banknotes, then the notes are spent on wages and end up in various retail channels, where they directly contribute to further price increases.

During this "upward" period of speculation, the expansion of banknote issuance would lead to an increase in its duration, supporting speculative prices and facilitating an outflow of precious metals abroad, which ultimately, with a "sudden change in the course of trade", would force banks "to cut their credit more sharply and in a harsh way. "

In evaluating the 1844 Act, Mill pointed out that its usefulness in curbing speculative credit expansion in the earliest period is far more harmful after the onset of the trade crisis, since the act restricts loans intended to support creditworthy firms and greatly increases the severity of commercial coups.

Mill attempted a deeper explanation of the speculative state, noting that the reason for the prolonged rise in demand for loans could be "the sudden discovery of some new and attractive way of capital investment for all," such as the absorption of capital by the construction of railways. But this was only the first step in the analysis of economic dynamics, which required a revision not only of the polemics of the monetary and banking schools, but also of the "Say's Law."

The economic crisis of enterprises

Let's begin our consideration of this crisis at the micro level, given that the mechanism of the crisis at the micro level is a subsystem of the systemic crisis of the Russian economy as a whole. Its other subsystems are crisis mechanisms at the meso and macro levels. In addition, at the level of the world economy as a whole, there is a mechanism for the deployment of an economic crisis, which individually specifically interacts with the mechanism of a systemic crisis in each individual country. This applies to any country, even economically healthy at a given time. The crisis mechanism is similar to a virus. It can be suppressed until a certain time, as long as the forces of healthy socio-economic development prevail. As these forces weaken, the dormant mechanism of the crisis can wake up. Moreover, he always has an individually-specific character. Another thing is that for groups of countries that are similar in many respects (for example, the middle countries of Western Europe, especially poor countries in Africa, etc.), there are similar features of the systemic crisis of the national economy.

The mechanism of the crisis at the microlevel of the Russian economy is the interaction of the following factors, each of which generates an increase in crisis phenomena (in their totality, the action of all these factors is mutually reinforcing):

1. Enterprises were immediately thrown out of the planning and distribution system of management into a spontaneous market, almost not regulated by the state, in conditions of undermining the very foundation of any market. This was one of the two most important reasons for the catastrophic decline in production at the micro level of the economy. After all, if the capacity of the domestic market for the manufacturing industry or agriculture shrinks sharply, and products are uncompetitive in the foreign market or they are not allowed there by methods of well-thought-out foreign trade barriers, then the volume of production will inevitably decrease in proportion to the decrease in market capacity, respectively, people work less, earn less. live worse.
2. Another important reason for more than a twofold decline in production was the catastrophic cutoff of funding sources production activities enterprises:
a) inflation 1992-1993 practically nullified its own working capital enterprises (own working capital), amortization fund and accumulations from the composition of profits (intended for the development of production and the social sphere); only for 1992 retail prices grew 26 times, and wholesale - 31 times; the economic organism of an enterprise is similar to that of a human, and its deprivation working capital, the depreciation fund is analogous to depriving a person of his vital organs;
b) budget financing of enterprises turned out to be practically blocked both due to the adoption of an ultra-liberal market ideology, proclaiming the complete withdrawal of the state from the economic sphere, and due to the impoverishment of the state budget;
c) credit, due to its super-high interest rate (much higher than the inflation rate), turned out to be almost inaccessible to manufacturing enterprises; the super-high level of interest for a loan is due to super-high incomes in speculative intermediary and short-term trade and procurement transactions with high degree risk (during all the years of radical reforms 1992-1999, over 90% of the capital of commercial banks was used for lending to speculative intermediary sphere).

Thus, the combination of the two above-stated main reasons for the decline in production (this most painful and destructive manifestation of the systemic crisis) forms a mechanism for stifling production at each individual enterprise, and hence the country's economy as a whole.

In order to even more clearly imagine the operation of this mechanism, let us turn to the scheme of the capital turnover of an enterprise, which we represent as follows:

FP - D - T (Cp, Rs) ... P ... T1 - D1 - PSR,
where FP is the financing of production;
RPS - effective demand in the market.

