The degree to which capital is tied to any particular country has decreased significantly, and at the same time the role of the financial sector has increased significantly.

At the same time, the role of states or their associations, such as the European Union, has significantly increased throughout the world, and a certain socialization of subjects is also observed economic activity. The latter is expressed in the consolidation of the role of transnational corporations and international financial and commodity exchanges, transnational banks.

If until the last quarter of the 20th century the role of private capital prevailed, now the public sector is increasingly important and market institutions world economy. States become the guarantor of economic stability of large corporations and actively use own funds to create enterprises. An often used approach is based on joint ownership individuals and the state as a subject of law and economic activity.

Development of the Russian economy at the present stage

Feature Russian development economy is a targeted combination various forms property. There are no specific tools for regulating the economy in the Russian Federation; each time, what is most optimal for the current situation is used. The same can be said about the methods of distribution of the national product.

The main way to participate in macroeconomic processes is export natural resources, not only hydrocarbons, which the country is rich in, but also various metals, as well as rare minerals. In addition, the products of chemical enterprises, equipment and machinery, agricultural products and different kinds weapons.

Since 2014, economic sanctions have had a negative impact on exports. Nevertheless, the Russian Federation remains the world's largest supplier of crude oil and natural gas.

If in the period before 2014 it was still possible to say that the presence of natural resources and literacy investment policy had a positive effect on the standard of living of the population, then during the period of tightening sanctions, downward changes in world oil prices, falling national currency and the ongoing economic crisis, the situation of the poorest segments of the population has become critical. Added to this is that domestic politics turned out to be incompatible with the development of small businesses. There is a widespread tendency towards the development of large farms and the curtailment of individual entrepreneurship.

The Russian state does not guarantee the low-income segments of the population any acceptable life.

Modern economic models in other countries of the world

What do the main ones look like? economic trends in other countries of the world?

In the USA and Europe, the ideology of the superiority of high-tech methods of creating wealth dominates. The state intervenes slightly in market processes, but retains a large amount of property. Entrepreneurial activity is actively encouraged, including small businesses. The service sector plays a big role. Social protection of the population leads to the fact that the issue of social inequality is no longer relevant. Serious attention is paid antimonopoly policy and the development of healthy competition.

In Japan, the state does not directly participate in economic activities, but retains control over most important aspects economic life. Particular attention is paid to personnel policy, and 45% public funds spent on social needs.

China remains a unique country where a market economy coexists with a command-administrative management system. The incomes of different segments of the population do not differ significantly, and the stimulation of entrepreneurship is greatly influenced by the Chinese living outside the country.

Section I Introduction to Economics

How to overcome the terminological barrier?

If someone is studying economics for the first time, then he does not understand many of the terms used in this science. A term is a word or phrase that denotes a specific concept. In turn, a concept is a thought that generalizes the characteristics of an object or phenomenon.

The simplest relationship is this: a term denotes one concept. However, often a term corresponds to two (or more) related concepts. In this case, it is important to understand the differences between these types of concepts.

Many sciences often use foreign terms that once arose in different countries. Although such terms have been preserved, nowadays they have often lost their original meaning and denote new concepts.

What is said here directly relates to the term “economy”. This term originated in Greece in the 4th century. BC. It was derived from the Greek word " oikonomike", which denoted the art of managing a household. Then we were talking about the household of a slave owner, where slaves without rights worked.

IN Currently, this term denotes two new basic concepts:

economic activity in all its forms (households of legally free persons, business, public sector in the national economy, etc.);

science that studies economic activity.

IN In the initial section of the textbook we will find out the modern content of the economy in the two indicated directions of its development.

Essence and role real economy

1. When and how did the real economy emerge?

IN domestic and foreign textbooks on economics (especially economic theory) nothing is said about when and why human economic activity arose. Some students give their own answer to this question. They claim

that economics was “discovered” by an outstanding scientist Ancient Greece Aristotle. But this answer mistakenly identifies Aristotle’s definition of the term “economy” with the practical process of creating a real (from the Latin realis - existing in the actual state of affairs) economy.

However, it is very important to get a correct understanding of the economy that existed from the very beginning and is developing at the present time. Otherwise, it is impossible to determine the historical periods of development of people’s economic activities, to find out qualitative changes in different periods economic development, including the 21st century.

Therefore, an intellectual task 1.1 arises in the lecture (the first number indicates the section number, the second - the task number. In each topic, tables and figures are indicated by one consecutive number).

 Task 1.1. When and how did the economy emerge?

To solve this problem you need:

a) use factual data from historical science about the beginning of the existence of human society;

b) know what abilities people needed to organize economic activities;

c) establish the reasons that prompted a person to constantly engage in economics.

Readers who have completed this task can compare the results obtained with the answer placed at the end of Section I of the lecture course.

Continuing to clarify the essence and role of the real economy, we will move on to clarify its main goal and ways to achieve it.

