There are two main forms of state intervention in the economy:

1) direct intervention through administrative means, which are based on the power of state power and include measures of prohibition, permission and coercion;

2) indirect intervention through various measures economic policy and priorities.

The implementation of the goals of state regulation of the economy in practice is ensured using various methods. Depending on the selected criteria, there are several options for classifying the methods of state regulation of the economy.

Direct Methods state regulation have a direct impact on the activities of economic entities, they force them to make decisions based not on independent economic choice, but on the instructions of the state.

Indirect Methods state regulation of the economy provide for the use of tools and methods of state influence on private business in terms of ensuring macroeconomic proportions of expanded reproduction. advantage indirect methods is that they do not violate the market situation, and the disadvantage is a certain period of time that occurs between the moments when the state takes measures, the reaction of the economy to them and real changes in economic results.

According to the organizational and institutional criterion, there are: administrative and economic methods of state regulation.

Administrative Methods based on the power of government. The set of administrative methods covers regulatory actions related to the provision of legal infrastructure and aims to create a legal environment that is most favorable to the private sector. The functions of administrative methods are: providing a stable legal environment for business life; protection of the competitive environment; guaranteeing the right of ownership and freedom of acceptance economic decisions. The degree of application of administrative methods varies depending on the sphere of the national economy. They are most actively used in the protection environment, in area social support poorly provided and relatively poorly protected segments of the population by creating minimal living conditions. Administrative methods are divided into prohibition measures, permit measures and coercive measures.

Economic Methods are measures of state influence, with the help of which certain conditions are created that guide the development of market processes in the state needs channel. These regulatory measures are associated either with the creation of an additional financial incentive, or with the risk of financial damage. The most commonly used economic measures are:

Means of financial (budgetary, fiscal) policy;

Means of monetary policy;

Forecasting, planning and programming of the economy;

Impact public sector economy, which is an independent complex tool.

TOPIC 13: Incomes of the population and social policy in a market economy

1. Incomes of the population and sources of their formation

2. Measuring inequality in income distribution. Lorenz curve. Living standards indicators

3. Social politics and ways to implement it

The analysis of the functioning of the economy at the micro, meso and macro levels, carried out in the previous chapters, already required a partial consideration of the role of the state in the market system. Now we have to summarize these parts and form, as far as possible, a more holistic view of the place of the state in modern economy. To this end, this chapter will address the following key issues:

• o the need and goals of state regulation of the economy;
• o methods, ways of influencing the state on the economy;
• o the main problems of state intervention in the economic system;
• o models of state regulation.

17.1. Necessity and goals of state regulation of the economy

The need for state intervention in the economy stems, on the one hand, from the peculiarities of the functioning of the market system itself, which is unable to cope with the solution of a number of important problems and situations (market failures), on the other hand, from strengthening the integrity of modern social systems, which requires an institutional representation of subjects common to all interests. The latter turns out to be especially significant in the conditions of modern scientific and technological revolution, the transition to a post-industrial civilization and a sharp increase in the internationalization of economic life.

What are the specific reasons for the possible intervention of the state in the economy?

First of all, the role of the state in preserving and maintaining the market environment itself should be recognized. It is the state through legal regulation that ensures the establishment and observance of the "rules of the game" of the main economic agents, legally defines and protects the rights of owners, promotes the preservation of competitive principles in the economy, suppresses forms of unfair competition, regulates many aspects economic activity etc. The state provides normal functioning monetary system, which is especially important in the face of the abandonment of the gold standard. The elements of coercion that are inevitably present in legal regulation, at first glance, limit the freedom of realization and the primacy of private interests, which are reasonably considered the foundation of a market economy. In fact, coercion turns out to be a way to reduce transaction costs (R. Coase) - the costs of negotiating, obtaining reliable information, the costs of risky actions of private structures, which would be extremely high in the absence of state control and guarantees. Such coercion is carried out by the state in the interests of all major economic actors and society as a whole. But, in turn, if the costs government controlled turn out to be higher than transaction costs, this is a reason for the state to withdraw from the relevant areas.

next important reason state intervention in the market system of self-regulation is an inevitable market trend towards monopolization, arising from the laws of competition, concentration and centralization of capital. The ambiguity of the consequences of monopolization (on the one hand, rising prices, costs, reduction in production volumes, irrational distribution of resources and income, in some cases, immunity to scientific and technological progress; on the other hand, cost reduction due to economies of scale, interest in scientific research and financial opportunities carrying out the latter, the ability to break through to world markets) creates a very contradictory attitude of the state to the assessment of the activities of monopolies. This finds expression in the difference in national antitrust laws: the most rigid attitude towards monopolies in the United States, European countries and Japan approach the problem more tolerantly, largely because of the need to help national firms to gain a foothold in world markets. It is to the extent that a monopoly is destructive to the economic system that it becomes an object of state influence - through legislative restriction and suppression of monopoly activities (price regulation, division of firms), through the promotion of competition, the promotion of the creation of new enterprises, the implementation of an open economy policy.

The reason for the participation of the state in the economic life of society is also the problem of external effects (externalities). Externalities in economic theory are understood as situations where the costs (or benefits) of private market transactions fall on third parties who are not direct participants in these transactions. Classical examples of these are numerous situations associated with environmental pollution (negative externalities), benefits received by society from the growth of the level of education, health, culture of people (positive externalities). From the point of view of the theory of microeconomics, in cases of external effects, there is an unjustified deviation of the demand and supply curves of the corresponding goods (and the equilibrium point) from the required position. With negative externalities, the market supply curve, based on the private costs of firms, does not take into account part of the costs of society (losses of third parties), due to which the volume of production and consumption of goods is overstated, prices are underestimated and, therefore, there is an excessive, unpaid and inefficient use of part of the resources . In the case of positive externalities (with the predominance of market relations in the spheres of education, healthcare, culture), the situation is reversed: the presence of unpaid benefits underestimates the effective demand for goods and services, the volume of their production and consumption, and prices turn out to be lower than those required by society, resources in the industry are underconsumed. The problem of negative externalities, as the theory shows, could be solved in a purely market way (in the case of zero transaction costs), but under one important condition - the exact identification of all property rights to all resources (including clean air, unpolluted water of reservoirs, etc.). .). This idea is formulated in the Coase-Stigler theorem: with zero transaction costs and a clear establishment of property rights, regardless of how these rights are distributed among economic actors, private and social costs (taking into account the mentioned costs of “third parties”) will be equal. However, the difficulty lies precisely in the fact that either zero transaction costs are impossible, or it is difficult to establish and distribute property rights. Because of this, state intervention in such situations is inevitable. It is carried out different ways. With the help of the policy of taxes, fines, direct prohibitions, the costs of firms artificially increase and the industry supply curve shifts, thereby reducing negative effects, and resources are redistributed in the optimal direction. The use of subsidies, subsidies, free provision of goods and services by the state expands the use of resources, the production and consumption of goods in industries with positive externalities. Thus, in this case, too, the state "tweaks" the market mechanism, contributes to the growth of efficiency. economic system, although it should be recognized that it is not possible to completely eliminate external effects for a number of reasons.

Another justified reason for state intervention in the economy is the need to produce so-called public goods. Public goods in economic theory are called goods that have the following basic properties: non-excludability - benefits cannot be provided to one person so as not to make them available to other people, non-rivalry - being provided to one person can be provided to others without additional costs. The production and supply of such goods by private firms turns out to be unprofitable, if at all possible: most people will use such goods for free, there will be a problem of "hares". “Pure” public goods, for which these properties are fully applicable, include national defense, lighthouse services, street lighting, etc. Some benefits are characterized by a partial absence of exclusion and competitiveness properties - these are “quasi-public” parks, roads, etc. Sometimes such goods also include education, medicine, and cultural sectors, although these are rather private goods with high positive externalities. Public goods, by virtue of their properties, are produced either by the state or by state contractors and are provided for use free of charge, financed from the state budget. But at the same time, it is a very difficult problem to determine the volumes of production of goods and the corresponding costs of resources; the traditional market mechanism for identifying equilibrium volumes and prices does not work here.

The problem of income distribution also requires the participation of the state. The market mechanism, as you know, is very cruel and is not capable, and indeed should not, address issues of social justice, guarantee a certain standard of well-being in accordance with the requirements of a modern democratic society. The state corrects this situation with the help of fiscal policy instruments: taxes, transfers, etc.

All of these factors of government intervention in the economy are more likely to microeconomics, as they characterize the problems of individual markets. But there are actually macroeconomic situations that require state regulation. Moreover, in relation to the latter, there are much more contradictory judgments than in relation to microeconomic ones. These problems can be interpreted as manifestations of economic instability.

First, it concerns inflationary processes, which, as is known, have a very destructive effect on economic systems. As the practice of developed and developing countries, monetary policy has a high anti-inflationary effect (restriction money supply), fiscal policy (deficit reduction state budget), structural policy, antimonopoly policy, etc. The fight against inflation is often the most important task of stabilization, without which the further development of the economy is unthinkable. Such stabilization is sometimes very expensive, accompanied by more or less economic recession, rising unemployment and other adverse consequences.

Requires government intervention and the existence of unemployment. Its high level, which exceeds the natural norm, is unacceptable in the economic system as purely economic reasons(loss of GNP), and socio-political: low income, poverty, high morbidity and mortality, social conflict; Finally, it is a violation of certain democratic rights and freedoms. The policy of bringing unemployment to its natural level and maintaining the latter is also associated with many problems: a possible deficit of the state budget, inflation, as it requires stimulation of production, payment of social benefits, the cost of creating and efficient work employment services, etc.

Strengthening the internationalization of the economy gives rise to another macroeconomic concern of the state - the balance of the country's balance of payments. As will be shown in the next chapter, the imbalance foreign economic relations(primarily the deficit of the balance of payments) can create many unfavorable situations, worsen the state of national economy, increase its dependence on the outside world, require complex and painful macroeconomic adjustments. Therefore, the state is pursuing one or another policy of short-term and long-term balancing of the country's payments, resorting in some cases to emergency measures of foreign economic policy (see Chapter 18).

The need to stimulate economic growth as the basis for social progress is another possible reason for state regulation of the economy. The market system, as history shows, quite often fails in this matter. Growth policies pursued by governments include, inter alia, the promotion of economic restructuring, scientific and technological progress, implementation of investment state programs, counter-cyclical regulation. It requires a sound monetary and fiscal policy, but is often associated with adverse consequences such as inflation, structural unemployment, balance of payments deficit, especially in the short term.

In this chapter, there is no need to dwell in detail on how the state solves certain macroeconomic problems - they are covered in sufficient detail above, in other chapters. Let's pay attention to something else - the named reasons for macroeconomic regulation actually set the possible goals of such regulation, and these goals can be not only complementary, but also contradictory. The achievement of one goal, as a rule, and it has already been shown, is accompanied by a deterioration in the state of the economy in some other direction, for example, in an effort to ensure full time inflation may increase, and vice versa, the fight against inflation will require at least for some time to forget about economic growth, etc. This peculiar state of affairs has received a very accurate name in the economic literature - the magic quadrangle. The "corners" of this quadrangle are such goals as: price stability, effective full employment of the population, equilibrium of the balance of payments and ensuring economic growth. All this, of course, complicates the effective regulation of the economy by the state, as it requires the allocation of priority goals and certain victims. Well, if in reality the country is faced with the need to solve only one problem, for example, eliminating high inflation or a balance of payments deficit, then the losses can be insignificant. It’s another matter if all the problems of the magic quadrangle “heap” at the same time and very strongly: both economically and politically it turns out to be extremely difficult to solve them, since the choice of priorities can be extremely painful for society and leads to an aggravation of social economic situation. This state of affairs is very typical for countries with transition economy and many developing countries.