Financing of production is an entrance into the circulation of capital of an enterprise, and therefore, into the process of production on it. Effective demand in the market is an exit from the circulation of capital, respectively, and from the production process. Depriving industrial enterprises of money at the entrance to and exit from production contributes to the financial strangulation of all Russian enterprises, even those that are very efficient in technical and technological terms, which is a consequence of the macroeconomic policy aimed at artificially compressing the money supply (MM) in the country in accordance with the requirements of the IMF (DM to GDP in Western countries averages 80%, in modern Russia - 10-14%). In the future, when considering the mechanism of the crisis at the macro level, this issue is disclosed in detail. Here it is touched upon in order to show once again that the main causes of the systemic crisis of the economy are intertwined at all its levels.

3. As you know, production costs are divided into fixed (do not depend on the volume of production) and variable (directly proportional to the increase in production). With a steady decline in production volumes, fixed production costs are distributed over a smaller number of products, respectively, the cost and price of each individual product grows. When the price rises, the volume of sales decreases. This causes a further drop in production. Fixed costs are spread over even fewer products. The prime cost and the price of a separate product, etc. rise again.

This is how a spiral of increasing production costs operates based on the unwinding of cost inflation. Note:

A) cost inflation spins up not only in accordance with the above reason, but also for many others;
b) in the course of market reforms starting in 1992, the Russian economy was no longer operating demand inflation (as it was in the last years of the USSR), but cost inflation, while reformers fought it as if it was demand inflation (i.e. e. by compressing the money supply).
4. The growth of production costs at the enterprise, in addition to the distribution of fixed costs to an ever decreasing amount of products, occurs as a result of the influence of the following factors:
a) extremely high taxes are shifted to production costs (even if they appear in the composition of profit, and not cost, for enterprises they objectively act as costs);
b) to ensure their own ultra-high income, speculative-intermediary and trading structures supply the enterprise with means of production (working capital and fixed assets) at inflated prices, which ultimately affects the cost of production of each individual production enterprise;
c) overestimated incomes of commercial banks (they, with rare exceptions, also belong to the speculative-intermediary sphere), to whose loans, albeit relatively rarely, but still have to resort to enterprises, also eventually settle on production costs;
d) the increasing physical deterioration of equipment due to the frozen investment requires more frequent and more expensive repairs, which significantly increases production costs;
e) due to the disruption of the established economic ties after the collapse of the USSR and the CMEA, enterprises re-and often semi-handicraft master the manufacture of the production components they need, which significantly increases production costs.
5. In addition, the destruction of many previous economic ties leads to underutilization of production capacities (due to the lack of production components necessary for their loading) and, accordingly, a drop in production. Note that the disruption of the established economic ties, which painfully affects the microlevel of the economy, itself refers to its mesolevel. At manufacturing enterprises, capital investments are frozen to a very strong degree, and therefore the production crisis is fraught with an ever-increasing loss of product competitiveness in the market due to the lagging behind in its technical and technological level and quality (it is difficult, often impossible, to manufacture competitive products with old equipment). If the number of such enterprises exceeds the critical mass (this is inevitable in the future, if economic course the country will not be drastically changed), then the national economy of the country will fall into devastation and chaos, and no less than it was during the revolution, intervention and Civil War in Russia in 1917-1920.
6. The sharp understatement of the salaries of specialists and skilled workers, especially in comparison with incomes in various areas of commerce and trade, led to the outflow of many qualified personnel from manufacturing enterprises. At the same time, the influx of talented young people into production decreased. All of the above applies not only to enterprises in the sphere of material production, but also to research organizations and universities, which are also production enterprises, but only functioning in the field of scientific and educational production (often this area is completely unjustifiably called the non-production sphere).
