Russians to be 40% richer by 2007!!!

[Diablos]

Who said capitalism was bad for Russia eh? I bet that by 2007 nostalgia about communism will be null and void.

"MOSCOW - The Russian government expects real disposable personal incomes to rise 35-40 percent by 2007 compared with 2003, Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Zhukov said at a conference “Investments in the economy of growth”.

According to Mr. Zhukov, personal incomes will be rising by 9-11 percent a year. He said it was necessary to decrease the number of Russian people living below the poverty line by half - from 30m to 10-15m people - over the next 3-4 years.

The poverty rate dropped to 20.8 percent in Russia in the first half of 2004. In January-June 2003, it was 23.5 percent. So, the number of people living below the subsistence level, dropped from 33.7m people to 29.8m people."

Source: http://www.russiajournal.com/news/cn...shtml?nd=45668

[T-34_Fanatic]

I cannot recall what I was watching but on this program they were saying Russians spend more then North Americans, infact they make North America look Socialist. I am assuming though these are the more wealthy individuals in Russia spending. Apparently the wealth isn't very well dispersed.

but by 2007 who knows?

[Soviet78]

"MOSCOW - The Russian government expects real disposable personal incomes to rise 35-40 percent by 2007 compared with 2003, Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Zhukov said at a conference “Investments in the economy of growth”.


You do understand that at the collapse of the USSR personal, well, all incomes actually, fell at least that much, and there is still severe un/under-employment in the country.


"The poverty rate dropped to 20.8 percent in Russia in the first half of 2004. In January-June 2003, it was 23.5 percent. So, the number of people living below the subsistence level, dropped from 33.7m people to 29.8m people."

You do understand that subsistence level is the ability to provide yourself with food, clothing and housing, right?

It is inevitable if we want to find a better measurement of real incomes and real poverty that a new system be devised to measure those things. GDP per capita is a false method of analyzing the society's wealth because it fails to take into account 'social expenses', as well as the fact that the measure is 'in average'. For example: Those below and slightly above the minimum income levels only account for two-thirds of all Russian people. The measure of GDP per capita (wealth per person), overrepresents those individuals making millions, or billions, and underrepresents those who make amounts below $10000 (a majority).


I am happy to see that Russia is getting back on its feet, but in recent years I have not seen as much improvement (through personal experience) as has been shown by the economists. While there have been some improvements, increased privitization of things like electricity services and schools have taken their toll on the things that are better, and it does appear that many rich people are getting richer (to the point of buying foreign football clubs, staying above the law, and living in some of the most expensive places in the world).

Living standards should not be measured by statistics and charts alone (the above points show why). Detailed analysis would better explain the situations of individual families, some of which are worse off (mainly in the less developed areas of the country), some of which are unaffected (the gains being offset by the increased expenses), and some of which are better off (in my experience, mainly those working two jobs or in the wealthy class).

Please don't look at me as if I am negative and evil and stubborn to the point of denying reality, as I have explained to you the situation (to my knowledge) of our country's economy, and why statistics can't be totally authoratative in the analysis of it's growth. All I'm saying is what I see, what I know (although little) of economic growth indicators, and what I conclude through my analysis. Russia will get back on its feet, and, who knows, perhaps in 30 or 40 years, they will get back on their feet completely and rival the economies of today's west. But the issue to me is: couldn't the Soviet Union have done the same thing? Looking at indicators of past performance, with some slight modifications to the economy, yes, it could have. And the thing that brings tears to my eyes is that many people, people who have believed in a set of ideals all their lives, have died, and are dying, knowing that what they stood for no longer exists. It is as if their lives are worthless, meaningless. What's worse, is that especially among the old; the people who have provided for us, who built our nation, are being treated with the least respect, with no dignity, who are given pensions that aren't capable of sustaining them. It is truly a sad time, when the people who defeated the nazis in our country's time of need in the Great Patriotic War are forced to sell their medals, their honours, for food, for bread.