2. the main objective economic activities of people

There is no doubt that the purpose of the economy is to create the goods that are necessary for people's livelihoods. Good is usually understood as something that satisfies a person’s needs and meets his life goals. All the variety of benefits can be divided into two types:

A) natural goods- products of nature (forest, land, fruits of plants and trees, etc.);

b) economic benefits- the result of creative activity of people.

In turn, natural goods used by people are divided into two types:

ready-made consumer goods, called “gifts of nature”;

Natural resources(funds, reserves) from which the means of production are created.

Concerning economic benefits, then they are divided into two types:

1) means of production- natural substances used for the manufacture of consumer goods;

2) consumer goods- consumer goods. A visual representation of the interdependence of all types of goods

gives rice 1.

		Natural benefits
Natural objects			Natural resources
consumption			means of production
(“gifts of nature”)
			Means of production
			(economic benefits)
			Consumables
			(economic benefits)

Rice. 1. Relationship between types of natural and economic benefits

Shown in Fig. 1 difference between two types of goods material production indicates two main divisions:

a) production of means of production; b) production of consumer goods.

To better understand this division of production of goods, let's try to solve the following problem. To do this you will need to use personal experience and business practices.

 Task 1.2. Which economic goods are means of production and which are consumer goods:

Now, having some ideas about the internal structure and results of economic activity, we will proceed to the important question of the importance of the main link of the real economy - production.

3. The importance of production for economic development

The most important principle (from the Latin principium - basis) of economic activity is to ensure its continuity. The continued maintenance of human life depends on this. In my opinion

like this a vital necessity is ensured thanks to the non-stop development of production.

Production serves as the initial link in the entire economic chain. Let's take a simple peasant farm as an example. The manufacturer first grows, say, tomatoes. He then distributes them: he keeps some for his family and sells the rest. At the market, tomatoes that are surplus to the family's needs are exchanged for other household products (for example, meat, shoes). Finally, material goods reach their final destination - personal consumption. The entire chain of economic relations is shown in Fig. 2.

Rice. 2. Sequence of business actions

From the above, the following conclusions arise:

all other components of the economy depend decisively on the amount of goods created -how much food is distributed, exchanged and consumed;

volume and quality of products manufactured in production

first of all determine level and quality of life of society members.

Given the decisive role of production in economic development, it is important to understand the question: what could be the possible changes production activities? In this regard, it is proposed to solve the following problem.

 Task 1.3. Graphically depict the main variants of the dynamics of production! stva.

After comparing three options for possible changes in the state of production, you can easily find the most preferable change. It is the progressive development of production activities. What does this progress mean?

4. New needs as the driving force of the economy

Now we have to consider such an integral link of the real economy, which is included in the mechanism of its movement. It's about people's needs. Needs are the need or lack of something necessary to maintain human life, social group and society as a whole.

Modern civilization (the current stage of development of the material and spiritual culture of society) knows many different needs. They are divided into the following types:

physiological needs(in food, clothing, housing, etc.);

need for security(protection from external enemies and criminals, help with illness, etc.);

need for social contacts(communication with people who have the same interests; in friendship, etc.);

need for respect(respect from other people, acquiring a certain social position);

need for self-development(improving all capabilities and abilities).

Very characteristic feature human needs is their elasticity (flexibility, extensibility). This predetermines their rapid and significant variability. It is also important to note: with regard to the upper limit of the growth of all needs and demands, man is strikingly different from any animal whose ultimate desire is to satisfy only natural biological needs. People do not have such a limiter.

Under favorable economic and other conditions, needs are most capable of elevation - unlimited growth in quantitative and qualitative terms.

Each person is characterized at certain periods of his life by a tendency towards increased needs. In this regard, the reader of the textbook, apparently, can solve another intellectual problem.

 Problem 1.4. How do the needs in society rise?

Solving this problem allows us to better understand the following circumstances. With the spiral movement of production and consumption (see Fig. 1 in Answers to intellectual tasks), the process of raising people’s needs begins vertically (raising them in qualitative terms) and horizontally (the necessary expansion of the production of new generations of economic goods).

However, with such a rise in the level of needs of society, it is discovered that the previously achieved level of production is not able to satisfy the new ones. social needs. As a result, it arises and worsens main contradiction real economy, i.e. The discrepancy between the new state of needs and outdated production is deepening.

It is quite obvious that to resolve such a contradiction it is necessary to radically restructure production. How to achieve this economic transformation?

5. Ways to transform production

Some authors of textbooks on economic theory define the production capabilities of society in a unique way. They argue that people's needs grow without limit, but economic resources are always limited. They see a way out of this impasse in the following changes. When new needs arise, it is necessary to redistribute resources: reduce the production of previous goods in order to create new products.

Is this judgment true or false?

To find the correct answer to this question, it is important for us to solve the following problem.

 Problem 1.5. What are the driving forces of production?

After finding out the answer to the intellectual task, we can understand what and how should be changed when transforming the economy.

Depending on the role of production factors in economic development, they can be divided into: traditional and progressive.

Traditional are those that arose in previous periods time and increasingly outdated conditions of economic activity.