7. As a result of the privatization, the ineffective owner of an individual enterprise in many cases was replaced by an anti-efficient owner. For example, new owners with a controlling stake use them as an object of speculation on Russian and foreign stock exchanges, not paying attention to real situation cases at enterprises. The administration of the enterprise, left to itself, in many cases, predatory exploits all the resources of the enterprise, including the labor force, without paying wages for months, often sharply lowering its level. At the same time, the products of the enterprise are often sold at reduced prices to commercial structures that are controlled by the heads of the enterprise and are aimed at their enrichment. In a number of cases, the management of the enterprise is entrusted to dubious people who do not have the proper qualifications and management experience, often with a criminal past. At the same time, the activities of both old and new managers are guided by the economic mechanism not on the growth of production efficiency, but on personal enrichment, which is achieved most easily through the predatory exploitation of enterprise resources and their plundering.
8. Research and development, as well as the training of specialists of all profiles by universities, began to enjoy extremely limited demand from enterprises in the sphere of material production. Under extreme compression budget financing science and education and the inaccessibility of loans for them, this led to a particularly deplorable state of organizations (enterprises of intellectual labor) in the field of science and education. Universities that train economists and lawyers are comparatively more prosperous. In the future, however, economists and lawyers will be in abundance. The demand for them will fall, the situation in economics and law schools will worsen.
9. The one-sided orientation of the Russian economy towards the external market, with a dramatic contraction of the internal market, had a particularly painful effect on enterprises of manufacturing industries, primarily science-intensive ones, which led to a much greater decline in production in these industries than in the entire national economy as a whole. As a result, as a result of radical reforms, the structure of industries and individual industries of the national economy not only did not improve, but sharply deteriorated. In this case, there is also an intertwining of the crisis at the micro and macro levels of the economy. Often the cause lies at the micro level, and the consequences appear at the macro level, that is, the opposite direction takes place. In addition, the principle applies feedback when a consequence at one of the levels turns into a cause that generates a consequence at another level. Thus, especially difficult economic conditions for knowledge-intensive enterprises (the reason is at the micro level) lead to a deterioration in the structure of the national economy of the country (a consequence at the macro level). In turn, this phenomenon entails a deterioration in the economic conditions for knowledge-intensive enterprises (i.e., according to the principle of feedback, the effect at the macrolevel turns into a cause at the microlevel).
10. Insufficiently controlled by the state cheap imports of food (often harmful and hazardous to health) and consumer goods (often of low quality, but usually with a pretense of fashion) significantly worsened the situation of agricultural enterprises, as well as enterprises of the light and food industries. At the same time, small enterprises in the real sector of the economy, for the development of which radical reformers most of all advocated, found themselves in a particularly deplorable situation, being squeezed between high prices for energy, raw materials, semi-finished products, on the one hand, and low paying capacity of the bulk of the population, on the other.
11. The quality of the labor force, especially at enterprises of the real sector of the economy (material production, science, education, socially useful services), is steadily declining (recall that labor resources are the main productive force of society) in the following sections:
a) the health of the population is deteriorating, life expectancy is reduced, incentives for productive labor are falling;
b) the level of education, training and retraining of personnel in production and in the system of advanced training is falling;
c) the outflow of qualified personnel from the real sector of the economy is increasing, and the inflow of talented youth into it is decreasing;
d) the labor force, including the qualified one, is more and more oriented towards making easy money and less and less inclined to hard, but highly skilled labor (work for wear and tear in the sphere of speculative-intermediary business, which has spread at the present time, does not count).

Types of economic crises

Irregular economic crises include intermediate, partial, sectoral and structural:

Intermediate - does not give rise to a new cycle, but interrupts for some time the course of the recovery or revitalization phase, shallow, is of a local nature;
- Partial - covers any area of ​​social reproduction;
- Sectoral - covers one of the sectors of the national economy. The reason may be imbalances in the development of the industry, structural restructuring;
- Structural - violation of the law of proportional development of social production. This is manifested in serious disparities between industries and the output of the most important types of products in physical terms, necessary for a balanced development of the economy.