[Voyager13b]

It's the old story of "figures don't lie, but liars can figure". The economy in Russia is growing at a fast clip, although much of the hard cash is due to current high oil prices. Younger people in polulated regions like Moscow and Peter are finding many opportunities, and as in America, they are able to exchange a good education for cash money by keeping their eyes open for a better paying job, and grabbing it when they have the chance. That practise is not understood by their parents (nor by my American parents here), as they got a job when they were young, and stuck with it until pension age.

The world has changed. The new generation in Russia is probably far better off than the old generation, as is the case in America, but the pensioners in Russia are hit very hard by this new reality. It is better now than it was a few years ago, but there is still much to be done to fulfil a lifetime of promises.

Also, consider that in the US, there are major centers of commerce scattered throuought each state, and the difference in quality of life from one region to the next is not that stark. Russia has only been a fairly open society for little more than a decade, and the differences from one region to the next can be extreme.

I think that Soviet78 might agree with me on this, as I have seen it for myself, and I'm sure that he has seen it too. That's not to say that people in various regions are starving, or live terrible lives. To the contrary, Russian people seem to accept their lot in life, and make it great. They still have a right to complain though, and I hope the message gets through that it is not just Moscow and Peter that matter in the grand scheme, but all of Russia.

Based on that assesment, I have no doubt that my friends in Moscow will reach parity with other western nations in terms of disposable income within ten years time, but I hope the rest of the country is afforded opportunity to grow as well.

Voyager

[Diablos]

Hello Soviet78,

Eventhough Russian wealth compared to other nations has diminished, Russia is today on the whole wealthier than it has ever been.

And imagine what Russia had been today had it not been for the jewish Bolsheviks?

You are right in what you say about the GDP. Looking at China for example, where the rich areas are very concentrated to the major cities, most of the nation is still dirt poor. In fact, the economic growth of the rich regions can largeley be credited to slavishly cheap labor from the poor regions. I believe a similar thing is happening in Russia no? Perhaps with less contrast between rich and poor though.

That can largely be blamed on a centralized government. Why? Because even the current government would fear regions other than Moscow would grow too powerfull and out of their
control. They FEAR loosing even an inch of their control, and every concession is made with great repulsion.

Don't get too obsessed about the rich. Why not let them be rich and respect them for that? Surely it would be more patriotic of them to reinvest the money into Russia so to create jobs and such (and earn money at the same time) rather than investing it unproductively. Besides, they create great tax revenues. Why not let them get richer so
that their businesses will create even more money for the state to support it's citizens? But if you don't like what they do, why don't YOU do something about that? After all, you are living in a "free" country are you not?

No, the Soviet Union could not have done the same thing as Russia. Past performance is no guarantee of future performance in a changing world.

Even in Europe there is much talk about decentralizing power, lowering taxes and bureucrazy. Sweden for example, may very soon be a country where net taxation is lower than in the United States. There are powerful think tanks in Europe who knows whats what. So far they have only failed to connect with the executive bodies of our systems however. But that is changing. What I'm trying to say is that even socialist Europe is waking up to the pitfalls of socialism and moving away from it. That doesn't mean we are trying to create a "sink or swim society", not at all. We take care of the poor but we also try to make our society as free as possible and encourage learning, work, creativity
and competition. I would imagine that is exaclty what Russia would do as well in the long run. A free society delivers that much better than the USSR ever could.

I agree with that there were some good things with the USSR, education for example. With proper financing and an entrepeneurial mind Russians could perhaps take advantage of
their good education?

How is the state of financing and the entrepeneurial spirit in Russia btw?

[sfan1401]

EXCUSE ME, Diablo, but i lived for a long time in China. In fact, i was born in China. So if u wanna talk about real GDP, PPP, whatever, BE CAREFUL, AVOID GUESSWORK. With $1 USD, u can purchase $2.5 to $4 USD worth of goods. (by american standards.) Yes, the rest of the country is 3rd world. Hey, but where i lived which was Wuhan (Citroens, Renaults, and Peugeouts for chinese market r all made there)we lived a life i would say no worse than Greece or Portugal or Spain, at least by quality of living. And in Shanghai, i would not hesitate to compare it with Italy or something. In fact the richest is not shanghai, its Guangzhou.

[Diablos]

Well that's exactly what I was saying.