Progressive conditions are those that are many times superior to weakly changing factors in both qualitative and quantitative terms.

From the history of the real economy it is known that from the moment of its inception and for about nine thousand years, physical labor of people and manual labor tools used for the development of natural resources were traditional and predominant for production. And only in the XVI–XVIII centuries. A new era has begun in the development of factors of production. Humanity, on an ever larger scale, began to use the creative power of a qualitatively completely new factor of progress - the achievements of science and technology.

Science and technology gave rise to revolutionary changes in production processes, which began to be carried out through the use of machines, chemical and other methods. The limited capabilities of human power were replaced by the forces of nature, routine ways of working - by the conscious application of natural science. As a result, qualitative transformations have sharply accelerated in accordance with the newly emerging needs of society. Such transformations were first quantitatively measured in special economic indicators. They became indicators of labor productivity and production efficiency.

Labor productivity measured by the number of products created in a certain time by a worker. It is characteristic that if in the initial period of the existence of agriculture one worker could create products for two people, then in the 20th century. at most

In developed countries, one worker created food for 20 people.

Production efficiency (E p ) can be measured using the indicator:

Ep = V/R,

where B is the volume of production (at the enterprise, in the country); P is the amount of resources expended.

From all that has been said, the following conclusions are obvious. If new needs arise in society, they become a powerful driver of technical progress. In turn, the progress of technology and technology causes a completely natural saving of resources per unit of production, or an increase in production efficiency.

However, this cause-and-effect relationship is countered by a completely different trend. The fact is that, firstly, the increase in needs over a certain period of time ends when a certain maximum level is reached. Needs cease to develop vertically and horizontally. Secondly, the beginning technical progress develops unevenly and exhausts its capabilities over a certain period. All this again leads to an exacerbation of the main contradiction of practical economics. Thus, historically, the need to move the production of economic goods to a higher orbit is maturing.

For the whole economic history three stages of production development arose (three orbits of their movement emerged). Their differences from each other can be seen in table. 1–3.

	Table 1
First stage of production
General signs of stages	Their features
The technological revolution that gave birth to	Neolithic revolution (tools of the new
	Stone Age) - 10 thousand years ago
New area of ​​economy	Agriculture (2/3 employees)
	and craft
Using scientific achievements	The beginnings of science are not connected in any way
	with production
Energy sources in production	Manual labor of people
Transfer of information	In oral and handwritten form

As is known from Topic I, 10 thousand years ago the Neolithic (characteristic of the New Stone Age) revolution took place, and with it the agrarian (agricultural) revolution. People have learned to polish stone tools well and use them to create

various products made of bone and wood. The agricultural revolution was based on two great discoveries - agriculture (initially in the form of primitive tillage and grain crops) and pastoralism (the domestication of wild animals and breeding them as livestock). Later, food products were created using more productive metal technical means (the plow and the wheel were invented).

The productive economy favored a sharp increase in population. During the Neolithic era, the growth rate of the world's population almost tripled. In modern times, population growth accelerated even more, and the level of its needs increased. This came into sharp conflict with the limited capabilities that are inherent in production using manual labor. This contradiction was overcome at the second stage of production (Table 2).

Table 2

Second stage of production

General signs of stages	Their features
Technological revolution,	Industrial Revolution
which gave rise to the stage	(60s of the XVIII century - 60s of the XIX century)
New area of ​​economy	Industry (2/3 employees)
data usage	The scientific foundations of the revolution arose in the 17th–18th centuries.
	(long before industry)
Energy sources	Energy revolution: at the first stage -
in production	steam technology (steam locomotives, steamships) - XVIII century,
	at the second stage (the turn of the 19th – 20th centuries) -
	electricity, internal combustion engines
	(cars, planes, etc.)
Transfer of information	On paper media(invention
	printing in the 15th century) and radio

The second stage of production is characterized by the following qualitatively new processes:

the main thing is mechanized industrial production;

industry based on machine technology transforms other important sectors of the economy;

rapid growth of cities: they are home to up to 2/3 of all residents of the country;

important was the transition to new energy sources (from steam technology to the use of electricity and internal combustion engines).

Associated with the new stage of the economy was a new great growth in population: the world population (650 million in 1650) increased sevenfold.

However, the achievements of the industrial economy are clearly insufficient for modern stage development of needs. Indeed, with mechanized labor, a worker often controls one machine. And he is not able to constantly ensure high quality products, without which it is impossible to create the latest technology. Industrially the developed countries the need for natural raw materials and energy resources began to become more and more acute. As a result, a deep contradiction arose between relatively limited production capabilities and a completely new - in quantitative and qualitative terms - level of needs. This contradiction is resolved during the course that began in the 40s and 50s. XX century grandiose on- scientific and technical revolution (NTR), which opened an unusually promising era of economic development. Instead of traditional natural substances and fuels, it created many new (unparalleled in the biosphere) types of materials and energy carriers (Table 3).

