MOSCOW, November 28 – RIA Novosti. Russian President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday announced a number of initiatives in the socio-demographic sphere, including the extension of the maternity capital program until the end of 2021, subsidies mortgage rate for families who will have a second or third child, as well as establishing a monthly payment for the birth of a first child up to one and a half years old.

Speaking at a meeting of the Coordination Council of the National Strategy for Action in the Interests of Children with his proposals, the head of the Russian state noted the need to “reset” demographic policy in the country.

Extend maternity capital

The maternity capital program was supposed to end at the end of next year, but on Tuesday Putin proposed extending it until the end of 2021. The Russian leader also proposed introducing additional features use of maternal capital.

“Funds from maternity capital can be received in the form of monthly payments to those families who are especially in need,” Putin said.

According to him, the approach will be targeted. In addition, it will now be possible to use maternal capital to pay for preschool education services, or more precisely to pay for the care and supervision of a child from the age of two months. “I know that this measure is in great demand; in particular, after the birth of a child, a mother will be able to continue working or studying,” the Russian leader explained.

According to the first deputy chairman of the United Russia faction, Andrei Isaev, Putin’s decisions related to maternal capital and support for needy families will have a positive impact on the demographic situation.

"Many families are ready to have a second and third child, but they do not have enough own funds to solve the housing problem. And part of the maternity capital remains unclaimed. Therefore, it is extremely important for them to receive additional help; such an opportunity will appear,” he said.

Support firstborns

Putin said that from January 2018 in the Russian Federation a monthly cash payment families at the birth of their first child, which will be paid until the child reaches the age of 1.5 years. The amount of payments will be calculated from the amount living wage child established in a subject of the federation. On average, it will be 10,523 rubles in 2018, 10,836 rubles in 2019, and 11,143 rubles in 2020. In this case, the payment will be targeted. Financial costs for the implementation of these measures will amount to 144.5 billion rubles over three years.

The head of the Commission of the Public Chamber (PP) of the Russian Federation for the support of family, motherhood and childhood, Diana Gurtskaya, among all the measures to support the family to stimulate the birth rate proposed by the president, especially highlighted this initiative.

“I am sure that for many this will be a strong reason not to set career goals ahead of motherhood,” Gurtskaya explained to RIA Novosti.

According to the social activist, specific measures to support families to stimulate the birth rate are “a serious result of the implementation of the National Strategy of Action in the Interests of Children.”

The first deputy chairman of the United Russia faction, Isaev, also considers the decision on the monthly payment for the first child important.

“The category from zero to one and a half was very correctly chosen, because for a family with children from three to seven years old, the problem has been largely solved thanks to the program “kindergartens for children,” but just when the mother does not work, she stays at home, receiving allowance, not wages but wants, for example, to start working earlier - providing assistance in this case is most effective and most significant. It's the most sensitive in this case moment,” says the parliamentarian.

Put children's clinics in order

Putin in his speech advocated increasing the accessibility and quality of provision medical care children and touched upon the problem of the state of children's clinics. According to him, in order to carry out their reconstruction, major repairs and retrofitting with equipment, according to preliminary estimates, more than 50 billion rubles will be required.

"It is obvious that the regions, taking into account even the assistance that was provided to them in Lately, will not be able to perform this work at their own expense. Therefore, in the next three years, the bulk of this amount, 10 billion rubles per year, will be provided by the federal budget,” Putin said.

The government, together with the regions, he added, “needs to quickly work out a detailed schedule for reconstruction and overhaul children's clinics, including outpatient departments of hospitals, as well as approve the terms of co-financing and the rules for selecting clinics, to do this taking into account the readiness of design estimates and, above all, the severity of the problem."

Following the results of the coordination council, Health Minister Veronika Skvortsova told reporters that the department supports the president’s order on the reconstruction and construction of children’s clinics.

“We are faced with the fact that worn out clinic buildings, in general, require significant renovation. And indeed, (these are) sometimes adapted premises, sometimes in residential buildings. Therefore, we warmly support the task that the president gave to prepare a program for reconstruction, major repairs, and the construction of new clinics,” Skvortsova said.

She also believes that the measures proposed by Putin to improve the situation in Russia’s demography are “full-fledged” and “concern all facets and social assistance, social protection and medical support."

Mortgage special program

Putin proposed to launch special program mortgage lending for families in which, starting from January 1, 2018, a second or third child will be born. Buying housing on the primary market or refinancing previously received mortgage loans, such families will be able to count on government subsidies interest rate over 6% per annum.

According to the Chairman of the State Duma Committee on financial market Anatoly Aksakov, the program proposed by the President of the Russian Federation will be in demand by both such families and banks.

"This good program, absolutely correct, many thanks to participation in it will be able to solve their problems. It is also beneficial for banks. They will receive money from the budget, and since this is still a good mortgage product - there is good collateral, the banks will work with it with interest,” the RIA Novosti deputy said, commenting on the proposal of the head of state.

Supervisor think tank CIAN Alexey Popov believes that the implementation of this initiative will make apartments in new buildings more affordable for families with two or more children by 7-8%.

“The increased availability of mortgage products for families with several children may lead to an increase in demand for 2-3-room apartments, which currently remain unsold in many projects due to the increased popularity of studios and one-room apartments,” Popov explained to RIA Real Estate.