From the standpoint of the theory of regulation, crises are classified:

A crisis as a result of an "external" shock is a situation when the continuation of the economic development of a particular geographic community is blocked due to a lack of resources, associated with natural and economic disasters;
- Cyclical crisis - the phase of elimination of tension and imbalances that have accumulated during the recovery in economic mechanisms and social processes;
- Structural crisis - any case of manifestation of the contradictory nature of long-term reproduction;
- The crisis of the regulatory system is a situation when the mechanisms associated with the existing system regulation turns out to be unable to change unfavorable conjuncture processes, although the accumulation mode remains viable;
- The crisis of the mode of production - the exacerbation of contradictions developing in important institutional forms that determine the mode of accumulation. Unviable most important regularities on which the organization of production is based, the distribution of value.

The Great Depression is a prolonged recession in the world economy that occurred in 1929 and finally ended in the late 1930s. At the same time, the recession spread to most of the Western countries and other countries around the world. In essence, the Great Depression is a global economic crisis, and the term itself is usually used in relation to the United States of America.

By the time the crisis began, 1% of Americans had ultra-high incomes, 42% - ultra-low. In 1929, roughly 100 large corporations controlled half of America's corporate finance, and the banking system was wild - banks often promised their depositors 4-5% of their daily income.

Since the mid-1920s, the US stock market has been completely dominated by bulls - bulls who play on the rise in stock prices. In 1923, the Dow Jones stock index was at 99. In August 1929, it soared 400% and reached 380, and on September 3, the index reached a record 381.17 - one of the reasons for this growth was the activity of stock speculators.

The amount of savings that US residents kept in banks rose sharply. Interest rates were then low, so bank loans were available to many Americans who expected to repay them in the future. Speculators took out bank loans in order to invest this money in stocks.

The state of affairs in the industry seemed brilliant. Industrial companies reported profits and preferred to invest them in the production of new types of products. This prompted market players to actively buy up their shares. However, in 1929 it became clear that stocks did not provide a high level of dividends, and the profit forecast of many issuing companies turned out to be overestimated. Issuing companies faced declining sales while their stock prices rallied.

October 24, 1929 (this day went down in history as Black thursday) on the New York Stock Exchange there was a sharp decline in shares, marking the beginning of the largest world economic crisis in history.

“Bulls” were replaced by “bears” - players for a fall. Investors began to sell shares en masse, attempts to hold stock prices were unsuccessful.

The cost of securities fell by 60-70%, business activity dropped sharply, and the gold standard for major world currencies was canceled.

The most solid stocks - the American Telephone and Telegraph Company, the General Electric Company and the General Motor Company - lost up to two hundred points within a week. By the end of the month, shareholders had lost over $ 15 billion. By the end of 1929, the fall in securities prices had reached a fantastic amount of $ 40 billion. Firms and factories were closed, banks collapsed, millions became unemployed.

In the first three years of the depression, 4,835 banks went bankrupt. And the panic-stricken population tried at the first opportunity to withdraw their savings from the surviving banks, as a result of which the amount of money in circulation grew from $ 454 million in 1929 to $ 5699 million at the end of 1932.

The crisis raged until 1933, and its effects were felt until the late 1930s.

Industrial production during this crisis fell by 46% in the United States, 24% in the UK, 41% in Germany, and 32% in France. Industrial stocks fell 87% in the US, 48% in the UK, 64% in Germany, and 60% in France. Unemployment has reached colossal proportions. According to official figures, in 1933 there were 30 million unemployed in 32 developed countries, including 14 million in the United States.

The "New Deal" of President Franklin Roosevelt, the essence of which was to carry out state-monopoly regulation of the economy, made it possible to gradually normalize the situation in the country. The policy of the "New Deal" included price regulation, the initiation of the amalgamation of producers into large enterprises, a social program - the establishment of a minimum wage, a maximum working week, the introduction of pensions for workers who have reached 65 years of age, etc.

The main, most devastating and critical phase of the industrial cycle is the crisis, which serves as the starting point for the subsequent phases of the cycle.

The history of the economic development of various states shows that economic growth cannot last forever. Gradually, negative factors begin to accumulate, and the economy enters the stage of crisis. Such a crisis is natural. It is called an economic or cyclical crisis. Entrepreneurs, as a rule, are not ready for it, therefore the course of the crisis phase is explosive and landslide. The balance is upset not in any industry, but in the entire economy.