	Table 3
Third stage of production
General signs of stages	Their features
Technological revolution,	The beginning of scientific and technological revolution in the 40s and 50s. XX century
which gave rise to the stage	The first stage is the leading industry - electronic.
	Second stage (1970s - beginning of the 21st century) -
	microelectronic information revolution
New area of ​​economy	Services (2/3 employees)
data usage	Scientific and technological revolutions merged together
Energy sources	New source electricity - nuclear power plants (nuclear)
in production
Transfer of information	At the first stage - large computers.
	At the second stage - microelectronic
	(personal computers, Internet)

The third stage of production is characterized by the following features:

The service sector is experiencing the greatest development, where it employs 60–70% of all employees;

science becomes a direct factor of production. On the basis of its achievements, benefits are created that do not exist in nature;

Achievements of computer science and computer technology are being widely introduced in all sectors of the economy and in everyday life. This allows-

Kazan Social and Legal Institute

Elabuga branch

Essay

Discipline: Economic Theory”

On the topic: “Modern Russian economy”

Elabuga
Table of contents

Introduction........................................................ ........................................................ .......... 2

1. Modern Russian economy.................................................... ................. 5

2. New economic system in Russia.................................................... .............. 8

Conclusion................................................. ........................................................ ..... 15

List of used literature......................................................... ............... 16

Introduction

Spicy economic crisis, which many countries faced in the early 80s, required a restructuring of state regulation of the economy and a transition to the development of market relations. The main directions of reforms were privatization (transition state property into private hands), price liberalization, financial stabilization (fighting inflation, strengthening the national currency).

The stages of reform are developed by government departments. This is the definition goals and for this particular enterprise, choosing methods and priorities, searching for the least painful ways to transition to the market. A market economy is the result of a long historical development, which involves the formation of an appropriate infrastructure and legal framework. There must be profound changes in the system of values, motivation of economic behavior and business relations.

The roots of many of today's problems in Russia (the decline in production, inflation, the instability of the ruble, the crisis of non-payments) go back to the previously existing centralized economic system and its legacy - monopoly and technical backwardness.

The transition from a command economy to a market economy cannot be accomplished in a few days or months. This is a long transition period, measured in decades, which includes a number of successive stages. In Russia, the semi-spontaneous transition to the market has been going on for more than ten years.

The need for social reforms has been long overdue, which was expressed in attempts to carry out various economic reforms and experiments. But all these attempts did not go further than improving the existing system. As a result, the economic situation did not improve. A new, qualitatively different approach to understanding what had been achieved and to the future was required. In fact, if a huge country has significant natural and labor resources, solid intellectual potential, but does not have the necessary results, the reason must be sought in the social system itself.

The abstract consists of an introduction, two main chapters, a conclusion and a list of references.

1. Modern Russian economy

The entire history of mankind can be divided into separate components, which we will call socio-economic systems. They, being born, developing and then dying, pass from one to another. Such systems are limited in time and space, and have only a unique set of features and mechanisms of interaction between all its subjects. As a rule, the main difference between one system and another, in addition to cultural and technological ones, is the way resources are distributed.

Over the last century, Russia has twice experienced the change from one system to another. At the beginning of the century, this process took place in a violent way, when an experiment was carried out on an entire people, which ended in failure, or rather in tragedy, and showed the inconsistency of the system with a planned economy and forced (planned) distribution of resources, which adherents of communist ideas (or people those who covered their activities with these ideas are “deformed socialists”), therefore the process that we are witnessing - the process of changing the system - became natural.

It is obvious that the planned economy was unable to satisfy the needs of society; its “efficiency” did not allow the country not only to maintain its leading position in the world community, but also to provide normal living conditions for its citizens, and therefore the need arose to reconstruct the system. In the early 90s, Russia began a sharp transition to a market economy. The old structure of society and social relations is destroyed, and a new one is being built on its remains.

We can characterize the current state of the country as a transition economy. It is easy to identify the special features of such a system and see that they are all present at the present time:

Temporary and intermediate nature,

Heterogeneity,

Instability.

Russia in the 90s is a country with a transition economy. It is not difficult to prove this; we see that the process of changing systems is underway, and this allows us to say that after some time it will reach its logical conclusion.

In the country's economy one can still discern the remnants of developed socialism, although one can already talk about the predominance of market relations, but not yet developed, which is why we also call our economy mixed. And finally, we see that the transition process is extremely uneven, spasmodic and unstable, changing course depending on circumstances or policy (policies).

What is the process of changing one economic system another for a simple individual. In my opinion, this question is one of the most important in theory. transition economy. Let's try to answer it using a simple example from our life.

The overwhelming majority of the population of our country was brought up with the idea that there are countries abroad in which market relations dominate, and people there do not want to know anything about socialism, and it was believed that this was wrong. The free market in their minds was the embodiment of evil. I’m talking about those who really believed in communist ideas, now they are overwhelmingly pensioners or people who are already close to retirement, in our case this means the most politically active, and, more often than not, defending their former beliefs.