Money and resources will be found

As Federation Council Speaker Valentina Matvienko told reporters, the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Labor of the Russian Federation have preliminary calculated the costs of everything proposed by the president social measures and confirmed the possibility of their implementation.

“The President never introduces anything without preliminary consideration, I know this. Therefore, naturally, the Ministry of Labor and Social Protection and the Ministry of Finance first calculated all these measures and confirmed the possibility of their implementation,” Matvienko said.

According to her, changes to legislation will be quickly prepared and new measures to support families will be reflected in the 2018 budget.

According to Natalya Porokhova, head of ACRA's research and forecasting group, subsidizing the mortgage rate for families who have a second or third child will require 10 billion rubles annually, which is a relatively modest budget subsidy.

“Families who will have a 2nd or 3rd child in 2018 represent 0.5% of the population of the Russian Federation. If the usual mechanism is assumed - subsidizing the difference between market rates and the social mortgage rate, then the measure will require relatively modest budget subsidies ( no more than 10 billion rubles per year),” says Porokhova.

Chief Economist of the Eurasian Development Bank (EDB) Yaroslav Lisovolik believes that initiatives in social sphere, voiced by Putin, can be financed from additional oil and gas revenues from the Russian budget.

“I think the compromise here may rather lie in the fact that the budget plans of the Ministry of Finance are quite conservative and, probably, it is possible to provide for the possibility of implementing such initiatives through additional budget revenues, which are obtained due to the excess of oil prices that we are now observing. Probably “This kind of compromise would be possible in conditions where, on the one hand, adaptation to the decline in oil prices over the last three to four years is necessary and, on the other hand, it is necessary to stimulate growth and maintain the well-being of the population,” Lisovolik told RIA Novosti.

“Probably, this will be resolved in this way - that is, due to the fact that priority in the distribution of additional budget revenues will be given to such projects,” he added.

UDC 314.335.044

FERTILITY SUPPORT

© F.N. Semevsky

Key words: demographic policy; demography; cultural inheritance; economy; GDP. Preservation of the people should be a priority task of the state. Fertility support should be built taking into account the basic principles of the theory of human population dynamics, the principles of macroeconomics and psychology. Promotion of fertility must be combined with condemnation of celibacy and childlessness. People should be given a choice of support. Demographic policy should be specific in each region. Now the ruling groups prefer measures that are in the form of encouragement rather than coercion or prohibition. In countries with high GDP per capita, there is a dependence of the total fertility rate (TFR) on the intensity of fertility support, expressed as a % of GDP. The causal relationship between efforts to support fertility and the total fertility rate (TFR) may run in the opposite direction, that is, in places where the TFR is lower, efforts to support fertility may be higher. As a result, the fertility support effect should be underestimated. Fertility support comes in the form of many small payments and benefits, the receipt of which requires considerable effort from parents who already have many worries. The funds allocated to support fertility are insufficient to restore simple reproduction. A tax on childlessness in combination with payments to parents is the best way to support the birth rate and does not require additional budget expenditures.

Since the separation of man from the Earth's biota with a fundamentally new mechanism of heredity - culture, the problem of reducing the birth rate has arisen.

From the theory of human population dynamics it follows that the government needs to support the birth rate in civilized states.

Effectiveness public policy fertility support in Modern times no doubt.

Consideration of the experiences of banning abortions in Russia and Romania leads to the conclusion that they significantly increased the birth rate, although over time their effect weakened. The latter is not surprising, since a person adapts to change external environment. It does not follow from this that his behavior does not depend on the environment.

Now the ruling groups prefer measures that are in the form of encouragement rather than coercion or prohibition.

From the study of the effect of fertility support measures, the conclusion follows that they increase the birth rate, although, as a rule, not enough. All serious researchers have come to this conclusion.

Fertility increases one-time benefits(average), monthly benefits(medium-weak), tax deductions affect, but only the rich, subsidies (possibly weakly), speed bonuses (debatable), housing subsidies for families with children (possibly), length of parental leave (affects non-linearly), size payment for parental leave (positive impact), paternity leave (affects egalitarian families), flexible and part-time work regimes (positive impact), development of home care and childcare services (possibly), compensation of part of the payment contains

the child’s life in a preschool institution (possibly), subsidizing the receipt higher education(does not affect), subsidizing medical services(does not affect).

P. MacDonald reviewed assessments of the effectiveness of economic measures to support childbearing. The researchers conclude that this policy produces positive results. The following figures are given: for every 10% increase in the amount of child benefit as a share family income accounts for 25% of the increase in a woman’s fertility; if the number of children attending preschool institutions increases by 20%, then the total fertility rate (TFR) of the cohort increases by 0.05 children.

In South Korea, with the introduction of the family planning program, the TFR fell from 2.1 to 1.23 from 1983 to 2012. V. Kim, based on a model that included survey data on the desired number of children, calculated the amount of benefits necessary to restore the birth rate. To restore simple reproduction of the population, according to his calculations, 6.6% of GDP will be required.

In the early 1980s. The local government of Naberezhnye Chelny caused an explosion in the birth rate by providing a one-room apartment for the first child, a two-room apartment for the second, and a three-room apartment for the third.