The considered reasons for state intervention in the economy, as already noted, simultaneously determine its main goals: maintaining a competitive environment, price stability, economic growth, etc. These goals, of course, can be refined by building a kind of goal tree, identifying the nature of relationships within this system. It is also necessary to single out the ultimate goal of state regulation - promoting an increase in the efficiency of the socio-economic system and the growth of the well-being of citizens. The specific goals of regulation for a particular country in a given period of time are already determined on the basis of an analysis of the current situation in the economy and taking into account a number of non-economic factors, primarily of a political nature. The difficulties of such an analysis, the contradictions of political relations, the variety of interpretations of a number of problems by various economic schools make this process extremely complex. But this cannot eliminate the need for government intervention in the economic system. As a result of such interaction between the market and the state, a mixed economy is formed. In this economy, the principle of distribution of powers between the two mechanisms of regulation can be indicated quite simply: the market - as much as possible, the state - as much as necessary, but the very degree of such necessity is interpreted very differently.

And now let's turn to the methods and mechanisms of state participation in the economy, a significant part of which was also considered in previous chapters. Our task is to systematize this knowledge, and basically, regardless of the specific goals of regulation, since most of the methods are quite universal.

17.2. Methods of state influence on the economy

Under methods of state regulation of the economy we will understand the specific ways for the state as a public institution to achieve the set goals.

Very conditionally, all methods can be divided into two main groups - administrative based mainly on elements of coercion, restrictions economic freedom subjects, and economic, focused on the inclusion of mechanisms of their personal interest, although all methods, being ways of state influence, are implemented through a number of administrative acts. It should be noted right away that it is very difficult to determine the optimal ratio between administrative and economic methods. It is clear that the same principle of economic benefit (but not only it) will be the most important at the basis of such a proportion: if administrative methods turn out to be more effective, they should be preferred, if economic ones, they should be used, although calculations of this kind are not easy. In general, since the modern mixed economy is based precisely on the market, the state is primarily focused on the use of economic instruments, which to a greater extent guarantee the fundamental values ​​of a democratic society, primarily economic freedom.

What specific means of influencing the economy does the state have?

First, this legal system. The state, through laws, establishes the basic rules by which the economic system functions, determines the areas and methods illegal activities. There is practically no sphere of economic life that would not be subject to legal regulation to one degree or another - from the production of goods and services, their distribution to, to a certain extent, consumption.

The second method of state intervention should be mentioned state property (including resources and capital facilities) and state enterprise. As an owner, the state assumes responsibility and risks for managing the relevant systems in the interests of society as a whole. As a rule, most often the objects of such property are either extremely significant systems for the economy (natural or artificial), the operation or creation of which requires high costs; unprofitable industries, the maintenance of which is considered necessary for one reason or another; production of public goods; new science-intensive industries, unattractive at first for private business due to high risks.

This list may include the electric power industry, the nuclear industry, communication systems, maritime, rail, air transport, the coal industry, academic science, educational, cultural, healthcare institutions, mineral deposits, nature reserves, forests, waters, and so on. A specific set of objects of state property, the nature and methods of managing them follow from the state of the economy and the goals facing the state. Changing these factors is very often associated with nationalization or privatization procedures, the methods of implementation of which are also different and difficult.

Thirdly, the state in its economic activity relies on tax regulation, at least two main functions of taxes - fiscal and stimulating - contribute to the achievement of various goals - from promoting investment, economic growth, employment, balancing the balance of payments, etc., to social - ensuring standards of living standards, principles of justice. At the same time, she tax system precisely because of the variety of areas of its application, it cannot be universal and must change with the emergence of new priorities economic development and be consistent and balanced.

Fourthly, one should recognize the extremely high importance of directions, methods of spending budget funds state. Sizes allocated financial resources industries, regions, areas of non-production and social activities can greatly contribute to their development or, conversely, curtailment. Government spending can cause economic growth, or restrain it, accelerate the scientific and technological progress and structural restructuring of the economy, or lead to deindustrialization with significant budget deficits, contribute to breakthroughs in the world economy, or preserve the backwardness of the national economy. And here it is very important to remember the priorities of economic policy goals, since the size of government spending is limited, and the budget deficit should be maintained within reasonable limits - 5 - 6% of GDP.

The next instrument of state regulation is monetary mechanism: impact on the economy through changes in the discount rate of interest, reserve requirements and open market operations. Impact on the economy in this case It turns out through money - a kind of circulatory system of the economic organism. Such influence is carried out, first of all, in order to achieve price stability, encourage investment, counter-cyclical regulation, stabilize the balance of payments, etc.

The need to speed up economic growth also created such a specific instrument of state influence on the economy (on the reproduction process) as accelerated depreciation equipment, which contributes to the rapid renewal of technology and creates additional demand.

In a modern mixed economy, the methods of forecasting and indicative planning, as well as economic programming, are very common and successfully applied. They allow concentrating the efforts of private business and the state for the implementation of any goals that are significant for the national economy and the implementation of major programs (regional, structural, scientific and technical, sectoral, foreign economic). Plans and programs, as a rule, are of a long-term nature, are not directive, but have a high degree of efficiency, since they are based on the whole range of incentive measures implemented by the state.

Of particular note are the specific methods of state regulation of foreign economic relations (for details, see Chapter 18). This includes the impact on the exchange rate and balance of payments (for example, foreign exchange interventions, transactions with gold, customs policy), and international treaties and agreements regarding the movement of goods, capital, work force, currency relations, international integration.

The above classification of the instruments of state intervention in the economy is, of course, very conditional. Of the noted methods, the first two relate mainly to direct administrative methods, and the rest - mainly to economic ones. This list, of course, is incomplete both in terms of breadth and depth of coverage of this problem. In the first case, other methods of state influence could be noted - for example, methods military economy, as well as methods mediated by other spheres of public life - through culture, public ideology and psychology, religion, etc. ). In the second case, we are talking about the possible and necessary specification of regulation methods. Partially, this gap in the analysis was filled in the previous chapters, but a more complete acquaintance with such methods is possible only outside the curriculum of economic theory proper or in other academic disciplines, or with the help of special works of a scientific, methodological and normative nature.

In conclusion of this paragraph, it should be noted that all methods of both direct and indirect influence are actually integrated into the market mechanism and are elements of the most complex system of a mixed economy, and therefore inevitably interact with each other. At the same time, the very complexity of the system does not allow to fully trace and take into account all the existing possible direct and reverse links. Because of this, the methods of regulation (as well as the goals, as mentioned above) can in principle contradict each other, which is very often found in practice (for example, a discrepancy between adopted laws and their funding).

The inconsistency between the goals and between the instruments of state influence on the economy, as well as the goals and instruments among themselves, makes us turn specifically to the problems of state regulation of the economy. In this case, a number of other, still unknown moments will be revealed. At the same time, the ambiguity of assessing the role of the state in various theoretical schools will become more understandable, since the higher the significance of the adverse effects of state regulation is assessed, the more its expedient boundaries are interpreted.

17.3. Problems of state regulation of the economy

Comprehension of the theory and practice of state regulation of the economy allows us to identify a number of specific problems that require knowledge and consideration from both the regulators themselves and the citizens of the country, in whose interests, by definition, such a policy is carried out.

Let's start with the fact that the very definition of the goals of regulation presents difficulties, and no small ones. These difficulties are multifaceted. Thus, each of the goals reflects the interests of certain social groups, which are very different in terms of activity and ways of defending their interests. The choice of any one goal, giving a gain to some forces, to others can cause damage that the state is often unable to compensate for (distributive effect), although in theory it is possible to make political decisions based on the Pareto criterion (see Chapter 12), excluding loss of any parties, these are decisions within the framework of consensus (unanimity). The losses of any parties will not be significant also if the Kaldor-Hicks criterion is met. Namely, changes in economic policy signify an improvement if those who benefit from decision-making value their monetary gain higher than the "injured party" estimates their loss. This criterion does not necessarily imply that the winners actually compensate the losses of the losers (although this is possible and probably desirable), it requires only the potential possibility of this.

Further, the very procedure for making political decisions (mainly by a majority of votes), which should contribute to the choice of priority goals that are optimal for society, often turns out to be untenable due to the lack or distortion of information, at best ensuring decision-making in the interests of the average voter. To this it should be added that, as shown in the theory of public choice (D. Buchanan), state decisions are made not only in the interests of society as a whole, but also in many respects in the interests of politicians of various ranks, focused, in particular, on the need to preserve and strengthening its position in power structures. The consequences of such decisions can be very unfavorable. There is also a problem of a temporary nature: what should be given preference - interests and goals today or the future? Finally, simple errors in the choice of goals are possible, caused by an inaccurate analysis of the existing situation, the lack of development of the theoretical foundations of such an analysis, the inferiority of information base, incompetence of managers, etc. Often these difficulties already cause great skepticism regarding the very expediency of state regulation of the economy, creating a breeding ground for the spread of ideas of conservatism and liberalism.

This skepticism can be reinforced if one considers the high costs of government regulation. It really costs quite a lot, and without strict control on the part of society, the costs will only increase due to the natural tendency of the growth of bureaucratic structures. Such growth, in turn, will complicate the very adoption and effective implementation of decisions. If we also take into account the possible internal inconsistency of methods of state regulation or their inconsistency noted in the previous paragraph, then its results may differ greatly from those planned. We should also recall such a concept as the tax burden, which reduces the gains to consumers and producers and reduces common benefits trade.

Quite often, the uncertainty of the factors and instruments of state influence on the economy finds its expression in a kind of law of unforeseen consequences: the consequences of regulation are actually quite different from those planned. In its operation, economic lags are very significant, characterizing a certain inertia of the economic system. The internal lag is the time between the moment of economic shock and the time of the government's response, they are especially characteristic of fiscal policy related to the procedures of discussion in parliament. The external lag - the period of time between the moment a decision is made on a problem and the beginning of the results from this measure - is very significant in monetary and foreign economic policy, since they contain a complex transmission mechanism. The existence of such lags complicates the analysis of situations and the choice of adequate measures of state regulation.

The problems of state regulation are undoubtedly connected with the economic expectations of the main actors. Economic policy should take into account these expectations, but not only. She herself influences these expectations. Therefore, any macroeconomic models designed to reveal the mechanism of operation of the economic system are largely imperfect. In this regard, there is a specific term in economic theory - Lucas' criticism: traditional methods of economic policy analysis cannot adequately reflect the impact of political changes on economic expectations.