The market has arrived - a new generation has arrived, which has accepted the new system and is learning to live in it. From the above, we can conclude that the change in social economic relations resulted in a wide gap between generations. The population was divided into two parts - those who adapted and those who did not. It is almost impossible to change the thinking of an adult, which means that as long as those who have not adapted can influence the lives of others, the Russian economy will, to a greater or lesser extent, be in transition.

We must remember that the political-economic system that currently exists is defined as transitional, which means that it distinctive features are: crisis of the socio-economic system, instability of macroeconomic indicators, destruction of the old reproduction system in the absence of a new one, lag legislative framework from rapidly changing real economic relations. Which further complicates human perception of the new system.

Economic processes are underway - privatization, capital accumulation, the formation of internal markets, etc., but their progress depends on politicians, and not all of them support the idea of ​​market reforms. Now we have a “pseudo-market”, but we have a goal, the achievement of which should end the reforms in the country. Table 1 illustrates the previous statement.

Table 1

Our goal is the market

We currently have	Goal of change
In property relations, power prevails over right	Property relations of capitalist type
Dominance of monopolies	Competitive market
High level of capital export	Investments in the national economy
Transformation of the production structure during technical degradation	Innovative development of production
Arbitrariness of administration at enterprises	Social partnership and the “participatory economy”
High level of corruption	Rule of law, with a strong social policy
A divided society	Civil society

2. New economic system in Russia.

By the beginning of 1992, the command-administrative system that had existed for more than 70 years left behind a “rich” legacy:

Total nationalization of the economic sphere

Over-monopolization and deformation of the economic structure with an extremely high degree of militarization

Suppressed inflation

Hidden unemployment

Total shortage of goods and services

Lack of economic motives for work

The dominance of social dependency and paternalistic psychology of the overwhelming majority of the population

The main problems that must be solved during the transition period are privatization, macroeconomic stabilization, promotion of entrepreneurship, liberalization foreign economic relations. Necessarily - social politics aimed at protecting people with low incomes.

As is known, a market economy presupposes an interconnected system of markets: goods, labor, capital, etc. In this regard, the most important goals in the transition period are:

Development of a market for goods and services, the main feature of which is free pricing, when the overwhelming majority of products are produced in the private sector

Formation financial market, because without stocks, bonds and other valuable papers a market economy is unthinkable. Holders of securities have the opportunity not only to have additional sources of income, but also to become owners; and this reduces social tension in society.

Creation and regulation of the labor market. Indeed, in the labor market, as well as in the market of goods and services, the discrepancy between supply and demand is a rather painful thing.

Domestic economics Based on the transition to the market of other post-socialist countries, he identifies two approaches that can lead to the formation of a new economic system in post-Soviet Russia: evolutionary (China) and the “shock therapy” method (Poland). The differences between these options lie in the timing of systemic reforms and stabilization measures, the degree of coverage of the national economy by market mechanisms, the scope of regulatory functions of the state, etc.

TO general features evolutionary transition to a market economy include the following:

1. The beginning of the reform is associated with the establishment of a dynamic equilibrium in the consumer market, not only with the help of a more flexible price system, but primarily due to the rapid deployment in the private sector of the production of consumer goods and services and the saturation of the market with them.

2. Market relations initially cover the sphere of production and sales of consumer goods and only then extend to investment sectors.

3. Price liberalization is carried out at subsequent stages of reforms.

4. Carried out hard financial policy in order to prevent high inflation.

5. Private enterprise is encouraged.

An attempt at an evolutionary transition to a market in the Soviet Union in 1989-1991. did not take place due to the extreme delay in carrying out reforms (including due to utopian plans to implement the next model of “humane socialism”), the beginning of the total collapse of the old system (enterprises refused to fulfill government orders at prices set from above that were unfavorable for the manufacturer, and centrally distributed resources, forced economic ties were broken)

By the end of 1991 economic situation Russia has deteriorated so much that there is no other alternative than a qualitative breakthrough into a market economy. After the fall of the communist regime and the collapse of the USSR, the possibilities for evolutionary transformations were exhausted for Russia. The main prerequisites arose for moving towards the market according to the Eastern European version, the concentrated expression of which was the shock therapy model first developed and applied in Poland.

The shock therapy strategy includes two main directions:

1. anti-inflationary stabilization program

2. deep institutional reforms, primarily radical transformations of forms of ownership (privatization).

Supporters of shock therapy in Russia distinguish two stages in the implementation of their economic program. At the first stage (1-2 years), radical anti-inflationary measures are carried out in order to achieve market and financial equilibrium on this basis. At the second stage, the duration of which is determined to be approximately 10-15 years, it is planned to carry out the planned fundamental changes in the economy and ensure its recovery.

The shock therapy strategy is as follows. The main emphasis is on financial and economic stabilization as a means of achieving balance in the market, balance state budget. Reducing inflation and balancing the market are facilitated by a sharp reduction in the state budget deficit and an increase in loan interest above the inflation rate, which leads to an additional reduction in current demand. Increasing the interest rate on deposits simulates savings. As a result of all these measures, it is possible to ensure more rational price ratios individual goods, reflecting real demand.