The effect of demographic policy is observed when comparing the TFR with the intensity of fertility support across Swiss cantons. This policy is adopted by each department independently. J. Bonoli calculated multiple regression coefficients of TFR with standardized indicators of factors not related to demographic policy cantons, benefits and the number of kindergartens per thousand employed women. Both demographic policy indicators demonstrated a statistically significant relationship with the TFR.

J. Bonoli concludes that the best policy is one that makes it easier for women to combine work with family life.

In countries with high GDP per capita, there is a dependence of TFR (7) on the intensity of fertility support (X), expressed as % of GDP

7 = 0.105X + 1.378.

To raise the birth rate to the level of simple reproduction, 6.9% of GDP must be spent on supporting the birth rate1.

notice, that causation efforts to support fertility and TFR may be in the opposite direction, i.e. in places where TFR is lower2, efforts to support fertility may be higher. As a result, the fertility support effect should be underestimated.

PSYCHOLOGY

Public policy, in order to be effective, must be based on the principles of psychology. In textbooks and summaries on individual issues, the following provisions relevant to our topic can be extracted.

1. People are different, unlike all types of Earth’s biota, they strive for different goals, optimize various criteria in different sets of values.

2. People are not very smart (limitedly rational). Experts are smarter.

3. A person is extremely easy to persuade.

4. You can achieve the desired behavior from animals and people with the help of encouragement, punishment and sometimes example.

5. People tend to attach more importance to events happening now and not take into account events in the distant future.

ECONOMY

It is known that taxes on labor and capital suppress production, but taxes on natural rent do not. In our country and in almost all capitalist countries, rent taxes (payments) occupy a modest share of state revenues. This is due to the fact that the appropriation of natural resource rent forms the basis of the income of the ruling group and its power.

Government revenues are made up of tax revenues (83%). Among them, rent payments (payment for subsoil, land, water, standing timber) amount to less than 12%. Among non-tax revenues, perhaps only fines (1%) do not suppress production, since fees for environmental pollution have recently been abolished.

Vices tax system lead to the fact that benefits aimed at supporting fertility (as well as other budget expenses), they confiscate from the people amounts twice their value.

In economics, to compare economic events distributed over time, discount

1 Given the actual effectiveness of fertility support in Western Europe. With a reasonable demographic policy - less (See below).

2 For example, in connection with the confessional composition. In Switzerland, Protestant women have an average number of children per life of 1.35, Catholic women - 1.41, Muslim women - 2.44.

ting. Income A received today corresponds to income Aeb received at moment G, where b is the discount factor. This is relevant to the assessment of “maternity capital”3 and other deferred payments for children.

There are market and non-market utilities. Market utilities are measured in monetary units based on theory marginal utility. Non-market utilities, such as safety, children, life, etc., are difficult to measure. Economists equate them to budget costs. Market economic theory starts from the premise of rational behavior of people and institutions. Individuals strive for maximum satisfaction of their needs, and the state strives for the highest growth of social welfare. All this is good, but people’s behavior is limitedly rational, and the behavior of the state is even more so. Market theory leads to absurdities in the case of goods like drugs. Actually monetary valuations non-market utilities are set by the state under pressure from representatives of the ruling group and sometimes voters. Both do not know enough to make a rational decision. Estimates of non-market utilities are unreliable4.

It seems that science can do such tasks better, but it does not have the power. Still, science can give advice, and sometimes its advice is listened to.

OPTIMAL FERTILITY MANAGEMENT POLICY

A state that recognizes that having children is good and not having children is bad needs to control information flows.

On modern man information is bombarded that can be organized along many axes. By sources (family, school, Internet); by type (music, literature, synthetic); low quality - elitism (anecdote, ditty, philosophical treatise), etc.

Information is often a product that generates income for producers and sellers (for example, a detective story), or something that is recognized as useful, but is not convenient for sale and requires budgetary expenses for production and distribution.

Information in one form or another has always been filtered and is now being filtered by individuals and groups in power. The state, big capital, owners of television channels, publishers, and finally consumers select information. At the same time, government censorship is extremely unpopular.

The state filters information, although it is hampered by the provisions of the dominant ideology - secular humanism, the Declaration of Human Rights, international

3 Perhaps the legislators miscalculated and only because of this had some success. Since 2009, maternity capital has been used with the help of lawyers to purchase a mortgage loan immediately after receiving the certificate.

4 The Russian family culture has recently been very different from the culture of the Germanic peoples (Nosevich, 2001). Even now, young families, according to our observations, receive strong support from the older generation. Perhaps the conclusion about the advantage of late childbearing, especially given the increasing risk of genetic defects in children, does not apply to Russia.

family obligations, constitution. Pornography is filtered using Art. 242 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, incitement of intergroup hatred - Art. 282 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, drug propaganda - Art. 6.13 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation.

Current activity government in this direction seems reasonable, but I would like to increase its effectiveness.

Much has been written about the benefits of art. There is no doubt that art benefits cultural creators. It seems that if there is benefit to society, then it is generated by the best works. Fiction was interested in falling in love. Marital love, family and children occupied her very little. From a demographic point of view, in modern times and now it has brought and continues to cause harm rather than benefit. Of course, there are exceptions.

Many people are now convinced that children will not bring them happiness. Most likely they are wrong. Perhaps educating them in this area would be helpful.