Such a phenomenon as the search for political rent is also associated with state regulation of the economy. Political rent is an additional income of private economic entities caused by the adoption of certain political decisions (for example, the introduction of trade duties, government orders, the issuance of state licenses, etc.). Since the search for political rent is cheaper for firms than traditional forms of competition, this kind of pressure on power structures is widespread both in the form of legal forms (lobbying) and in the form of shadow relations (corruption of the state apparatus). Lobbying is an activity aimed at ensuring the adoption of public decisions in the interests of the group. Such a group, having its own specific interests, acting cohesively and purposefully, can achieve solutions that are beneficial to the minority if their opponents are not organized and if the individual benefits of the latter are less than the costs necessary to obtain them. It is clear that these decisions may be contrary to the interests of society and, if implemented, cause significant damage to the economic system as a whole and certain social groups. The search for political rent involves the use of not only the practice of lobbying, but also logrolling - mutual support by groups of each other, as well as vote trading. Political rent can become a powerful factor in merging the state apparatus and shadow structures. The criminalization of the state apparatus is an extremely dangerous trend, especially for weakened economies.

The significant presence of the state in the sphere of direct production of goods and services is associated with another difficult situation - the low efficiency of state enterprises. As a rule, this is due to the lack of strong incentives that are typical for private entrepreneurship. The heads of state enterprises are less interested in the performance of their structures. This turns out to be an additional burden on the state budget.

By pursuing an antimonopoly policy in relation to some areas of activity, the state, by its actions, can inevitably create the basis for monopolization in other areas, and not only through the establishment of a state monopoly, but also through the mechanisms of licensing, protection of intellectual property, government orders. At the same time, many of the negative consequences of restricting competition can cause significant damage to the economy. With the unbridled growth of the strength and power of state penetration into the economy, this creates the danger of total control over it with the destruction of the mechanisms of market self-regulation.

The problem of state regulation of the economy is also that the political business cycle (caused by the periodicity of election campaigns and the time of office of authorities) becomes a significant factor in macroeconomic fluctuations. Politicians strive to ensure that by the time of the elections a favorable socio-economic situation has developed with the help of fiscal and monetary policy instruments. It is clear that such actions are not always justified from the point of view of the logic of the development of the economic system itself.

And finally, government intervention can create a problem of imbalance between human freedom, primarily economic, and coercion. Violation of human rights with an excessive presence of the state in the economy can become too high and unjustified price even for an efficient economy.

Consideration of the problems of state regulation allows us to move on to the final part of the chapter - models of state participation in the economy. At the same time, disagreements between individual economic schools on the issues already discussed.

17.4. Models of government intervention in the economy

At the very beginning, it should be recognized that such a formulation of the question is not entirely correct and rather arbitrary: there are as many models of state participation in the economy as there are unique combinations of the main goals, their corresponding complexes of regulation methods determined by specific situation in the country in a given period of time, taking into account social, political, national, religious, psychological and other factors. The theoretical generalization of such combinations is quite difficult to implement. Due to the ambiguity of historical analogies, it is even more difficult to use the results of such an analysis in practice. At the same time, some judgments regarding the main options for micro- and macroeconomic regulation by the state of the economy can still be made.

Under the model of state regulation of the economy, we mean the system of basic goals and methods for achieving them. Such models are directly related to the leading theoretical schools in economic theory. Therefore, initially, the following main models can be distinguished, corresponding to the concepts of a modern mixed economy: Keynesian (liberal reformist) model and neoconservative (neoclassical). These models differ in terms of priority goals, according to the set and ratio of regulation methods and, accordingly, the balance of forces of market and state influence and, which is very important, according to possible socio-economic consequences, including adverse ones. Let's try to briefly consider these models.

The Keynesian model assumes active state intervention in the economy, since the market system is considered within the framework of this school as internally unstable and non-equilibrium. As shown by D. M. Keynes, the market economy tends to be unstable due to the law of growth marginal propensity to saving and lack of labor market flexibility, wage rigidity and downward price inelasticity. Under these conditions, the demand is insufficient to purchase the entire volume of the produced product in society - crises of overproduction with chronic unemployment set in. It is the need to overcome economic crisis and unemployment in conditions of incomplete use of society's resources is the main goal of the Keynesian options for macroeconomic policy (it should be recalled that this theory itself arose precisely against the backdrop of such an economic situation in many countries of the world). And it was in solving data, and not any other problems, that this model played a leading role - suffice it to recall T. Roosevelt's "New Deal" (1933). The Keynesian model in its various interpretations dominated the economies of countries for quite a long time - from the 30s to the 70s. 20th century

Methods of state intervention within the framework of the considered liberal-reformist model were based, first of all, on the stimulation of aggregate demand. The most important role here was given to the state: government spending has a direct impact on the magnitude of aggregate demand and creates a strong multiplier effect on consumer spending. In practice, this manifested itself and can manifest itself in the implementation of public investment and procurement, public works (road construction, land reclamation, construction of ports and other large facilities, etc.), the production of public goods, high spending on social needs (for education , medicine, social assistance). Against this background, state property and state entrepreneurship are significantly increasing, in particular, as a result of the nationalization of facilities and state investments. The nature of such interference indicates the importance of fiscal policy in regulation, which is also manifested in the widespread use of tax measures. Taxes, firstly, increase significantly, as budget expenditures increase, and become a way of counter-cyclical regulation: they increase during the upswing phase and decrease during the recession. Within the framework of the Keynesian approach, methods of deficit financing and related inflationary stimulation of the economy are also used.

Monetary policy is more modest in this model because it has a very complex transmission mechanism. Nevertheless, the importance of manipulating interest rates and other instruments to achieve certain goals was recognized, primarily for regulation business cycle. Keynesian approaches to the role of the state in the economy are inevitably accompanied by increased administrative measures of economic impact - the degree of legal regulation has increased economic relations, primarily in the field of labor, price regulation, antimonopoly policy. Considerable spread in the model under consideration is the use of methods of planning and programming of the economy.

The use of Keynesian concepts of state regulation of the economy, as shown by the long practice of their application, indeed ensured in most cases the achievement of the set goals. The liberal-reformist model had no alternative for a long time and was used in all countries with a market economy. But as the initial problems were solved, the macroeconomic situation changed, adverse effects state presence in the economy. The bureaucracy has grown significantly. The inefficiency of the work of state enterprises became evident. The growing state budget deficit caused by the expansionist government policy, the increase in public debt led to serious financial problems and manifested itself in a sharp increase in the rate of inflation - it got out of control and began its destructive effect on the economic system. The manipulation of tax and interest rates increased the unpredictability of the economy and caused capital flight abroad. Widespread methods of direct regulation and administration fettered business, reduced incentives entrepreneurial activity. A high degree of social protection reduced incentives for labor activity. Economic growth has stopped. There was stagflation. As a result, in the 70s. the Keynesian model entered a crisis state, giving rise to fundamentally new economic problems and not finding adequate ways to solve them. This crisis was also associated with the emergence of new important factors of economic development: the countries were faced with the need to implement deep structural transformations of the economy associated with mastering the achievements of the scientific and technological revolution, the transition to post-industrial development options; it was also necessary to take into account the growing internationalization of the economy, increasing its role in the socio-economic progress of society. Keynesianism was unable to find adequate answers to the changed situation. The question of changing models of economic development inevitably arose. It could not but be associated with new approaches to the role of the state in the economy: most of the problems of the 70s. one way or another associated with the "pro-state" economic policy within Keynesianism. There was a transition to a new neo-conservative model of state regulation, prepared by an alternative school of economic thought, which for a long time observed the development of reformist tendencies in the economy and gave a critical assessment of the approaches used within the framework of Keynesianism.

The main goals of the new model inevitably turned out to be different. The most urgent problem was the fight against inflation. It was necessary to carry out deep structural transformations in the economy, carry out reindustrialization on the basis of the scientific and technological revolution and thereby create new conditions for economic growth. The theoretical basis for solving these problems was the neo-conservative direction in economic thought - monetarism, the theory of rational expectations and the theory of supply-side economics, proving the decisive role of market self-regulation in the economic progress of society. The most prominent representatives of this trend are M. Friedman (monetarism), A. Laffer, D. Gilder (the theory of supply-side economics), R. Lucas, D. Muth, L. Repping (the theory of rational expectations). The main idea of ​​the new model is to strengthen the positions of the market and intra-company planning in the organization of economic life by limiting direct government intervention in the economy and strengthening individualistic principles. Such profound changes are based on the return to the positions of neoclassical theory, which considers the market economy as a reliable self-regulating system that is able to ensure balanced growth with full use of resources, the absence of involuntary unemployment due to the flexibility of prices, wages, interest rates, and other sustainability mechanisms. The neoclassical model makes extensive use of the Fisher equation, which links the money supply, the velocity of money, the price index, and real GNP. It follows from this that maintaining equilibrium in the system implies control over the money supply as the basis for price stability and aggregate demand. These views of the monetarist school of economic thought are complemented by the idea that it is necessary not only to control aggregate demand to fight inflation, but mainly to stimulate supply (the theory of supply-side economics). Rational expectations theory reinforces the already skeptical attitude of neoconservatives about the advisability of state intervention in the economy. Any macroeconomic policy, according to the main theorists of this school, can hardly improve the situation - economic agents adapt very well to changes in the environment, nullifying all government measures to change it, the effect can only be if the government has comprehensive information and central bank.

Such theoretical positions also predetermined the corresponding system of measures of state influence on the economy. In line with the neoconservative models put into practice by the governments of R. Reagan in the USA, M. Thatcher in the UK, K. Tanaka in Japan, and others in the 80s. a whole range of measures was carried out to withdraw the state from the active "game" in the economic field and strengthen competitive principles. Large-scale privatization of state property was carried out, a radical reform of the management of state enterprises was carried out, deregulation of the economy took place - the revision and cancellation of many legislative restrictions and regulations (especially in the field of labor and social relations, antitrust measures). The scale of the redistribution of national income through the state budget was reduced, both the revenue and expenditure parts of the budget were reduced. fiscal policy stimulating demand was recognized as untenable in the new conditions, the value of fiscal policy as a whole has declined sharply. Consistent tax cuts, a revision of the tax system and policy in general, in particular, a decrease in the progressiveness of taxation, made it possible to intensify private investment, to nullify the effect of crowding out (by public investment of private), inherent in Keynesian model, to simplify the solution of problems of economic restructuring, production growth. Reducing the state budget deficit and domestic debt was based on a sharp decrease in government spending (primarily on social needs, on the maintenance of unprofitable state enterprises, on subsidies and grants to sectors of the economy, on the maintenance of the administrative apparatus) and really played a role in economic stabilization. The increase in aggregate supply that resulted from the implementation of such a policy, while limiting demand, helped to stabilize prices and overcome stagflation. But the main role in the fight against inflation was played by monetary policy - the consistent restriction of the money supply (including through targeting - the legislative determination of the growth rate of the money supply), an effective interest rate policy, etc. monetary policy became the main in system of measures of neoconservatives. A prudent foreign economic policy also contributed to the strengthening of competitive principles through models of liberalization of trade and other relations.

So, neoconservative approaches to state regulation are focused on achieving other priority goals and give preference not to direct regulation, but to indirect, not fiscal policy, but monetary policy. The role of the state in promoting structural and scientific and technical policy is unequivocally recognized - significant budgetary funds were allocated for these areas.