However, the positive aspects of shock therapy lead to a sharp decline in the living standards of the population, a reduction in investment demand, and an increase in unemployment.

However, financial stabilization in Russian conditions turned out to be unattainable in a short period of time, primarily because the transition from suppressed inflation to open inflation, which occurred after price liberalization, immediately revealed its not monetary, but predominantly institutional character. It is the depth of deformation in the structure Russian economy, in the current Soviet period stereotypes of economic behavior made an inflationary explosion inevitable in Russia in the process of transition to a market economy.

Among the most important institutional changes in the Russian economic system carried out during shock therapy:

Price liberalization

Adoption of antimonopoly legislation

Transfer of enterprises to full commercial settlement, separation of finances of enterprises and the state

Elimination of traditional central planning

Deployment of small privatization

Development of legal and organizational foundations for large-scale privatization

Creating the basics of the system social protection etc

The main feature of all these transformations is to minimize state intervention in the economy in order to give room for its independent development. The state acts in the market as an ordinary participant.

Liberalization of prices.

Pricing reform involves the introduction of free prices and their dominance in most sectors of the economy. Government regulation prices are reduced to a minimum determined by social requirements.

Early price liberalization in Russia transition period led to their sharp growth. Enterprises and the population bore the burden of reducing the budget deficit and excess money emission.

Gradually, the effective demand of consumers turns into a regulator of production. This is evidence of the strengthening of market principles in the economy. It is becoming increasingly difficult to transfer any increase in costs to the price finished products, i.e. on the shoulders of consumers.

Financial stabilization.

State system financial institutions in 1992-94 was gradually transformed into a two-level banking structure: "state central bank– independent commercial banks". It was created from above: the former state banks turned into financial “empires”, and from below - private firms and citizens created new commercial banks.

The central problem of financial stabilization is inflation. A significant source of inflation is concessional loans. It is also impossible to overcome inflation without reducing the budget deficit.

The source of financing the budget deficit is the issue of government securities (OFZ, GKO). However, when accounting for treasury obligations in Central Bank additional money supply and "monetarization" occurs government debt"Financing the budget deficit becomes inflationary and leads to a disruption in the stability of monetary circulation.

The possibility of non-inflationary covering of the budget deficit largely depends on the timely and complete receipt of tax payments.

During the transition to a market, the following tax principles are introduced:

1. obligation to pay taxes

2. convenience and simplicity tax system for taxpayers and tax authorities

3. flexibility of the tax system in changing business conditions

4. differentiation of tax rates for various categories payers

5. avoidance of double taxation

Among the problems complicating financial stabilization, the crisis of non-payments occupies a special place. Non-payments paralyze the activities of enterprises. Their workers do not receive their salaries on time. The main method of overcoming non-payments is the rehabilitation of individual enterprises and structural restructuring of the economy as a whole.

Privatization and demonopolization.

Privatization in Russia at the first stage (from July 1, 1991 to July 1, 1994) was reduced in most cases to a formal change of owner without the technical development of production and resort to market management methods.

The second stage of privatization (real) involves the concentration of shares among a small layer of people in order to form specific groups owning controlling stake shares

Today it is necessary to develop a comprehensive program for the reconstruction of Russian enterprises. The most important problem here is finding investment. Only through investment can enterprises be seriously developed.

Thus, privatization can become an effective tool for structural policy.

Privatization contributes to the demonopolization of production. During the reorganization, unbundling and privatization of existing enterprises, small and medium-sized enterprises appear that enter the market with various goods and services.

Agrarian reform.

An integral part of the economic reform being carried out in Russia is the privatization of land and the reorganization of state and collective farms. Termination of the state monopoly on land occurs in the process of transfer land plots citizens and businesses.

The creation of peasant (farm) farms is the basis for the revival of the Russian class of landowners, the formation of owners. However, the operating conditions of farmers are deteriorating due to the financial and industrial instability of village residents, the inability to take out a soft loan, etc.

Integration into the world economy.

Great importance for development market economy has the formation of stable foreign economic relations, openness of the Russian market. There are two important areas of this integration: international trade and internationalization of production (with the attraction of foreign investment).

Changes that have taken place in Russia's foreign trade over the past last years, are radical in nature. Demonopolization carried out foreign economic activity.

The main achievement of the policy of economic liberalization has been preserved: saturation of the consumer market with goods. This is achieved to a large extent through imports, which account for about 40% of retail turnover.

The internationalization of production, in addition to attracting investment from abroad, has another aspect: entering the world market with domestic products and importing goods and services from other countries.

The new system for regulating foreign economic activity is characterized by strengthening economic and tariff methods of regulation and reducing the role of quantitative (quotas) restrictions on exports and imports.

Conclusion

The main result of the first stage of liberal reforms in Russia was a qualitative shift, a final break with the previous economic system and the formation of the foundations of a market economy.