It is obvious that pregnancy, childbirth and child care cause inconvenience, suffering, and anxiety. Raising a child, especially when combined with work, is associated with lack of sleep and overwork. The economic situation of a family with children worsens compared to those without children. This is not to say that the belief in a negative relationship between having children and happiness is not based on anything. Early studies on this issue found a drop in happiness, life satisfaction after childbirth, and many others.

More recent studies that distinguish between groups of respondents and rely on time series of changes in these estimates lead to different conclusions. Children bring happiness to married persons. Cohabitees, divorced people, and never-married people experience less satisfaction in life. Happiness and life satisfaction begin to increase long before the moment of conception (4 years), reaches a maximum at the time of childbirth, then decreases, but still exceeds the level of these feelings in childless men and women. Well-off women who give birth late receive slightly greater satisfaction than those who give birth early. The first child gives the greatest happiness. A third child often does not increase life satisfaction. In old age, the difference between women with children and those without children disappears (in the USA and Russia, this may not be the case). The husband is more happy about the birth of a boy than a girl. Subsequent children do not reduce his satisfaction with life. These results were obtained using data from Denmark, Germany, the UK and the USA.

A survey of women over 45 and men over 50 in Hungary yielded the following results. Childless people in 90% of cases regret not having children; those who have one child would like to have more in 70% of cases; parents of two children - in 20% of cases.

People should be offered multiple fertility support options so they can choose an option that fits their life goals.

Pictures of the world and their core value systems determine people’s life goals and, indirectly, fertility. The picture of the world is determined by genotype, material environment, family upbringing, information

mation emanating from the small group in which they are included, mass information emanating from professional informants, the state in the form of propaganda and coercion. It includes metaphysical elements.

It is rare that a family is able to withstand external pressure.

People's life goals are varied and change throughout history. Until modern times, men (of the dominant group) strived for exploits, glory, virtue, and holiness5. Gradually, the glory of an artist and scientist is added to the glory of a warrior. Labor is not highly valued. In the 18th century knightly morality gives way to bourgeois morality. Nowadays people strive for wealth, power, success.

In Russia, changes occurred more slowly, but recently we have caught up with the English-speaking countries and have surpassed Western Europe.

Our high school students at the beginning of the 20th century. chose their future profession based on interest in business and altruistic considerations, only 1% aspired to wealth. In the 1960-1970s. people believed that personal happiness comes from useful work (96%), good health (85%), family and children (73%). In 1982 and again in 1997, using a unified methodology (method of unfinished sentences) under the leadership of V.B. Olshansky conducted a study of the values ​​and attitudes of secondary school students (grades 6-10). During this period, the share of mentions of moral aspirations as the main problem in life decreased by 6 times; the share of those focusing on entering universities and acquiring professions fell from 18.8% in 1982 to 10.45% in 1997. The desire for money has increased fourfold. Sociological surveys lead to the conclusion that modern youth rarely choose to create a family as a goal, preferring the pursuit of prosperity even in the age range of 19-30 years, which is most suitable for childbearing. M.G. Leontyev for young people aged 17-19 years in a provincial city gives the following distribution by life goals: live in abundance - 26%, get a good job - 13%, get a good education - 9%, earn a lot of money - 8%, buy expensive things - 7%, to have your own apartment - 3%, to start your own business - 2%, to provide a future for children - 8%. All these goals ultimately come down to increasing well-being (76%). They strive to create a good family - 24%.

At the same time, fertility support in a form that allows you to combine work and childcare will be more attractive than time-extended benefits for career-oriented parents. Parents with three children are unlikely to be interested in nurseries and kindergartens.

In addition to the two groups considered, many others can be distinguished. For example, there are rich and poor, those who know and those who do not know English language, criminals and law-abiding citizens.

Nowadays, fertility support is expressed in the form of many small payments and benefits, the receipt of which requires significant effort from parents who already have many worries. It would be necessary to

5 What life goals did other groups pursue?

it's harder to say.

present people with several simple but different options.

It was shown above that the funds allocated to support the birth rate are insufficient to restore simple reproduction. Childlessness tax combined with payments to parents -best way fertility support, which does not require additional budget expenditures.

From the weakness of the human mind noted above, it follows, in particular, that the optimization of demographic policy should not go beyond the boundaries of purely demographic issues. Issues of increasing or decreasing the absolute amount of state support are not discussed below. A demographer cannot argue that, for example, defense spending should be reduced and fertility support increased. In the case of a childlessness tax, this requirement is met.

The Internet community and the Duma are extremely negative about the tax on childlessness6, but do not object so strongly to tax deductions and benefits for families with children.

Opponents of the childlessness tax put forward a number of arguments: the tax will be discriminatory, infringe on the rights of citizens and violate articles of international law, the constitution, and laws of the Russian Federation. People suffering from physiological infertility will suffer. They will have to bring relevant certificates.

“The unethical and even immoral nature of the childlessness tax is obvious. Childlessness (I'm not talking about physiological childlessness) is a person's choice. With his choice he does not make anyone worse, he does not take anything away from anyone, he does not make anyone unhappy.” All this seems frivolous to us7.

A childlessness tax combined with payments to parents appears to be the best means of economic support for fertility. This happens because he essentially also withdraws the rent that arises from the refusal to bear children (investment in the future).