Assessing the results of the functioning of this model in practice, it should be noted that in most cases it turned out to be adequate to the situation and effective: inflation was suppressed, the restructuring of the economy was carried out, sustainable economic growth was outlined, i.e., the set goals were achieved. At the same time, neoconservatism inevitably led to the aggravation of the problems of unemployment, living standards and social protection of the population, increased social differentiation in society. Potentially, this is seen as the basis for a possible certain tilt towards the Keynesian traditions. In any case, some economists already tend to see such changes in the policies of the Clinton administration.

So, consideration of two basic models of a mixed economy indicates that the nature of the model, its replacement by another, is caused by the needs of socio-economic development and is based on the provisions of the main schools of theoretical thought. As already noted, we can talk about other models - command (planned, socialist), and in its various modifications, for example, market socialism; fascist; models of social market economy Germany (L. Erhard); the Swedish model (Swedish socialism); about models of economies of "new industrial states", etc.).

A separate problem is the model of state regulation in countries with economies in transition (post-socialist). It should be recognized that it is comprehended to the least extent. The absence of a coherent theory of the transition economy condemns the governments of countries to rely mainly on the trial and error method, which is fraught with great costs for society. Application of neoconservative recipes for these countries in modern conditions happens to be just as unjustified as the Keynesian approaches.

Thus, based on the material presented, the following conclusions can be drawn.

Conclusion

Firstly, the need for state intervention in the economy and the goals of such intervention are determined by a whole range of micro- and macroeconomic reasons and are mainly related to overcoming the fiasco (failures) of the market.

Secondly, the methods of such regulation are based either on the system of legislative acts and state property - administrative measures, or on the system of internal incentives - indirect economic impact.

Thirdly, state intervention in the economy has a number of very significant negative consequences that should be taken into account when developing and implementing government programs.

Fourthly, the system of goals and methods for achieving them can be represented as a regulation model. The main ones for a mixed economy are the Keynesian model and the neoconservative one, based on the corresponding theoretical schools. The content of each of the models is determined by the specific conditions of the country's socio-economic development, which require the solution of certain priority goals, primarily overcoming unemployment and economic downturn in the Keynesian model and inflation and the restructuring of the economy - in the neoconservative. At the same time, the first model is based on the recognition of the active role of the state in stabilizing the economy, the second assumes a predominantly passive position of the state and gives preference to the forces of market self-regulation.

Fifth, the actual problem is the theoretical development and practical development of the model of state regulation in countries with economies in transition, since traditional recipes for state influence on the economy in many cases turn out to be untenable.

There are two main forms of state intervention in the economy:

• 1) direct intervention through administrative means, which are based on the power of state power and include measures of prohibition, permission and coercion;
• 2) indirect intervention through various economic policy measures and its priorities. Nureev R. M. Course of microeconomics. M.: NORMA, 2008 p.203

Direct regulation methods are based on power relations and are reduced to administrative impact on the activities of business entities. These measures mean that economic entities will be forced to make decisions based not on their own economic choice, but on the instructions of the state. Among the methods of direct state regulation, various forms of irrevocable targeted financing of certain sectors of the economy, regions and firms in the form of subsidizing non-state enterprises prevail; public investment in certain industries is also a form of direct regulation. The concept of state entrepreneurship is associated with public investment. They talk about state entrepreneurship when they mean the creation and operation of state production enterprises in a particular industry. Typically, state-owned enterprises arise in capital-intensive and low-profit industries such as the coal industry, shipbuilding, rail transport, maintenance highways etc., in industries that determine scientific and technical progress, the accumulation and production of human capital, and the conduct of scientific research. State entrepreneurship is developing in those areas where the functioning of any non-state form of ownership can lead to negative consequences. Thus, the state implements programs to support such areas as education, healthcare, environmental protection, which would develop more slowly without direct state participation in the form of state subsidies. A permanent object of subsidizing in many states is agricultural production, the extractive industry, etc. The implementation of direct regulation measures has its "pluses" and "minuses" - a high degree of efficiency due to the rapid achievement of economic results, on the one hand, and the creation interference with the operation of the market mechanism and its weakening, on the other.

Methods of indirect regulation suggest that the state lays down the conditions so that, when making economic decisions independently, the subjects of the economy gravitate towards options corresponding to economic goals states.

Based on the organizational and institutional features of the regulators applied by the state, the methods of state regulation can be divided into legal, administrative, economic. The legal levers of state influence on the economy are designed to provide its legal infrastructure, to create for the private sector - households and businesses - reasonable legal conditions for functioning. Legal regulation economics is the establishment by the state of the rules of economic behavior for firms-producers and consumers. The system of legislative norms and rules determines the forms and rights of ownership, the conditions for concluding economic contracts, the procedure for registering and operating firms, ensures the protection of the competitive environment, etc. Administrative measures are divided into prohibition measures, for example, prohibitions on the production and trade in weapons, drugs, medicines, etc., permit measures, such as a license giving the right to manufacture, trade in any product, or to carry out any type of activity, coercive measures, such as payment of taxes, installation of treatment facilities, etc. Administrative measures are not related to the creation additional financial incentive for the private sector and are based on the strength of state power. Administrative measures can be used in state control over prices, incomes, discount rate, exchange rate. Administrative regulatory measures in countries with developed market economies are used on a small scale, most often they are limited to environmental protection, social protection population. The role of administrative methods increases in critical situations - during the war, a difficult situation in the economy. Glazunov N.I. Public Administration System: Proc. Moscow: Unity - Dana, 2008 p.107

A business is a business enterprise that operates for the purpose of generating income (profit). It presupposes an investment in the business of own or borrowed capital, the income from which is spent not simply on personal consumption, but for the expansion of productive activity. A business is a supplier of goods and services in a market economy.

Government is provided mainly by various budget organizations, which do not aim to make a profit, but implement the functions of state regulation of the economy.

The same person (an adult member of society) can be part of a household, a business, or a government agency. For example, employed by a government official, you are a representative of a government organization; by owning the securities of a corporation, you represent a business; spending your income for personal consumption, you are a member of the household. Accordingly, the modern market economy is a whole system of markets: goods and services, labor, loan capital, valuable papers, currency markets and etc.

The most important conditions for the emergence of the market are the social division of labor and specialization. The first of these categories means that in any more or less numerous community of people, none of the participants in the economy can live at the expense of complete self-sufficiency with all production resources, all economic benefits. Different groups of producers are engaged in separate types of economic activity. This means specialization in the production of certain goods and services. Specialization, in turn, is determined by the principle of comparative advantage, i.e. the ability to produce at a relatively lower opportunity cost. This category is one of the central concepts in economic theory. Producers have different skills, abilities, are provided with limited resources in different ways. The principle of comparative advantage explains both the processes of specialization within an individual enterprise and internationally.

The condition for the emergence of the market is the so-called economic isolation of the subjects of the market economy. After all, the exchange of goods, created on the basis of the social division of labor and specialization, is completely independent, autonomous in making economic decisions, producers. Economic isolation means that only the manufacturer decides what to produce, how to produce, to whom and where to sell the created products. An adequate legal regime for the state of economic isolation is the regime of private property.

For the emergence of a market for any product, the value of transaction costs is also important. Transaction costs determine the conditions and boundaries of market activity.

And, finally, an important condition for the emergence of the market is the free exchange of resources. After all, the social division of labor, specialization and exchange can also exist in hierarchical systems, where the Center determines who and what to produce, to whom and with whom to exchange resources and manufactured products. Only free exchange, which exists in spontaneous (spontaneous) corridors, allows the formation of free prices, which will prompt economic agents in the most effective directions of their activity.

No one denies the need for the state to perform certain functions in the economic sphere. However, on the issues in what proportions state and market regulation should be combined, what are the boundaries and directions of state intervention, there is a fairly wide range of theoretical views and practical approaches corresponding to them - from complete state monopoly in the management of the national economy to extreme economic liberalism, when it is argued that The economy can be efficient only in conditions of unrestricted private enterprise. There are a number of intermediate options between these extreme options, for example, the Chinese version of a combination of market and state regulators, the so-called socially oriented market economy of Germany and Austria, the Swedish model of a mixed economy, etc.

A kind of economy in which there was an extremely high degree of state monopoly was built in our country by a centrally controlled economy. It was based on comprehensive directive planning, i.e. centralized solution of questions about how much and what to produce, what resources should be used, how much labor and capital should be spent, what wages should be, etc. The task of drawing up a balanced plan, linked in all respects, is practically unsolvable due to its colossal dimension and static nature.

But even in the unlikely event of a balanced plan, the system, where all the actions of economic entities are signed for five years in advance, turns out to be inactive, poorly adapting to changes. One of the reasons is that private initiative was excluded from the sphere of economy. All economic agents acted on the basis of the planned targets, orders and instructions.

In addition, any viable system presupposes the presence of forward and backward links. Such links underlie the market mechanism of self-regulation. The balance between supply and demand is established in the presence of direct (from production to the market) and reverse (from the market to production) links operating through a viable, flexible price system.

In the planned economy, there were, although deformed, direct links, but the reverse ones practically did not work. The absence of feedback at fixed and distorted prices made the system insensitive to the dynamics of consumer demand. One consequence of this is overproduction in some industries and shortages in others. The deficit was hallmark pla new economy.

In any economic system, including a market economy, the state acts in a certain sense as an economic agent that has the right and the possibility of coercion, for example, in the field of tax policy, state legislation. Coercion, if used extensively by the state, nullifies all the advantages of free enterprise based on competition and market pricing.

The attitude to state intervention in the market economy was different at different stages of its formation and development. During the formation of market relations in the XVII-XVIII centuries. the dominant economic doctrine - mercantilism - was based on the recognition of the unconditional need for state regulation, for the development of trade and industry in the country.

With the development of market relations, the class of entrepreneurs, which gained strength, began to consider state intervention and the restrictions associated with these as an obstacle to their activities. It is not surprising that those who came at the end of the XVIII century. to replace mercantilism, the ideas of economic liberalism, which negatively assessed state intervention, immediately found a huge number of ardent admirers.

Regardless of prevailing economic doctrines, no one has ever relieved national governments of responsibility for economic situation countries. Everyone agrees that the invisible hand of the market must be complemented by the visible hand of the state. An important stage in the theoretical understanding of the role of the state in a market economy was associated with the name of the outstanding English economist J. M. Keynes. The ideas put forward during the "Keynesian revolution" revolutionized the classical views on the market economy. They proved the impossibility of self-healing of the economic downturn, the need for state policy as a means capable of establishing aggregate demand and aggregate supply, and bringing the economy out of crisis.

The classics proceeded from the thesis about the need for the state to perform traditional functions, realizing that there are areas that are beyond the reach of the competitive market mechanism. This primarily concerns the so-called public goods, i.e. goods and services that are consumed collectively. It is obvious that the state should take care of their production and organize joint payments to citizens for these products.

Among the problems that the market competitive mechanism does not solve are externalities, or side effects. When the production of any product leads to environmental pollution, then, as a rule, additional costs are required. At the same time, this may not affect the price of the product, which entailed such side effects. Externalities, or side effects, can be controlled through direct state control.