An economic crisis is a significant imbalance in the economic system, often accompanied by losses and the rupture of normal ties in production and market relations. This ultimately leads to an imbalance in the functioning of the economic system as a whole. Thus, the economic crisis is an imbalance of supply and demand within the country for goods and services.

The economic crisis resulting from the overproduction of goods is called the overproduction crisis. It is characterized by a gap between production and consumption opportunities, when production outstrips effective demand. As a result, part of the goods remains unsold, while society has spent certain resources on their production.

An underproduction crisis occurs when effective demand overtakes production. This type of crisis, by devaluing fixed capital, creates conditions for the renewal of production on a new technical basis, which will reduce production costs, restore the pre-crisis level and even surpass it.

Economic crises are manifested in an absolute decline in production, a reduction in capital investment, an increase in unemployment, an increase in the number of bankruptcies of firms, a fall in stock prices and other economic shocks.

The cause of economic crises is the main contradiction of capitalism between the social nature of production and the private capitalist form of appropriation of its results. The division of labor, specialization of production, cooperation in industry bind capitalist enterprises into a single economic mechanism, for the normal functioning of which it is necessary to observe certain proportions on the scale of the entire economy between industries, the production of means of production and the production of consumer goods, between the accumulation of capital and consumption. But the domination of private property, the anarchy of production that it engenders, fierce competition, and the exploitation of labor by capital lead to a constant violation of the proportions of reproduction. Some of these disorders resolve spontaneously, while others intensify and accumulate.

In the system of imbalances of reproduction arising in the course of economic development, there is always a violation of the proportions between capital accumulation and consumption. The desire of capital to self-growth, the pursuit of profit are provided due to the slow growth (and sometimes even reduction) in the incomes and consumption of workers. The resulting contradiction between production and consumption accumulates, reaches an explosive point and becomes, as a rule, the direct cause of the economic crisis, which completes one capitalist cycle and clears the ground for the next one by rectifying the disturbed proportions between the accumulation of capital and consumption, the production of means of production and the production of objects. consumption. The economic crisis is sharply exacerbated by class contradictions, since the entire burden of the disasters they bring falls mainly on the shoulders of the working people. This causes an intensification of the class struggle, in the course of which the self-awareness of the working class grows, its organization and solidarity.

Economic crises lead to huge economic losses for society, since during them a significant part of the production apparatus is idle, and hundreds of thousands and even millions of workers lose their jobs.

Along with cyclical crises in a market economy, there are also partial crises that cover not all, but some local area of ​​economic activity (such are, for example, crises in the sphere of money circulation and credit).

A structural crisis arises as a result of imbalances in development between individual sectors of the economy. As a rule, these crises are longer in time and change the overall picture of cyclical development. The following can lead to the emergence of a structural crisis: the collapse of the economic system, political instability (regional conflicts), changes in raw materials markets. A structural crisis can manifest itself in the form of an energy crisis, food, raw materials and environmental.

World financial crisis (global economic crisis) - a stable financial crisis of countries that are part of the global financial system, based on the dominance of the American financial system over other systems.

The difference between a financial crisis and an economic crisis is that the former is the cause of the latter. At the same time, the economic crisis does not always arise due to the financial crisis.

The global financial crisis is manifested in rising prices for real estate and food, in job cuts, both in commercial and government organizations, in the absence of stability and loss of faith in the future. Moreover, the reasons for these changes are different in different countries.

The timing of the onset, the depth and duration of crises depend, first of all, on the degree of violations of the basic proportions of reproduction during economic booms. But, in addition, they are able to self-generate, since in the course of them there is usually a drop in the purchasing power of workers (due to an increase in unemployment and a reduction in working hours), which further complicates the conditions for the sale of goods and prevents the restoration of a temporary balance between capital accumulation and consumption.

Although the cause of the economic crisis is the same, each crisis has its own specific features, due to the specific historical conditions in which it develops. Its course is influenced by the peculiarities of the era, the level of development of capitalism, and the whole complex of economic and political factors acting in a particular country at the time of the unfolding of the crisis.