This idea was put forward and substantiated by P. Demeny. It comes down to granting the right to vote to children, and the implementation of the right is entrusted to

6 State Duma deputy A.V. advocated the introduction of a tax on childlessness. Chuev, chairman All-Russian organization entrepreneurs "Business Russia" B.Yu. Titov, Archpriest Dmitry Smirnov.

7 It is enough to call the tax mandatory contributions to the birth support fund, and most of these arguments will disappear.

People suffering from physiological infertility present some problems. However, now not all of them suffer from this. Judging by the widespread use of voluntary sterilization, there are few of them. They should be given the right to be exempt from tax, but this right does not have to be exercised. They have the opportunity to raise a child or pay tax, comforted by the fact that it actually goes to the children. In any case, mandatory health insurance, mandatory contributions V Pension Fund are more infringing on freedom than the childlessness tax. The author of the above quote forgets about the unborn children, who were deprived of the right to life, and about the born, who will be forced to support and protect in old age, except for their parents and their peers who abstained from childbearing.

parents or guardians. This idea was put forward much earlier and later.

Secular humanists consider children subhuman. They can be killed during the fetal stage. Within a month after birth, the murder of a baby is classified as a special type and is punished more leniently than the murder of an adult8. A child under 10 years of age cannot speak in court. The life of a teenager is valued lower than the life of an adult. Until he reaches adulthood, he is deprived of the right to vote in elections at all levels. Legislators are not confused by either these facts or contradictions with Art. 2 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child and Art. 20, 38, 45 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation.

This measure seems reasonable and useful. The author is not a supporter of radical reforms and believes that it should be implemented at the regional level and see what comes of it.

Other Fertility Support Methods

The options considered are not exhaustive possible ways fertility support.

In history, we observe a continuous expansion of the scope of government intervention in public life. Each step in this direction solves some specific problems, but usually ignores the side effects of changing the environment in which a person acts on his behavior.

1. People now have ample opportunities to prevent conception and avoid caring for a child: sterilization, vaginal and oral contraceptives, abortion (fetal murder), refusal to raise a child immediately after birth. The ability to avoid childbearing has a negative effect on fertility. In dying nations governmental support these actions are unnatural. This activity and medicine have nothing in common. Hippocrates was right.

2. A.N. Koshelev proposes measures to reform the pension system and give teenagers the right to work. These are reasonable proposals.

3. Measures against drug addiction, alcoholism and other types of abnormal behavior are necessary. Drug addicts and alcoholics have a variety of negative effects on society, including reducing the birth rate by 28%9. However, this is a subject of study of criminology rather than demography. In addition, state policy towards groups with deviant behavior has a strong impact on the quality of offspring, but this issue is beyond the scope of this study.

4. We provided rough estimates of the negative impact of twenty-one factors on fertility: 14 material and 7 informational.

Such assessments can and should be taken into account by specialists in other fields when they make recommendations to the authorities. For example, we are witnessing reforms in education. The author does not take the liberty of speaking out about the quality of reforms, but

8 The number of such murders increased tenfold after the law was passed.

9 The birth rate among alcoholics is quite high.

considers it his duty to state that the transition to eleven years of schooling from ten years reduces the birth rate by 2-3%.

A human life in the United States is now valued by the government at $1-3 million. Half a million children are born in Russia every year. Hence, the transition to 11-year secondary education brings losses of $22 billion per year due to a decrease in the birth rate.

In Russia there is no decently substantiated assessment of human life by the authorities. This estimate is related to gross domestic income per capita and should be reduced for Russia. At the same time, the transition effect must be reduced to $10 billion. It is possible that the reformers did not conduct a comprehensive assessment of the reforms being carried out, but simply imitated a dying Europe - and in vain.

5. To develop an optimal policy for supporting fertility, experience is needed, and science does not have the ability to conduct experiments in this area. The joint work of government and science in the form of an order from the government for detailed plans seems promising regional systems fertility support by reputable demographers. Experiments on groups of people are better than experiments on nations.

LITERATURE

1. Tyndik A.O. Review of modern family policy measures in countries with low fertility // SPERO. 2009. No. 12. P. 157-176.

2. Macdonald P. Low birth rate and the state: policy effectiveness // Low birth rate in Russian Federation: challenges and strategic approaches: materials of the International. seminar. M., 2006. P. 27-56.

3. Kim W. Will Pronatalist Policy Work? The Case of South Korea. URL: http://www.brown.edu/Departments/Economics/2013-undergrad_the-ses/wookinKim thesis.pdf (accessed: 05/15/2015).

4. Bonoli G. The impact of social policy on fertility: evidence from Switzerland // Journal of European Social Policy. 2008. V. 18. No. 1. P. 6477.

5. Lindsay P., Norman D. Information processing in humans. M.: Mir, 1974. P. 485-487.

6. Simon H.A. How big is a chunk // Science. 1974. No. 183.

7. Semevsky F.N. Changing opinions. 2009 // Moshkov Library. URL: samlib.ru/s/semewskij_fedor.../izmeneniemnenij3_1doc.shtml (access date: 05/16/2015).

8. Aronson E., Pratkanis E.R. The Age of Propaganda: Mechanisms of Persuasion, Everyday Use and Abuse. SPb.: Prime-EVROZNAK, 2003. 384 p.

9. Personality psychology: dictionary-reference book / ed. P. Ermine, T. Titarenko. Kyiv: “Ruta”, 2001 // Psychological Library. URL: psylib.org.ua/books/hjelz01/txt20.htm (access date: 05/16/2013).