Economic practice revealed in the XIX century. and confirmed in the 20th century that there are situations, the so-called fiasco of the market, when market coordination does not ensure the efficient use of resources.

It should be noted that he "came down" to the problems of justice and equality. Unrestricted market distribution, fair from the point of view of the laws of the market, leads to a sharp differentiation of income, social vulnerability. When market distribution does not suit the majority of the population, it ends in extremely serious social conflicts. It is up to the state to adjust the distribution provided by the market. State intervention requires another market problem - unemployment. Conditions are necessary to reduce it or mitigate its consequences, if it is nevertheless inevitable

1.2. The functions of the state and the main instruments of state regulation

Regardless of the prevailing economic doctrines, no one has ever relieved national governments of responsibility for the economic situation in the country. In other words, everyone essentially agrees that the “invisible hand” of the market should be complemented by the “visible hand” of the state. The state is called upon to correct those "imperfections" that are inherent in the market mechanism. Accordingly, it assumes responsibility for the creation of relatively level playing field for the mutual rivalry of entrepreneurial firms, for effective competition, for the limitation of monopolized production. The state also needs to direct economic resources to meet the collective needs of people, to create the production of public goods and services. The participation of the state in economic life is also dictated by the fact that the market does not provide a socially just distribution of income. The state should take care of the disabled, children, the elderly, the poor. As a rule, the market is not aimed at developments in the field of fundamental sciences, because this is associated with a high degree of risk and uncertainty, with huge costs. And in this area the intervention of the state is required. Since the market does not guarantee the right to work, the state has to regulate the labor market and take measures to reduce unemployment. Foreign policy, the regulation of the balance of payments, exchange rates also fall on the shoulders of the state.

In general, the state implements the political and socio-economic principles of this community of citizens. It actively participates in the formation of macroeconomic market processes.

The role of the state in a market economy is manifested through its functions, the most important of which are the following:

Creation of a legal basis for making economic decisions. The state develops and adopts laws that define property rights, regulate entrepreneurial activities, aimed at the production of high-quality products and medicines, etc.;

Economic stabilization. The government, using fiscal and monetary policy, seeks to overcome the crisis, the decline in production, reduce unemployment, smooth out inflationary processes;

Socially-oriented distribution of resources. The state organizes the production of goods and services that it does not private sector. It creates conditions for the development of agriculture, communications, transport, urban improvement, etc., determines the costs of defense, space, foreign policy, forms programs for the development of education, health care;

Ensuring social protection and social guarantee. The state guarantees a minimum wage, old-age pensions, disability pensions, unemployment benefits, various types of assistance to the poor, indexes fixed incomes due to rising prices, etc.

The state influences the market mechanism through:

1) your expenses,

2) taxation,

3) regulation,

4) state entrepreneurship.

Government spending is considered one of the important instruments of macroeconomic policy. They affect the distribution of both income and resources. Large items are spending on defense, education, social security.

An essential element of expenses is transfer payments. This, as already mentioned, includes various types of benefits (for unemployment, for disability, for a child, for income support), old-age pensions, and war veterans.

Another important instrument of state policy is taxation. Taxes play a significant role in the redistribution of income.

State regulation contributes to the formation of economic relations and proportions, the coordination of economic processes and the linking of private and public interests. State regulation carried out in various forms- legislative, tax, credit, subvention. Legislative form means that special legislative acts are adopted that provide relatively equal opportunities for competition, expand the boundaries of competition, and prevent the development of monopolized production and the setting of exorbitantly high prices.

Antimonopoly (antitrust) legislation is aimed at counteracting the monopolization of the economy and at stimulating competition. Particularly in Russian Federation in March 1991, the Supreme Soviet of the RSFSR adopted the law “On Competition and Restriction of Monopoly Activities on commodity markets". This law provides for measures against the formation of large companies such as trusts and concerns, as well as against unfair competition. A social body has been created - the RSFSR State Committee for Antimonopoly Policy and Support for New economic structures. This Committee is instructed to exercise control over the fact that the formation of associations, corporations, concerns does not lead to monopolization in the market. It has the right to give permission for the registration of new large economic structures and for the re-registration of existing large organizations.

At the international level, competition is regulated by special interstate agreements, documents of the UN Commission on Industry and Trade, the European Economic Community and other organizations.

Tax and credit forms of regulation provide for the use of taxes and credits in order to influence the national volume of production. By changing tax rates, benefits, the government influences the narrowing or expansion of production, investment decisions. By varying the terms of credit, the state affects the decrease or increase in production. By selling securities, it reduces bank reserves, while increasing interest rates and consequently reduced production. By buying securities, the state increases bank reserves, while interest rates fall and production expands. The subvention form of regulation involves the provision of state subsidies or tax incentives to certain industries, enterprises (mainly such industries as agriculture, mining, shipbuilding, transport). The share of the subvention in the GNP of developed countries is 5-10%. By allocating subsidies, lowering tax rates, the state thereby changes the distribution of resources, and subsidized industries are able to recover costs that they otherwise could not cover at market prices.

Some Western economists believe that subventions disrupt the operation of the market mechanism, hinder the adequate distribution economic resources, hinder the response of the market to changes in demand and income on the demand side and to changes in costs and quantities of goods produced on the supply side.

Public enterprise tends to take place in areas in which management is contrary to the nature of private firms, or in which huge investment and risk are required. State enterprises occupy significant positions in such industries as energy, ferrous metallurgy, transport, communications. The share of state entrepreneurship varies in different countries, but in these industries it is quite significant, as evidenced by the data.

2. State regulation of the market economy: necessity and opportunities

2.1 The main stages of interaction between the market economy and the state

For a better understanding of the need for state regulation, let's take a short excursion into the past - into the history of interaction between the state and the market economy. This is all the more interesting because the emergence of the state in time coincides with the emergence and development of commodity-money relations.

History shows that the interaction between the state and the market economy has gone through a number of stages.

At the first stages, which were quite long by historical standards, the state interfered little in market relations and acted as a political, rather than economic, institution. For its existence, it taxed certain subjects with taxes or tribute. For foreign merchants, duties were usually introduced. In a word, the state, being a superstructural institution, was not yet part of the economic basis.

Only at the stage of formation of capitalism as a social system based on market relations, the state begins to actively intervene in the economy, acting as the most important factor in the initial accumulation of capital. Thus, it played a crucial role in the formation and strengthening of a new mode of production. Let us note the main manifestations of this role.

1. The state waged wars in order to obtain indemnities, to create the most favorable external conditions for the economic activity of the national bourgeoisie.

2. In accordance with the recommendations of the representatives of mercantilism, the state established duties that protected the national market from the dominance of foreign goods, fought for the abolition of such duties in countries to which national producers sent goods.

3. In order to accelerate the accumulation of capital, legislation was used, such as the laws "On vagrancy", "On the working day", "On wages" adopted in England in the 18th century.

4. The state gave private companies the right to monopolize the sale of certain highly profitable goods: vodka, tobacco, tea, coffee, salt, etc.

5. Profitable government, primarily military, orders were placed at private enterprises.

6. With the help of the army and the police, the state ensured internal order, protection of property rights in accordance with the principle "private property is sacred and inviolable."

At the stage of capitalism of free competition, when the economy is dependent on the regulatory role of the market, state intervention in it noticeably weakens. The state pursues a policy of laissez-faire, that is, a policy of non-intervention in the economy. Its activity is reduced to maintaining external and internal conditions for the smooth functioning of the market mechanism.

The state is engaged in protecting national borders (here, figuratively speaking, it plays the role of a “night watchman”), maintaining internal order through the use of a judicial and repressive apparatus, levying taxes on the maintenance of the state apparatus, issuing paper money and certain types of securities. According to the postulates of modern liberalism, the role of the state should be limited to such activities even today.

At the stage of monopoly capitalism, there is a noticeable increase in state intervention in the economy.

First of all, such intervention was due to the policy of colonial conquests and preparations for wars for the redivision of the world. In this regard, the state was engaged in the placement of military orders, the share of which in total demand grew noticeably, provided military-political and diplomatic methods favorable conditions for the export of capital by national monopolies, regulated the working and living conditions of workers.

The great crisis of 1929 - 1933, which occurred simultaneously with the accelerated development of the planned economy of the USSR, laid the foundation for the modern stage of interaction between the state and the market economy. There was an increase in state intervention in the economy, and an anti-crisis policy began to be pursued. In the 1930s in the United States, the "new course" of F. Roosevelt, which included the centralization of the banking system, a ban on the export of gold from the country, state control over prices, state lending to agriculture, allowed to bring the country out of the crisis. Thus, in the United States (and in parallel in Sweden), a system of state regulation of the economy began to take shape. After the Second World War, this system also emerged in other countries with market economies. Based on this system, European countries began to take shape "social market economy", in which the state becomes a necessary and active subject not only economic but also social life.

1. The presence in each country of public and mixed goods, which cannot always be brought to the population through the market in in full, especially those that are characterized by non-rivalry and non-excludability. These are personal and national security, transport services, education, healthcare, culture, etc. Such benefits should be provided by state law enforcement agencies, the country's army, the public road network, public education, health, culture, environmental authorities, etc.

2. Strengthening the social nature of the production of commodity goods. As a result, the economy becomes very vulnerable in the face of cyclical economic development, especially during times of crisis. There is a need for centralized public regulation of the economy. Moreover, the state is the only bearer of a conscious principle at the macroeconomic level. Other subjects - the population, firms, banks - are such only at the micro level. Their behavior as subjects of macroeconomics is often at odds with the public interest.

For example, we know that people in times of crisis tend to save more, rather than spend, in preparation for even worse times. This reduces aggregate demand and further aggravates the economic situation in the country. Firms behave in a similar way, nullifying investment spending during a crisis. Banks that increase the rate of interest when the economy enters a phase of crisis also contribute to this behavior. It can be seen that all these subjects behave rationally from the point of view of microeconomics, but not macroeconomics. The only entity capable of behaving rationally at the macrolevel is the state.

3. The emergence of negative external market effects, called externalities. External effects (externalities) are characterized by the occurrence as a result of market relations between some persons of damage or additional costs for other persons who are not the subjects of these relations.

The emergence of external effects is due to the fact that the economy exists in the external environment - social and natural, through which these effects manifest themselves. Accordingly, social and environmental externalities arise.

Social externalities include such phenomena as poverty, crime, unemployment, covering that part of the population that is outside the framework of market relations: the sick, the elderly, those with many children, and those who are professionally unsuitable. The state is forced to deal with all of them, providing them with material assistance. This ensures the necessary social instability in society for the development of the economy.

Environmental externalities are due to the fact that the market mechanism forces enterprises to reduce production costs, including environmental costs. As a result, the production of marketable products is accompanied by pollution of the natural environment and the occurrence of corresponding environmental damage, which is imposed on the whole society. Here, too, there is a need for a state environmental policy that forces enterprises to comply with certain standards for emissions of pollutants into the natural environment.

4. An important factor in state regulation of the economy is scientific and technological progress (STP). The implementation of many achievements of scientific and technical progress requires huge capital, which only the state is able to mobilize, especially since the return on the introduction of these achievements is not always fast. Scientific and technical progress requires more and more qualified labor force, which, again, can only be prepared on a large scale by the state, by developing a system of general and vocational education. Scientific and technological progress also imposes increased demands on people's health, which the state is forced to take on.