At the same time, structural changes are much less profound than what is minimally necessary for the functioning of a market economy. Structural changes in the Russian economy are happening much more slowly than in other countries conducting shock therapy. The result is a very limited size of the private sector and a slow pace of development.

From the point of view of creating an effective market mechanism economic reforms in Russia should be carried out in two directions. The first includes institutional transformations - privatization, demonopolization, encouragement of entrepreneurship and private economic initiative, creation of a capital market and financial and banking system, implementation of agrarian reform and development of a social protection system adapted to the conditions of a market economy.

The second direction is the completion of economic liberalization, including wholesale and retail trade, monetary sphere and foreign economic activity.

These processes will be the most important content of a fairly long transition period, as a result of which the main institutions of a market economy will emerge and strengthen in Russia.

List of used literature

1. Zavyalov P. " Russian market through the eyes of a marketer" // Russian Economic Journal. 1995, No. 7.

2. Course of economic theory. Under general editorship prof. Chepurina M.N., Kiseleva E.A. Kirov. 1995.

3. Modern economics. Edited by Doctor of Economics Mamedova O.Yu. Rostov-on-Don. 1998.

4. Economics. Ed. Ph.D. Bulatova A.S. Moscow. 1996.

Having outlined and assessed the situation that has developed in the modern mainstream, we would like to conclude by placing neoclassics in the context of other areas of modern economic science and presenting a classification of the main schools and trends newest stage development of economic theory.

IN modern history economic teachings, it is necessary to clearly distinguish between scientific programs that are characterized only by a general, even innovative, formulation of questions and individual original conclusions, scientific schools, which appear in the form of an established unity of their own methodology, the theory itself and a practical program, and, finally, scientific directions that combine several scientific schools or consisting of a single but influential school.

Based on the experience of preparing the five-volume publication “World Economic Thought” and taking into account the data of the latest publications, we will try to offer our own vision of the evolution of the modern history of economic theory in the West.

The general idea of ​​the proposed tables is an attempt to connect the theoretical content of the main movements and schools of Western economic theory with socio-political practice, as was customary in many publications of domestic scientists. Theoretical "flows" in economic studies The West is located in each of the figures from left to right (that is, from bottom to top) - from left revolutionaryism (E. Mandel) to the ultra-liberalism of F. Hayek, L. Mises and their followers. The table includes: left flank (Western Marxism and radical left criticism); left-of-center movements (social democratic economic theories, traditional institutionalism, evolutionism, French dirigisme and regulationism, the unorthodox welfare theory of A. Sen, etc.);

Centrist concepts (mainly the theory of "social market economy", representing the ideological core of modern German neoliberalism, as well as the economic views of numerous followers of J. M. Keynes); the right-liberal flank, represented mainly by modern neoclassicism and ultra-liberalism of the neo-Austrian school.

A relative innovation is the inclusion in general scheme a very broad “institutional-evolutionary direction” (64). In addition to modern followers of Veblenian institutionalism and French dirigisme, the institutional-evolutionary complex includes the school of French regulationism of R. Boyer, the left-center theory of welfare of A. Sen, which has many followers, as well as varieties of modern evolutionism: neo-Schumpeterianism (R. Nelson, S. Winter), historical neo-institutionalism (D. North, R. Vogel), “qwerty-nomics” by P. David and B. Arthur.

The basis for including all these theories and schools in a single movement is that they have a similar methodology - with an emphasis on variability, mobility of particular economic structures individually and the entire national economy as a whole; use of close categorical apparatus with special attention to social institutions; verbal (rather than mathematical) modeling of economic situations; general critical, sometimes reaching the point of openly negative, attitude towards the neoclassical mainstream, moderately reformist practical economic program.

Let us note that the diagrams in the figures are based on the opposition of the theoretical-economic mainstream to the anti-mainstream or, following the successful expression of A. M. Libman, “economic heterodoxy.”

The mainstream is not limited to the modern neoclassical direction, but also includes schools that once competed with neoclassicism and have now assimilated with it (to one degree or another): neoclassical synthesis (P. Samuelson, J. Tobin), neo-institutionalism (R. Coase, O Williamson, G. Becker), behavioral economic theory (G. Simon and others), neo-Austrian school. The generic feature of all schools and directions of the mainstream is the individualistic methodology (the doctrine of " economic man"), the general theory of marginalism, primarily the concept of maximizing benefits by a rational individual, a more or less expressed desire to justify the status quo (in relation to capitalism as a system), a conservative center-right or ultra-liberal economic program.

Economic theory, having gone through a complex evolution, differentiated into many directions and schools, steadily reproduced significant differences in approaches, the immediate subject, and the features of analysis. As a result, on the one hand, a detailed analysis of the functioning of economic systems in the process of using limited resources was formed and, on the other, an analysis of the socio-economic structure and content of the economy in its real forms and in close relationship with other relations and institutions of society.