10. Lowenstein G., Sicherman N. Do workers prefer increasing wage profiles? // J. Labor Economics. 1991. V. 9. No. 1. R. 67-84.

11. Davydov D.V., Tarasov A.A. Models of consumer behavior: experimental testing in regional conditions // Management in socio-economic systems. 2003. T. 2. Issue. 6. URL: http://www.khstu.ru/rus/ics/ics_pdf/N06_08.pdf (access date: 05/16/2015).

12. Kohler H.-P., Behrman J., Skytthe A. Partner + children = happiness? The effects of partnerships and fertility on well-being // Population and Development Review. 2005. V. 31. P. 407-445.

13. Angeles L. Children and Life Satisfaction // J. of Happiness Studies. 2010. V. 11. No. 4. P. 523-538.

14. Baetschmann G., Staub E., Studer R. Does the stork deliver happiness? Parenthood and life satisfaction // Univ. Zurich, Dep. Economics. Working Papers: Department of Economics, University of Zurich, 2012. No. 94.

15. Herbst C.M., Ifcher J. The Increasing Happiness of Parents // Working Paper No. 2014-05-SCU-ECON 2014. URL: http://www.scu.edu/ business/economics/wpscue (accessed: 05.16.2015 ).

16. Kamarâs F. Fertility preferences versus actual behavior in Hungary // ed. by I.E. Kotowska, J. Jozwiak. Population of Central and Eastern Europe: Challenges and Opportunities. Warsaw: Statistical Publishing Establishment, 2003. P. 165-188.

17. Mironov B.N. Social history of Russia during the imperial period (XVIII - early XX centuries): the genesis of personality, democratic family, civil society and rule of law: in 2 volumes. St. Petersburg: Dm. Bulanin, 2000.

18. Beteva R. A. On the issue of erasing social differences in the understanding of the category of happiness in a socialist society // Questions of the development of socialist society. Sverdlovsk: Sverdl. and Nizhny Tagil. ped. Institute, 1971.

19. Olshansky V.B. Schoolchildren in a changing society (1982-1997) / ed. S.G. Klimova, N.Yu. Volzhskaya // ESM. 1999. URL: http://ecsocman.hse.ru/data/023/071/1232/013.pdf (access date: 05.15.2015).

20. Rogozin D. Goals and claims of youth // FOM database. URL: http://bd.fom.ru/report/cat/val_/youngvalue/d047724# (access date: 05/15/2015).

21. Leontyeva M.G. Moral values ​​of future management personnel as part of modern youth. 2009. URL: ich.tsu.ru/Grants/Conferences/MFU/03Sect/Leontieva.doc (access date: 05/15/2015).

22. Demeny P. Pronatalist Policies in Low-Fertility Countries: Patterns, Performance and Prospects // Population and Development Review. 1986. V. 12. P. 335-358.

23. Semashko L., Devit M. Project “Law of Children’s Suffrage” of the Russian Federation. Children's suffrage is the key to solving childhood problems. St. Petersburg, 2004. URL: http://www. peacefromharmony.org/?cat=ru_c&key=155 (date of access: 05/15/2015).

24. Koshelev A.N. Necessary measures state policy to overcome demographic crisis and the extinction of the indigenous population of Russia in the 21st century. // Report at the All-Russian Forum “The Sanctity of Motherhood”. 2012. URL: http://www.demographia.ru /articles_N/index.html?idR=5&idArt=2169 (access date: 05/15/2015).

Semevski F.N. SUPPORT OF FERTILITY

Saving of the people should be considered as the main task of the government policy. Support of the fertility must be based on the fundamentals of the human population dynamics theory, macroeconomics and psychology. Birth rate boosting should be combined with the condemnation of celibacy and childlessness. People must have a choice of the boosting rate form, and the population policy must be specific for each region. Now the ruling groups prefer measures having kind of encouragement rather than coercion or prohibition. In countries with high GDP per capita observed dependence of the total fertility rate (TFR) of the intensity of support for the birth rate, expressed as % of GDP. Causation efforts to support the birth rate and the rate of total fertility (RTF) can have the opposite direction, in places where the rate of total fertility (RTF) below, efforts to support the birth rate may be higher. As a result, the effect of supporting the birth rate must be low. Support fertility expressed in the form of many small payments and benefits, the preparation of which requires the parents already have a lot of concerns, a significant effort. The funds allocated to support the birth rate, insufficient for the recovery of simple reproduction. Family tax payments in conjunction with the parents is the best way to support the birth rate, which does not require additional budget expenditures.

Key words: demographic policy; demography; cultural heritage; economics; GDP.

Semevsky Fedor Nikolaevich, Institute of Geography of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russian Federation, Doctor of Biological Sciences, leading researcher, e-mail: [email protected]

Semevski Fedor Nikolaevich, Institute of Geography of Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russian Federation, Doctor of Biology, Leading Scientific Worker, e-mail: [email protected]

Vladimir Putin, who has not yet announced his presidential candidacy, has already promised gifts to the population. Starting in 2018, families with children will receive new benefits, a mortgage subsidy program, and maternity capital will be extended. The price of gifts is more than 200 billion rubles. The money has already been included in the draft budget for 2018–2020. - in the presidential reserve.