5. The state needs to intervene in the economy and in connection with the tendency to monopolize its most important areas, which violates the perfection of the market.

The market is becoming more and more imperfect and the state, through antimonopoly policy, seeks to prevent this trend.

6. Finally, state regulation is also developing under the influence of fierce international competition. Even large companies it is not always easy to survive in this competition without state support.

In general, state regulation is necessary for a more sustainable economic, social, environmental and political development of society. It is ensured by maintaining the necessary macroeconomic proportions (primarily the ratio between aggregate demand and aggregate supply), ensuring social stability in society, maintaining a healthy environmental situation and, finally, maintaining a balance of political interests in society and ensuring confidence in the government from various parties, public movements.

2.3 Possibilities of state regulation of the market economy

By the middle of the twentieth century. the need for state regulation of the market economy was provided with appropriate opportunities.

These opportunities, first of all, include the expansion and strengthening of the public sector in the economy. This sector generates state property and funds that the state has.

The public sector itself arose with the advent of the state. The state has always had land, buildings, structures, equipment (primarily military), etc. There has always been a budget that was formed and used by the state and had an impact on the economy. However, the size of this sector was insignificant for a long time and did not have a significant impact on the economy. Thus, before the First World War, the share of the state in the national income of most countries with a market economy was 3-10%.

There were no radical changes after the war, except for the USSR, where the economy became planned. The situation changed radically after World War II. Many industrial and transport enterprises, communications, banks, scientific and educational establishments, healthcare facilities, part of the housing stock, facilities public utilities, land, forest land. True, if we take the state's share in the total means of production, then in different countries it is different: in the USA this share (without the Pentagon's property) is approximately 2%, in England -8 - 10%, in Germany - over 20%, in Japan and France - about 30%. The high proportion of state property was one of the reasons for characterizing the economies of many Western countries as mixed.

The expansion of state ownership was facilitated by the Second World War, which led to the emergence of many large military factories. In some countries, after the war, nationalization took place, that is, the transfer of a number of private enterprises to state ownership.

A significant role in the expansion of state ownership was played by the scientific and technological revolution, which led to the emergence of new and rather capital-intensive industries with a low rate of capital turnover. In addition, these industries required significant funds for R & D, which did not promise a quick return in the form of profit.

We are talking about nuclear energy, aircraft manufacturing, rocket science, the development of which was provided by the state.

Since the scientific and technological revolution required a new workforce, the state had to take over the development of education, health care, and social services. The aggravation of international competition led in some countries to the bankruptcy of entire industries that were of national importance: coal and gas industry, metallurgy, railway transport. The state was forced to take care of their preservation and development.

In addition, the state had to go to the nationalization of some enterprises that had a natural monopoly: railway transport, energy, communications.

The state budget played an important role in the formation of the public sector. Thanks to him, the public sector received cash for your development. The nationalization of private enterprises was carried out at the expense of the state budget through buyouts, new enterprises were created, including infrastructure-type enterprises designed to serve the private sector.

The state budget became the basis for public procurement of goods from private firms. For example, in the US, about 20% of GNP comes from government purchases.

Significant opportunities for the state to influence the economy are associated with the redistribution of national income. In a number of countries over 50% of the national income passes through the state budget. The impact on the economy is carried out both in the process of forming the state budget through tax policy and in the process of its use through budgetary policy. If in 1870 government spending in 14 OECD countries was only 11% of GDP, in 1913 it was 13%, then in 1960 - 28%, in 1980 - 42%, in 2000 - 45%.

An integral part of the public sector are state banks, which in a number of countries took the lead banking system. It became possible to purposefully influence the state on the money supply, on the credit activity of private banks.

In general, the presence of the public sector in the economy allows the state to use economic methods of influencing the private sector as the basis of a market economy.

Significant opportunities for state regulation are associated with the formation of a powerful administrative and legal system in countries with developed market economies. Not only theory, but also practice has shown that society does not need a market in general, but an organized market operating within the framework of certain laws and rules. In this regard, economic law has been developed, a system of legislative regulation of the national economy has developed.

The administrative-legal system made it possible to exercise control over monopoly markets, external market effects, and ensure the protection of national interests in international markets.

The possibilities of the state have also expanded due to the strengthening of its nationwide character as a superstructural institution. If before the state acted as an instrument of the political power of the ruling class, then in modern conditions it is called upon to be an instrument for balancing class and social interests, ensuring national harmony and social peace. Understanding the need for such a role for the state makes the ruling classes more tolerant of its intervention in the private sector.

The strengthening of the national character of the modern state was also facilitated by the formation of the so-called middle class - a rather significant part of the population with average incomes, which became a kind of balancer between the poor and the rich.

It is also impossible not to note the role of science, especially economic science, in the theoretical support of state regulation of the economy. Of particular importance are economic and mathematical methods that make it possible to model economic processes and thereby foresee the consequences of political and economic decisions being made.

2.4 Contradictions of state regulation of the market economy

State regulation of the market economy after the Second World War gave good results. In the 50s - 60s. they even began to talk about the fact that the Western countries had entered the "golden age" of their development, the "age of prosperity." There were the following grounds for such statements:

The noted decades were a period of almost crisis-free development, especially for the countries of Western Europe and Japan;

Relatively high rates of economic growth were observed;

Employment was maintained at a consistently high level;

Income and standard of living of the population increased relatively quickly and steadily.

But by the end of the 60s. serious problems began to emerge, the roots of which began to be seen in state regulation of the economy. Scientists began to talk not only about the "defects" and "failures" of the market, but also about the "failures" and "defects" of the state.

Thus, the causes of inflation were found in the application in the post-war period of the Keynesian model of regulation, with its emphasis on fiscal policy measures. Indeed, in order to stimulate economic growth, the state often spent more money than was received in its budget in the form of taxes. The state budget deficit in many countries has become chronic and the main means of combating it has become the issue of money and government securities (government borrowings). All this could not but contribute to the growth of inflation.

Inflation was also associated with a policy of full employment. This policy assumed the involvement in production of all factors of production, including insufficiently efficient ones, but requiring remuneration at the level of efficient ones. Accordingly, the owners of efficient factors of production, primarily labor, demanded a higher price for them than for inefficient factors. The result was an "inflationary spiral". By the beginning of the 70s. inflation from creeping began to move into galloping.

The aggravation of the problem of inflation largely contributed to the fact that in the 70s. in countries with market economies, changes began to occur in the practice of regulating the economy. The Keynesian model was replaced by supply policy models. However, not without the impact of this policy, many countries faced such new problems as slapflation and stagflation.

Slapflation is characterized by a combination of economic recession, rising unemployment and high inflation, which is clearly contrary to the Philipps curve. Periods 1973 - 1975 and 1980 - 1982 characterized by a significant decline in production in almost all countries with market economies while maintaining inflationary processes.

Stagflation is characterized by a combination of economic stagnation, high unemployment and inflation. The one-way upward movement of prices, despite the unfavorable economic situation and even the decline in production - what has been called the "ratchet effect" - a phenomenon characteristic of stagflation.

In general, state regulation has encountered a number of contradictions.

1. The contradiction between the goals of state regulation. For example, it is necessary to simultaneously contain inflationary price increases and ensure full employment, which, as we have seen, is not always compatible. The contradiction between social justice and economic efficiency which is manifested in the fact that the desire of the state to achieve greater social justice through a more even distribution of national income leads to a decrease in the efficiency of production of the same national income. As a result, the "national pie" is not growing as fast, limiting the opportunities for increasing the incomes of the poorest part of the population.

2. Contradiction between models of state regulation. Basically, this is a contradiction between models that involve active state intervention in the economy, and models that involve very moderate intervention. As a result, in the policy of the state in the 70s - 90s. there was a kind of pendulum between dirigisme and liberalism, reflected in the successive replacement of representatives of dirigisme and liberalism in state power.

3. The contradiction between the instruments of state regulation.

For example, stimulating aggregate demand through fiscal policy can lead to an increase in the interest rate and deter net exports.

Narrows the possibility of exports and the policy of "expensive money". Excessive bank reserves, formed under the influence of government policy, do not always turn into loans, since banks limit them during a recession, taking care of their liquidity.

4. Contradictions caused by the presence of a time lag between the identification of problems existing in the economy, decision-making and the implementation of specific activities. The economy often reacts to these measures with a delay, and sometimes this reaction no longer corresponds to the economic situation that has changed since the decision was made.

All these contradictions appear as objectively inevitable, in connection with which the problem of choosing the optimal variant of state regulation arises. An important role in this choice begins to play economics. Its practical function is getting stronger and stronger.

3. State intervention in the economy and the problem of limiting such intervention

3.1. Ways of state intervention in the economy

First of all, it is important to distinguish between two main forms: direct intervention through the expansion of state ownership of material resources, lawmaking and management manufacturing enterprises and indirect intervention through various economic policies.

The direct intervention of the state is the adoption of legislative acts designed to streamline and develop relations between the elements of the market system. An example of state regulation of the economy through the issuance of legislative acts is the provision on cooperation in France.

indirect intervention. Depending on the purpose of the intervention, economic policy measures can be aimed at:

Stimulation of investments;

Ensuring full employment;

Stimulating the export and import of goods, capital and labor;

Impact on the general price level in order to stabilize it;

Support for sustainable economic growth;

Redistribution of income.

To carry out these various measures, the state resorts mainly to fiscal and monetary policy. Fiscal policy is budgetary policy. It can be defined as a policy pursued by manipulating government revenues and spending. Monetary policy is a policy pursued by regulating the money supply in circulation and improving credit sphere. Both these areas of public policy are closely related to each other. However, this relationship in a market and centralized economy differs significantly.

Countries with a market economy are constantly looking for the optimal combination of state regulation and the functioning of a naturally formed market mechanism.

In a market economy, taxes play such an important role that it is safe to say that without a well-established, well-functioning tax system, an efficient market economy is impossible.

What exactly is the role of taxes in a market economy, what functions do they perform? Answering these questions, they usually begin with the fact that taxes play a decisive role in shaping the revenue side of the state budget. It is, of course, so. But the first place should be given to the function, without which it is impossible to do without in an economy based on commodity-money relations. This function of taxes is regulatory.

Market economy in developed countries is a regulated economy. It is impossible to imagine an effectively functioning market economy in the modern world, not regulated by the state. Another thing is how it is regulated, in what ways, in what forms.

State regulation is carried out in two main directions:

Regulation of market, commodity-money relations. It consists mainly in defining the "rules of the game", i.e. development of laws and regulations that determine the relationship between persons operating in the market, primarily entrepreneurs, employers and hired workers. These include laws, regulations, guidelines government agencies governing the relationship of producers, sellers and buyers, the activities of banks, as well as labor exchanges. This area of ​​state regulation of the market is not directly related to taxes.

Regulation of the development of the national economy, social production when the main objective economic law operating in society is the law of value. Here we are talking mainly about the financial and economic methods of state influence on the interests of people, entrepreneurs, in order to direct their activities in the right, beneficial direction for society.