The structure of economic theory today is, firstly, the result of the development of the economy from the simplest to complex economic systems of a mixed type. Secondly, this is the result of the increasing complexity and diversity of models. Third, modern theory- the result of the development of scientific methods. IN late XIX century, a whole set of qualitative and quantitative methods arose that significantly expanded the capabilities of science. It is becoming more and more obvious that the object and subject of economic theory is multifaceted, that attempts to describe the economy based on one approach, one method are unproductive and not promising.

Modern economic theory is a system of economic sciences related by a common subject -. Moreover, each component of economic theory has its own immediate subject.

The following can be identified as the main structural parts of modern economic theory.

The theory of rational (effective) use of limited resources - analysis of the functioning of economic relations at the micro level () and macro level ().

Socio-economic theory - analysis of the economy as a socio-economic system, in the unity of economic and social content, analysis of the economic system and specific models of the economy.

Institutional economic theory, which considers primarily organizational and economic relations, the relationship between economic and other institutions and their impact on the development of the economic system.

A special place in economic theory is occupied by the history of economic theory, designed not only to provide a historical perspective on the development of economic science, but also to integrate various approaches as parts of a single holistic view of the economy. Economic theory is a general theoretical science of economics, in contrast to particular economic sciences that study sectoral, specific economic problems. The latter disciplines also have a theoretical part, however, it is based on the general conclusions of economic theory. At the same time, in modern conditions The theoretical basis for a comprehensive study of economics are both courses that outline the fundamentals of the rational use of limited resources of society (Economics), and disciplines that study the socio-economic system of society in its real forms and contradictions.

Due to the fact that economic theory is studied by various disciplines, the question arises about the name of “economic theory” and its components. At the same time, the subject of discussion is often the question of the relationship between Economics and political economy and their connection with the main components of economic theory.

The naming of the disciplines that make up economic theory should be approached taking into account history and its real economic content at a particular stage of social development. History shows that the same name of science often hid opposite directions of economic theory, different methodological principles of its analysis and interests.

Initially, economic theory received the name “political economy” at the beginning of the 17th century. after the title of Antoine Montchretien's work "Treatise of Political Economy Dedicated to the King and Queen", published in 1615 in Rouen. The current understanding of the subject of political economy, which grew together in the 20th century. with the analysis of socio-economic and production relations, has little in common with what A. Montchretien had in mind when using the term “political economy”. His desire to emphasize the need not just for skillful farming, but for state national economy and explains the appearance of the word “political” in the name of economic science. And here the appeal to this term was completely justified: after all, “politics” from the Greek “politike” means the art of government. However, there were other, deeper reasons for the emergence of the name of our science in the 17th century. A. Montchretien was a mercantilist, and representatives of this trend in the history of economic thought were unanimous in the need state approach to the economy, the need for the state to implement policies for the purpose of national growth. Therefore, it is no coincidence that the period of mercantilism was characterized by the name of economic theory as the science of wealth. And although ideas about wealth, about measures public policy changed from early to developed mercantilism, such an understanding of economic science was present in the titles of the main works of all the largest representatives of mercantilism (T. Mena “The Wealth of England in Foreign Trade, or the Balance of Our foreign trade as a regulator of our wealth”, I.T. Pososhkova “Book of Poverty and Wealth”, etc.).

For a long time, economic science by its name remained the science of wealth, judging by the titles of the works of its prominent representatives: P. Boisguillebert (“Discourse on the nature of wealth, money, payments”), A. Turgot (“Reflections on the creation and distribution of wealth”) , A. Smith (“An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations”), etc. However, it should be noted that the “official sign” of the names of these works is deceptive - behind the same name of science were hidden the ideas of both mercantilists and physiocrats (Turgot), and classical English political economy (Smith).

With the decomposition of mercantilism, the emergence of capitalism, and the subordination of not only the sphere of circulation, but also production, economic science increasingly turned into a science of studying the relations of production, the reasons for the antagonistic nature of the distribution of the product, and the significant socio-economic contradictions of society. As a result, in the 19th century the name " Political Economy"replaced the previous name of the science and became typical for all directions and schools of economic theory. The works of the classic of English political economy D. Ricardo, subsequent economists T. Malthus, J. S. Mill, J. McCulloch, G. Carey were published under this name , the founders of marginalism K. Menger, L. Walras, W. Jevons, representatives of the social school in Germany F. Oppenheimer, A. Amonn and the theoretical works of prominent representatives of pre-revolutionary economic thought in Russia Y. Zheleznov, A. I. Chuprov, M. I. Tugan-Baranovsky And in modern conditions, a number of areas of socio-economic thought use the term “political economy” to designate a new subject of research - the influence of politics, income distribution and others social factors on economic growth and development.

Economic theory today uses different names to refer to its subject matter. Applied to academic disciplines These are, first of all, Economics courses, offering systematic presentations of the theory of efficient and rational use of limited resources. The classic name of science is also used - “political economy” (R. Barr. “Political Economy” in 2 volumes. M., 1994), for the German economic school The name of the science is characteristic as the doctrine of national economy or economics (H. Zandel, R. Temmen. “Fundamentals of the doctrine of economics.” M., 1994). There are other variants of the names of economic theory.