The measures should stimulate the birth rate, Putin explained. After the baby boom of 2000, it began to fall: in January - September 2017 it practically did not grow in annual terms, and the natural population decline exceeded 100,000 people against natural increase for the same period in 2016 by 18,000 people.

Money for the firstborn

From 2018, families giving birth to their first child will receive a monthly subsistence minimum for the child until he is one and a half years old. This minimum is different for each region, but on average in 2018–2020. will exceed 10,000 rubles. The assistance will be targeted - only poor families will be able to count on benefits. In total, the government will spend more than 144 billion rubles on this.

It is unclear who should be considered poor, a federal official admits: without a system of a unified register of people and households, it is unclear real structure and poverty level. You can do without a register, argues Tatyana Maleva, director of the Institute of Social Analysis and Forecasting of RANEPA: we are talking about people who do not have enough money for current consumption. If a family's income is less than 1.5 times the poverty level, it can get into the program, she says. In the first half of 2017, 14.4% of the total population had incomes below the subsistence level.

People are already receiving benefits for caring for their first child up to one and a half years old. But in the second quarter of 2017 it was slightly above 3,000 rubles. The new allowance can become a serious measure of support, Maleva believes: many people even receive wages below the subsistence level, and families cannot decide, let alone a second or third child, or even a first. The number of families with two or three children is growing faster than families without them, she says. For a family in the region that is on the verge of poverty, this is a great help, agrees another federal official.

Capital for drinking?

Another measure is the extension of the maternity capital program until the end of 2021 (previously it was supposed to end at the end of 2018). The purposes for which such money can be spent will also expand: families in particular need will be able to receive monthly payments (the same amount as the new benefits for the first child) until the child turns one and a half years old. Capital can also be spent on nannies caring for children.

The measure could turn the program into a new benefit, the official is skeptical, but it will not be spent on children, but on alcohol. Now, of the three possible goals - education of the child, improvement living conditions or replenishing the funded part of the mother’s pension - most often the money is spent on housing. But not every family needs it and can afford it, argues Maleva: with the crisis, incomes fall and many do not even have enough money for food. " Individual families They really can drink away their capital, but what, 146 million people are alcoholics?” she says, wondering why everyone has to suffer because of troubled families. Many people have been asking for permission to spend money on nurseries for a long time, says Maleva; however, without the construction of new nurseries, the measure may not work, she warns.

Mortgage at 6%

Modernization for children

50 billion rubles. will be allocated for the reconstruction and re-equipment of children's clinics. The situation with hospitals is already almost critical: 31% of hospitals and clinics do not have running water, 35.5% do not have sewerage, 40.5% do not have central heating, according to data from the Accounts Chamber. According to her calculations, in 13 years, without the allocation of money for updating, more than 70% of medical equipment will be impossible to use

For wealthier families, the government will revive the mortgage subsidy program. For those who will have a second and third child in 2018, a program will be launched to subsidize the mortgage interest rate. When buying a home on the primary market or refinancing mortgage loans they will be able to count on subsidized rates in excess of 6% per annum for three years from the date of issuance of the loan at the birth of the second child and five years for the third. Now the average mortgage rate is 10.5%, as follows from the Central Bank data, so the state will bear more than 4% of the cost of the loan. In 2018–2023 the program could cover over 500,000 families, Putin cited an estimate from the Ministry of Construction. The cost of the program is 10 billion rubles, says the official.

In 2015–2016 a subsidy program was already in place at 12% per annum (the state compensated the borrower for the difference between this amount and the bank’s rate). Anyone could use it, but only for an apartment in a new building. The share of loans issued with its help exceeded 35% banking system, recalls Vadim Pakhalenko, director of the mortgage lending directorate at TKB Bank. But new program the audience will be smaller, he believes, the number of loans to such families will not exceed 7–8%. Banks will be able to increase their client base, Pakhalenko hopes, but the main limitation of the use of subsidies is the cost of real estate.

On November 28, 2017, Vladimir Putin held a meeting of the Coordination Council for the implementation of the National Strategy for Children in the Kremlin, during which he made several long-awaited statements regarding new measures social support families with children who will earn money starting January 2018.

In total, the President proposed 6 new social support measures:

Attention

More details about all these proposals can be found in the transcript of the meeting published on the official Kremlin website. Below are the main excerpts from this speech by Vladimir Putin.

Opening speech of the President November 28, 2017

Vladimir Putin at the meeting of the Coordination Council for the implementation of the National Strategy of Action for Children:

“You know that this year, in accordance with the Decree Decade of Childhood announced. I hope that the Government, in implementing this new project, will certainly ensure continuity with the objectives of the National Strategy for Action in the Interests of Children, and the Federation Council will continue to keep these issues in the area of ​​its constant attention. At the same time, I would especially emphasize that the importance of such areas as strengthening the institution of family and creating equal opportunities for the full development of all children remains the most important for us.

You know that since the beginning of the 2000s we have been closely and consistently engaged in demographic development issues. And thanks to thoughtful and, one might say, effective solutions, problems in this area are being consistently solved. Among the measures that were introduced and which are still working, the maternity capital program played a special role. Much has already been done in this regard; the birth rate has begun to rise. Having two children in a family has become a stable trend. Decreased infant mortality“Thanks to the creation of a system of perinatal centers, first of all, it was possible to achieve positive indicators of natural population growth, which, frankly speaking, no one expected, but it happened.”