In market conditions, the methods of administrative subordination of entrepreneurs are reduced to a minimum, the very concept of “superior organizations” that have the right to manage the activities of enterprises with the help of orders, commands and orders is gradually disappearing.

Maneuvering tax rates, benefits and fines, changing the terms of taxation, introducing some and canceling other taxes, the state creates conditions for the accelerated development of certain industries and industries, contributes to solving problems that are urgent for society. Thus, at the present time there is perhaps no more important task for us than the development of agriculture, the solution of the food problem. In this regard, collective farms, state farms and other agricultural production are exempted from income tax in the Russian Federation.

Another example. It is well known that a well-functioning market economy cannot be imagined without the development of small businesses. Without it, it is difficult to create an economic environment favorable for the functioning of commodity-money relations. The state should promote the development of small business, support it by creating special funds for financing small businesses, preferential lending, and preferential taxation.

Another function of taxes is stimulating. With the help of taxes and benefits, the state stimulates the technical process, an increase in the number of jobs, capital investments on the expansion of production

The next function of taxes is distributive, or redistributive. Through taxes, funds are concentrated in the state budget, which are then directed to solving national economic problems, both industrial and social, financing large intersectoral, complex targeted programs– scientific and technical, economic, etc.

With the help of taxes, the state redistributes part of the profits of enterprises and entrepreneurs, the income of citizens, directing them to the development of industrial and social infrastructure, to investments and investments. The redistributive function of the tax system has a pronounced social character. A properly constructed tax system makes it possible to give a market economy a social orientation, as is done in Germany, Sweden and many other countries.

3.2. Limitation of state intervention in the country's economy

Obviously, the modern market system is unthinkable without state intervention. However, there is a line beyond which deformations of market processes occur, production efficiency falls. Then, sooner or later, the question arises of the denationalization of the economy, ridding it of excessive state activity. There are important limits to regulation. For example, any actions of the state that destroy the market mechanism (total directive planning, all-encompassing administrative control over prices, etc.) are unacceptable. This does not mean that the state absolves itself of responsibility for the uncontrolled rise in prices and should abandon planning. The market system does not exclude planning at the level of enterprises, regions, and even the national economy; however, in the latter case, it is usually “soft”, limited in terms of time, scope and other parameters, and acting in the form of national targeted programs. It should also be noted that the market is largely a self-adjusting system, and therefore it should be influenced only by indirect, economic methods. However, in some cases, the use of administrative methods is not only acceptable, but necessary. One cannot rely only on economic or only on administrative measures. On the one hand, any economic regulator carries elements of administration. For example, money turnover will not feel the influence of such a well-known economic method as the central bank lending rate until an administrative decision is made. On the other hand, there is something economic in every administrative regulator in the sense that it indirectly affects the behavior of participants in the economic process. By resorting, say, to direct control over prices, the state creates a special economic regime for producers, forces them to revise production programs, look for new sources of investment financing, etc.

Among the methods of state regulation, there are no completely unsuitable and absolutely ineffective. Everyone is needed, and the only question is to determine for each those situations where its use is most appropriate. Economic losses begin when the authorities go beyond the bounds of reason, giving excessive preference to either economic or administrative methods.

We must not forget that the economic regulators themselves should be used with extreme caution, without weakening or replacing market incentives. If the state ignores this requirement, launches regulators without thinking about how their action will affect the market mechanism, the latter begins to falter. After all, monetary or tax policy in terms of the strength of its impact on the economy is comparable to central planning.

It must be borne in mind that among economic regulators there is not a single ideal one. Any of them, bringing a positive effect in one area of ​​the economy, will certainly have negative consequences in others. Nothing can be changed here. The state using economic instruments of regulation is obliged to control them and stop them in a timely manner. For example, the state seeks to curb inflation by limiting the growth of the money supply. From the point of view of combating inflation, this measure is effective, but it leads to an increase in the cost of central and bank credit. And if interest rates rise, it becomes more and more difficult to finance investments, and economic development begins to slow down. This is how the situation is developing in Russia.

State intervention in the economy requires quite large expenditures. They include both direct costs (preparation of legislative acts and control over their execution) and indirect costs (on the part of firms that must comply with government instructions and reporting). In addition, it is believed that government regulations reduce the incentive for innovation, for the entry of new competitors into the industry, since this requires the permission of the relevant commission.

According to American experts, the state impact on economic life leads to a drop in growth rates by approximately 0.4% per year (Lipsey R., Steiner P., Purvis D. Economics, N. Y. 1987, P. 422).

Due to certain imperfections, government intervention sometimes entails losses. In this regard, in recent years, the issue of deregulation of the economy and privatization has become more acute. Deregulation involves the removal of legislative acts that hinder the entry of potential competitors into the market, set prices for certain goods and services. For example, in the United States in the 1980s, deregulation affected trucks, rail and air transport. As a result, prices have dropped and passenger service has improved. The deregulation of freight, air and rail transport has brought benefits to American society estimated at $39-63 billion, $15 billion, and $9-15 billion, respectively. in year

Privatization - the sale of state-owned enterprises to individuals or organizations - is aimed at increasing economic rationality. It is caused by the fact that state-owned enterprises are unprofitable and inefficient. Western economists emphasize that the public sector does not provide such a powerful incentive to reduce costs and make powerful profits, as does private enterprise. For an entrepreneur - one of two things: profit or loss. If a private enterprise suffers losses for a long time, then it is closed. A state-owned enterprise is assisted, so it may not seek to increase its profitability.

This once again proves that state intervention is needed only where it is vital. In all other cases, the market will more effectively solve the set economic tasks.

State regulation in agriculture. In the modern Western economy, agriculture is one of the most important areas of active intervention. In this area of ​​production, the main principle of the free market, namely the play of supply and demand, turns out to be practically inapplicable. True, state intervention is far from a panacea. For example, in Western Europe, governments traditionally pay great attention to the problems of the agricultural market, but neither producers nor consumers are satisfied with the state of affairs in the agricultural sector.

The source of the problems is that in developed countries, due to high labor productivity, the production of agricultural products significantly exceeds the needs of the population.

The goals of state regulation in the field of agriculture include:

a) improving productivity through the implementation technical progress and rationalization of production, the most efficient use of all production factors, especially labor;

b) ensuring employment in the agricultural sector and an appropriate standard of living for the rural population;

c) stabilization of markets for agricultural products;

d) guaranteed supply of the domestic market;

e) concern for the supply of agricultural products to consumers at "reasonable prices".

The state establishes and annually reviews the minimum prices for the most important agricultural products. Thus, producers are protected from a sharp drop in prices. At the same time, the domestic market is protected from cheap imports and excessive price fluctuations through a system of additional import duties. Therefore, in the EU countries, food prices are noticeably higher than world market prices. Expenses in connection with the implementation of the agrarian policy shall be borne by the state budget.

The functioning of this mechanism can be illustrated by the example of the grain market. The starting point is the approximate price recommended by the state. It somewhat exceeds the market price, which not only guarantees the income of farmers, but also creates incentives to expand production. As a result, supply exceeds demand. When market price decreases to a certain level, the grain offered by farmers is bought up by the state at the so-called "intervention price" in unlimited quantities.

Thus, although each producer must bear the marketing risk himself, in practice this rule does not apply to producers of many agricultural products.

There are also mechanisms to protect against cheap imports and encourage exports. This means that an import duty is imposed on imports, equating the price of the product with the domestic price. When exporting, the state pays the exporters the difference between the domestic price and the world market price.

It should be noted that this policy provoked many problems. On the one hand, huge stocks of food have been accumulated, on the other hand, the discontent of the peasants, who believe that they are not provided with living wage. In this situation, large agro-industrial enterprises receive decent incomes, while small producers barely make ends meet.

Thus, agriculture remains a weak point of state regulation. However, apparently, the state of affairs in agriculture will remain unchanged.

3.3. Features of state regulation of the economy in Russia

In order to explain the reasons for the current state of affairs regarding the level of economic regulation in Russia, let us consider the events taking place in the country quite recently, 25-30 years ago, when:

In Russia, the command-administrative system of government, imperative planning was practiced and prevailed state form property;

There was a low efficiency of the public sector in the economy, encouragement of the so-called planned unprofitable enterprises;

The inability of the state to provide the necessary rates of economic growth was revealed;

This order of things gave rise to dependency and inertia of both the consumer and the producer;

Excessive government intervention led to the undermining of the market, its natural laws.

Protesting against these postulates, it was proposed to carry out cardinal reforms.

First of all, they abandoned the idea - the practice of the country as a single factory, one nationwide trust, the supremacy of the state in the economy. The ideas of liberalism, monetarism, privatization, freedom of economic agents in production and exchange became topical.

During the period of reforms carried out after 1991, the previously dominant structure based on public property was transformed into other structures with a clear increase in the share of private entrepreneurship.

The paternalistic model of relationships that existed between the state and the enterprise was finally destroyed by 1996. Businesses have lost confidence in state bodies and often refused to pay taxes. In 1993, there was still a consensus of interests between the state and the enterprise, that is, the state gave privileged loans, and in exchange for this, the enterprise paid taxes.

The ugly nature of the reforms undertaken has led to rampant criminality on an unprecedented scale. Massive criminalization of all spheres of public life accompanied the process of ill-conceived privatization, in fact, the seizure of public property by a few. Appearance of thousands joint-stock companies and the mandatory legal requirement to buy back part of the shares using exclusively vouchers gave a powerful impetus to the development stock market with all its negative consequences. Most of the fraud was associated with circulation, theft, forgery of vouchers, falsification of privatization documents, underestimation of the residual value of funds of privatized enterprises, and so on.

The inefficient activity of the state at that time can be judged by the following indicators: as of 2000, compared to 1990, Russia's GDP was less than 59%, industrial production - 54.5, agricultural production - 61.2, investment in fixed assets - 27.5% .

It is clear that the government should, first of all, take care of reforming and democratizing state property itself, and only then move on to privatization.

Turning to modern aspects of state regulation of the economy, we can say that a modern market economy, as a rule, is built on a contractual basis. Under such conditions, both the object and the subject of national economic influence fundamentally change. The subjects of influence are the federal government, administrations of the subject of the Federation, industry and intersectoral associations and enterprises.

Many economists point out that Russian economy there is a need for state influence on:

Sphere of production;

Scope of circulation;

the field of management;

social infrastructure;

To preserve and increase the scientific and technological potential of Russia, a set of carefully designed measures is required. First of all, the development and implementation of the state scientific and technical policy. This is one of the most important tasks facing government bodies in present stage. The main criteria should not be the formal pace of reforms, but the minimization of the loss of national wealth, the achievement of a real improvement in the life of the population.

There is a position that modern Russia will not be able to “get out” of the rather difficult economic situation that it is currently facing only by attracting financial resources and ensuring their circulation in the country, but by creating a proper and appropriate production base. The country's economy cannot stay afloat only by exporting natural energy resources. Thus, one of the main functions of the state at the present moment is the creation of capacities for the processing, food, technology, and machine-building industries.

One can give an example of the successful action of the government of our country in relation to the automotive industry.