“Today we need to take a set of measures that will stabilize and prevent a decline in Russia’s population in the coming decade. This requires active, consistent work in all areas - both to reduce mortality and to stimulate the birth rate. In fact, we need reboot our demographic development policy».

“As for the birth rate, it comes to the fore support for large families, families with modest income, creating additional incentives for the birth of a second and third child.

It is also necessary to pay Special attention young families. These, as a rule, are families with low incomes, because these are young people who are either still studying or have just entered the workforce; their incomes are usually very modest. This often holds back the birth of the first child, the appearance of the first child.”

What measures have been proposed by the President since 2018?

Vladimir Putin:“We have, frankly, discussed various measures for quite a long time, the time has come to make a decision and announce these proposed new measures. To support the birth rate, I propose to begin implementing a number of new measures to support Russian families as early as January 2018:

Namely, funds from maternity capital can be received in the form of monthly payments to those families who are especially in need. The same targeted approach will apply here as with payments for the first child. That is, payments will be determined in the amount of the subsistence minimum for a child in the region and for families with incomes that do not exceed one and a half times the subsistence minimum for the working population. Also until the child reaches one and a half years old.

In addition, it will now be possible to use maternity capital to pay for preschool education services (or rather, for child care and supervision) from the age of two months. I know that this measure is in great demand. In particular, the mother will be able to continue working or education after the birth of the child.

- Third direction. As you know, a decision has already been announced to expand the number of regions that will receive co-financing from federal budget to pay benefits for the third child. Such benefits have been paid since 2013. Children under three years of age are eligible. The criteria for the need of families, as well as the procedure for assigning payments, are established by the legislation of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

At the same time, let me remind you that co-financing from the federal budget goes to those regions where there is an unfavorable situation. demographic situation and the total fertility rate is below the Russian average. IN this year 50 regions of the Russian Federation took advantage of such co-financing conditions.

From January 1, 2018, 60 constituent entities of the Russian Federation will be able to receive support. Those regions where, on average, one woman gives birth to two or fewer children will be able to receive it, that is, the regional birth rate increases to two. As I already said, such a change in the coefficient will make it possible for 60 regions to receive federal assistance to pay benefits for a third child.

- Fourth. It is extremely important - especially for young families and families with children in general - housing issue. I propose to launch a special mortgage lending program. Families in which a second or third child is born since January 1, 2018 will be able to take advantage of its opportunities. By purchasing housing on the primary market or refinancing previously obtained mortgage loans, families will be able to count on government subsidized interest rates in excess of 6 percent per annum. Let me explain, for example, today the weighted average rate in the mortgage lending market is, according to the Bank of Russia, 10.05 percent. That is, in this case, the state takes on more than 4 percent of the cost of the loan. According to the Ministry of Construction, in the next five years this program could cover over 500 thousand families.

I'll tell you more. The mortgage lending program will be urgent in nature, providing for subsidizing the interest rate in excess of 6 percent upon the birth of a second child - for 3 years from the date of issuance of the loan; third child - within 5 years from the date the loan was issued. Questions may arise: the program will be coming to an end, and the child has just been born, what in this case. In the event of the birth of a third child during the subsidy period, but no later than December 31, 2022 inclusive, the subsidy period will be extended by 5 years - from the expiration date of the subsidy for the loan received in connection with the birth of the second child. In the event of the birth of a third child after the expiration of the subsidy period for the loan received in connection with the birth of the second child, but no later than December 31, 2022 inclusive, the provision of the subsidy is renewed starting from the date of birth of the third child.

- Fifth. We have practically solved the problem with places in kindergartens. Now we need to eliminate queues in nurseries - for children from two months to three years. This needs to be done as quickly as possible. Currently, applications have been received from parents of more than 326 thousand children. The same number of nursery places is planned to be created in the next two years.

- Sixth. We need to substantively and consistently improve accessibility medical care children and, of course, improving its quality. I have already said many times, in last years a good leap has been made to create perinatal centers in the regions. However, the condition of most children's clinics and their equipment leaves much to be desired. There are problems with queues and making an appointment with the right specialist. This state of affairs also serves as a deterrent when deciding to have children. And in general it just needs to be corrected and improved.

In order to reconstruct children's clinics, overhaul them and equip them with equipment, preliminary calculations, more than 50 billion rubles will be required. It is obvious that the regions, taking into account even the assistance that we have provided them recently, will not be able to complete this work at their own expense. Therefore, in the next three years, the bulk of this amount - 10 billion per year - will be provided by the federal budget.

The government, together with the regions, needs to quickly work out a detailed schedule for the reconstruction and overhaul of children’s clinics, including outpatient departments of hospitals, as well as approve the terms of co-financing and the rules for selecting clinics, to do this taking into account the readiness of design estimates and, above all, the severity of the problem.”

“I am confident that the implementation of all the proposed measures will bring results. I repeat, we are talking about the future of the country, about ensuring that as many children as possible are born in Russia, and that their living conditions improve and medical care improves.”

“This is what I wanted to say at the beginning. Thanks a lot".

President of Russian Federation Vladimir Putin 28.11.2017

RedRocketMedia

Bryansk, Ulyanova street, building 4, office 414