Using the example of protectionist measures, one can show the role of state regulation in the Russian Federation. During the formation of market relations, foreign companies began to penetrate the Russian market. automotive companies to form its own distribution network. While domestic automakers were doing very badly: production costs were growing catastrophically, quality was dropping rapidly, prices were becoming prohibitive - there was an overstocking of products, demand was falling. The prices of domestic cars approached foreign ones, while the quality of foreign cars was much higher. In the end, under pressure from domestic automakers, the government was forced to introduce state duties on imported motor vehicles in the amount of more than 100%. On the one hand, in order to prevent the final bankruptcy of enterprises and allied enterprises, this is correct, on the other hand, the state put them in a virtual state of monopoly headed by AVTOVAZ, since, in fact, there was no serious competition between domestic automakers, because they occupied different industrial niches.

Well, I know from my own experience that they didn’t buy less foreign cars, but we didn’t lose such an important industry as the automotive industry.

As for price fixing, for three recent years the government of the Russian Federation has repeatedly fixed prices for the products of various imaginary monopolies. Such measures cannot be called a wise response to the problems of competition in the formation of market relations. First, the government did not have clear criteria and a reliable methodology for identifying monopoly enterprises, and as a result, hundreds and even thousands of enterprises fell into this category. It also underestimated the ability of international competition or the freedom to start new companies to limit the power of real monopolies. Secondly, price control strikes at quite competitive industries and does not lead to competitive prices, but to commodity deficit. And thirdly, state price fixing can encourage enterprises to develop an unspoken common monopoly strategy. Thus, by setting high official prices for this or that product, the government may inadvertently promote the emergence of a monopoly where there used to be one. State prices actually become not a ceiling, but a price threshold for enterprises in the industry, contrary to the good intentions of the government.

Of course, when forming market relations in Russia, it is necessary to pursue a policy of protecting domestic producers from imports of foreign goods, but not to the extent that was stated above and as our government did in principle.

It is now clear that the objects of close attention of state bodies should be:

The problem of choosing a strategy for national development, the main component of which is to strengthen the unity of the state;

Problems of rational development of areas rich in natural resources; economic and social development of the North, Eastern Siberia; energy supply for the eastern part of the country, etc.;

Major regional socio-economic and environmental problems, such as economic recovery and increased employment levels in depressed areas, resettlement of forced migrants and refugees.

Conclusion

In the course of this work, we considered some of the tasks we set at the beginning of our study.

First, we studied the role of the state in the country's economy and the functions of the state. No one denies the need for the state to perform certain functions in the economic sphere. However, on the questions in what proportions should state and market regulation What are the boundaries and directions of state intervention, there is a fairly wide range of theoretical views and practical approaches corresponding to them - from complete state monopoly in the management of the national economy to extreme economic liberalism, when it is argued that the economy can be effective only in conditions of unlimited private entrepreneurship.

Secondly, we considered the state regulation of the market economy.

The market system is, first of all, flexibility and dynamism in decision-making, both on the part of consumers and producers. Public policy simply does not have the right to lag behind changes in the market system, otherwise it will turn from an effective stabilizer and regulator into a bureaucratic superstructure that hinders the development of the economy. Very often, the state is the root cause of changes in the economic behavior of entrepreneurs. Decisions made by the government influence decisions made (or not made) at the micro level. Government policy achieves its goal only when it encourages and does not dictate. When creating favorable conditions for entrepreneurs, their private interest will coincide with the interest of the state, that is, society. Consequently, the state should simply make more accessible to entrepreneurs that sector of the economy, which is the highest priority for it.

It should be noted that the state should not interfere in those areas of the economy where its intervention is not necessary. This is not only unnecessary, but also harmful to the economy.

Thirdly, the task that we set and completed was to study state intervention in the economy and the problem of limiting such intervention. The state intervenes in economic processes in various ways, both direct (issuance of legal acts regulating certain relations) and indirect. Obviously, the modern market system is unthinkable without state intervention. However, there is a line beyond which deformations of market processes occur, production efficiency falls. Then, sooner or later, the question arises of the denationalization of the economy, ridding it of excessive state activity. There are important limits to regulation. For example, any actions of the state that destroy the market mechanism (total directive planning, all-encompassing administrative control over prices, etc.) are unacceptable.

We also examined the features of state regulation of the economy in Russia. There is a position that modern Russia will not be able to “get out” of the rather difficult economic situation that it is now facing only by attracting financial resources and ensuring their circulation in the country, but by creating a proper and appropriate production base. The country's economy cannot stay afloat only by exporting natural energy resources. Thus, one of the main functions of the state at the present moment is the creation of capacities for the processing, food, technology, and machine-building industries.

In general, it is difficult to overestimate the role of the state in the economy. It creates conditions for economic activity, protects entrepreneurs from the threat of monopolies, provides for the needs of society in public goods, provides social protection for low-income strata of the population, solves issues of national defense.

Thus, we can conclude that the purpose of this work - to study the issue of state regulation of the economy - has been fulfilled.

Bibliography

1. Agapova T.A., Seregina S.F. // Macroeconomics: Textbook / Ed. Sidorovich A.V. M.: Business and Service, 2006. - 279 p.

2. Albegova I. M., Emtsov R. G., Kholopov A. V. State economic policy: the experience of transition to the market / Ed. edited by prof. Sidorovich A.V. - M .: Business and Service, 2008. - 123p.

3. Atkinson E.B., Stiglitz J.E. // Lectures on the economic theory of the public sector: Textbook / Per. from English. ed. Lyubimova L.L. M.: "Aspect Press", 2005. - 228s.

4. Big Economic Dictionary / Ed. A. N. Azrimyan. - 2nd ed. add. and reworked. - M.: Institute of New Economics, 2007. - 102p.

5. In Search of a New Theory: A Reading Book on Economic Theory, Ed. A.G. Gryaznova and N.N. Duma. - M.: KRONUS, 2007. - 186s.

6. Varga V. The role of the state in the market economy, MEiMO, 2009. - No. 10-11. - P. 23.

7. Vidyapina V.I. Encyclopedia of the market economy. State regulation of the market economy. - M., 2007. - 354 p.

8. State in a changing world. Questions of Economics. 2007. - No. 7. S. 4-34.

9. Zastavenko, Reisberg State programs and market, The Economist, 2007. - No. 3. - P.23

10. Kamaev V.D., Textbook on the basics of economic theory, M .: "Vlados", 2007. - 107p.

11. Kushlina V.I. State regulation of the market economy. - M., 2006. - 269s.

12. Macroeconomics: Theory and Russian practice: textbook / Ed. A.G. Gryaznova and N.N. Duma. M.: "KNORUS", 2006. - 181 p.

13. Maksimova V., Shishov A. Market economy. Textbook”, Moscow, SOMINTEK, 2006. – 345p.

14. Nikolaeva M.A., Makhotaeva N.Yu. Evolution of the state economic policy of Russia / World economy and international relations. - 2008. - No. 5. - P. 18

15. Porokhovskiy A. The phenomenon of the "new economy" and the functions of the state (materials for lectures) // Russian Economic Journal. - 2006. - No. 9. – p. 10

Agapova T.A., Seregina S.F. // Macroeconomics: Textbook / Ed. Sidorovich A.V. M.: Business and Service, 2006. - 279 p.

Porokhovskiy A. Phenomenon of the "new economy" and the functions of the state (materials for lectures) // Russian Economic Journal. - 2006. - No. 9. – p. 10

Macroeconomics: Theory and Russian practice: textbook / Ed. A.G. Gryaznova and N.N. Duma. M.: "KNORUS", 2006. - 181 p.

Nikolaeva M.A., Makhotaeva N.Yu. Evolution of the state economic policy of Russia / World economy and international relations. - 2008. - No. 5. - P. 18

Listen

The economy of any state is a system of complex interrelated processes, institutions and management decisions, characterized by certain features and characteristics that determine the model of the economic system.

Market economy - definition of the term

A market model is called an economic model based on the freedom of entrepreneurial activity, the right to private property, market pricing by finding the intersection of supply and demand curves, that is, the purpose of the functioning of market economy entities is to obtain benefits, while the risks of activity are borne and covered by the entity independently.

The market offers many options for products, works and services for the consumer, who is free in his choice. For the manufacturer, the market economy model offers conditions for competition with other manufacturers of similar products. The costs of production are borne by the producer himself, but the producer also forms the price on the basis of his judgment. The received funds (income) the manufacturer also distributes independently. IN market model economy, the role of the state as a regulator is very limited.

Since the choice of goods, works or services is wide for the consumer, competition relations arise between producers, which are fundamental in a market economy model. Also, the base will be the right of ownership, which guarantees freedom from interference by unauthorized persons.

Market economy - main features and signs

The fundamental characteristics of the model of this type of economy are:

• The right of private property as a guarantee of non-interference of the state and other persons.
• The right to carry out entrepreneurial activity - each subject has it, and he can independently choose and engage in any type of activity, while his costs are attributed to him as expenses and the subject independently distributes the income received.
• The choice of the consumer, his demand will be a decisive factor for the production of goods or the provision of services.
• The price is formed by finding the intersection points of supply and demand curves in the market. Regulation of product prices by the state is not provided; in a market economy, the market regulates itself independently.
• With the free choice of the buyer - what to buy, as well as with the freedom to choose the type of activity by the manufacturer, there are relations of competition that are hallmark market model of the economy.
• The state does not set prices for products, services, and is not the main regulator in a market economy.

Market economy - indicators of development

1. Growth within 2-3%.
2. Low inflation and inflation expectations.
3. The state budget deficit is within 9%.
4. Low unemployment (up to 6%).
5. Positive balance of payments.

The Russian economy previously existed within the framework of an administrative model characterized by the centralization of all processes, the presence of a powerful regulator in the form of state bodies, the setting of prices at a certain level by the regulator, and the planning system. Since the collapse of the USSR, Russia has taken a course towards building a market-type economic model to bring the economy out of recession.

A fundamental change in the economic development model could not but affect such areas as politics, government regulation, and the social sphere.

In addition to the protracted recession in the economy, the prerequisites for the transition to a market system were:

• the presence of strict state regulation of the economy has led to the formation of a large share of the shadow sector of the economy;
• low economic activity of economic entities in connection with the total regulation of all areas of activity;
• the formation of an incorrect structure of economic sectors that are not focused on consumer services, but on service and production in the military industry;
• lack of conditions for free competition, monopolistic phenomena in many industries have led to the non-competitiveness of manufactured goods;
• the totality of these factors led to the crisis of the economic system, which, in turn, affected the political and social system.

Measures for the transition to a market economic model were:

1. Privatization of property previously monopoly owned by the state.
2. The emergence of the most stable segment of the population - the middle class.
3. Forming links with outside world at the level of politics and economics.
4. Creation of organizations of joint ownership - between the public and private sectors, with the attraction of foreign economic investment.
5. Formation of sustainable international relations.

Market economy - ways of transition

For the final formation of a market model, one should decide on a transition strategy to it:

• Gradual, consistent implementation of reforms and changes, in which there is a replacement of institutions. It is characterized by a gradual weakening of the regulation of pricing, the economy, and the social sphere by the state.
• Shock therapy - when changes do not occur in stages, and the economy is released "into free swimming", with minimal government regulation. The market, as the most cost-effective instrument, will regulate itself. Government spending is sharply reduced, and pricing takes place by the market method.