The share of wages in Russia is significantly lower than in other bourgeois countries

Significantly…

significantly- significantly increase significantly change significantly change significantly limit significantly weaken significantly differ significantly increase significantly decrease significantly decrease significantly replenish ... ... Dictionary of Russian Idioms

I adv. qualities. Having an extremely important, paramount importance. II predicate. 1. Evaluation of any situation, whose or actions as constituting the essence of something. 2. Evaluation of something as having an extremely important, paramount importance. Explanatory ... ... Modern explanatory dictionary of the Russian language Efremova

significantly- essentially, adverb ... Russian spelling dictionary

significantly- see essential; adv. Significantly/essentially rework your speech. The patient's condition has improved significantly ... Dictionary of many expressions

Dry meadow is a continental meadow that develops on interfluves and slopes with a deep occurrence of soil and groundwater. Synonyms: which is used when the corresponding entities are interdependent in the system. See also: Diagrams essence relationship ... ... Financial vocabulary

An essential… Spelling Dictionary

Substantially new… Spelling Dictionary

Significantly special… Spelling Dictionary

Books

• Surgical anatomy of the heart according to Wilcox, Anderson Robert G. Substantially revised and expanded fourth edition of the famous atlas of surgical anatomy of the heart, written from the perspective of a cardiac surgeon and cardiomorphologist, contains a large ...
• Gulag archipelago. 1918-1956. Experience in artistic research. In 3 books. Book 1. Parts 1-2, Alexander Solzhenitsyn. A substantially updated edition of The Gulag Archipelago was published in 2007 by the U-Faktoriya publishing house (Yekaterinburg). For the first time, a complete list of witnesses who provided material for this ...

The desire to part with their current car and change to a new one occurs much more often among Russians than among residents in other countries. According to PricewaterhouseCoopers, as well as a number of research organizations, the average period of car ownership in Russia is 3-4 years, while in the USA, China, India - 5 years, in Japan - more than 6.5, in Germany and Canada - 7 (see graph).

Of course, such averaged statistics have some errors, and they use a car in Russia in different ways. For example, in the outback, a car is changed much less frequently than in large cities. And premium brands change more often than mass ones. However, the approach to the duration of car ownership in Russia is different than in other countries. Somewhere in Canada, a car often serves its owner for ten years, while in our country it is almost impossible to imagine such a thing. Why?

Mind and feeling

Of course, the frequent change of car in Russia means the growing well-being of the population. This is happening against the background of the rapid growth of the automotive market, which is expanding the offer of new models, as well as schemes for their acquisition - trade-in, loans, leasing, etc.

But in developed countries, the incomes of the population are no lower, there are no fewer shopping schemes, and cars are cheaper. However, cars there are changed infrequently.

It's all about the typical Russian reasons for changing a car. They can be divided into rational and irrational. According to market participants, the most common rational reason is an increase in the cost of maintaining a car. Over time, she begins to require first minor, then major repairs, and a prudent owner, having calculated how much it costs (fuel costs, maintenance, insurance, transport tax, loss of value during the sale - see "Content costs", "Expert-Avto » No. 6 (115) dated August 23, 2010), understands that it is more profitable for him to buy a new one.

Often a car is sold after the end of the factory warranty (it is quite logical to protect yourself from unforeseen expenses for possible repairs) or after an accident (so as not to deal with possible breakdowns after repair). “Bad roads, unfavorable climate, poor quality components, peculiarities of driving culture - these are the reasons for frequent car repairs in Russia. And the more often the repair, the more often the owners think about changing the car, ”says StanleyRuth, head of the automotive practice of PricewaterhouseCoopers in Russia.

Another common rational reason is changing needs. Let's say there was an addition to the family, and a more spacious car became necessary. Or there was a cottage, where you can only get on a more passable car. Or urgently needed money - for example, to repair or buy an apartment.

Car as a status

Rational reasons for purchasing a new car in the West are about the same as in Russia. However, we have very common motives that appeal to feelings and emotions. “A car in Russia is more than just a means of transportation, it is an expression of the social status of its owner,” notes YaroslavZaitsev, Head of Automotive Research at TNS. - The understanding is firmly embedded in the mind of the Russian buyer: the “cooler” the brand, the higher the social status of its owner, and this plays an important role when choosing and buying a car. In Europe, when choosing a car, the main thing is the price-quality ratio, but in our country it is perceived as a kind of compromise: it means that there was not enough money for a “normal” car.”

By the way, changing the class of a car to a higher one in Russia is explained precisely by a person’s desire to improve his social status: he changes a budget small car for a size class C, class C for a compact crossover, a crossover for an SUV. Consumers in European countries, say in Germany, can change a car for a new one of the same class for many years.

In the segment of premium brands, cars are changed especially often, about once every two years. “A premium car especially emphasizes the status of its owner, it can be said to be part of his business reputation,” says IgorGaponov, head of the marketing department of the Lexus brand in Russia. - We care what kind of car you drive. If you haven’t changed your model for a long time, this can negatively affect your image and even harm your business - business partners may think that you are not doing well.”

Acquiring a thing as status is what marketers call conspicuous consumption. It is typical not only for Russia, but also for some countries with developing economies, and this applies not only to cars, but also to other goods (for example, we love premium brand clothes and expensive gadgets that are bought on credit and even with the last money, just to keep up with the people of "their" circle). “The growth in the well-being of the population of recently poor countries is fraught with the appearance of conspicuous consumption,” notes MichaelSamokhin, lecturer in automotive marketing, head of the AD Wiser marketing analytics group. - Here we are not alone - Turkey and China demonstrate the same patterns of behavior. A fragile social position requires decorative confirmation - a new car of a larger size or high class.

Manufacturers conspiracy?

However, it should not be denied that manufacturers themselves are making considerable efforts to change machines more frequently. They, of course, try to produce the highest quality and durable models, but at the same time they are interested in changing them more often. Among the inhabitants, the myth of a “conspiracy of manufacturers” is widespread: they say that car companies deliberately make unreliable cars, they used to be for centuries - what a rotting body made of thick steel sheets cost, and now the parts are “disposable”.

In private conversations, representatives of leading companies admit: yes, the service life of modern cars is less than twenty or thirty years ago. For example, earlier the engine life in passenger cars often amounted to a million kilometers. Now, the most “long-playing” engines, primarily diesel ones, due to difficulties in electronics (injectors, etc.), reach a resource of 500–600 thousand km at best. The average mileage of an average-level car is limited to 300-400 thousand km. At the same time, some cars, for example, urban small cars, will be able to drive 100-150 thousand km at best during the entire period of operation.

However, it should be borne in mind that in recent decades the very approach to consumption has changed, and not only cars, but also other things that were rarely changed before. Say, back in Soviet times, refrigerators served for thirty or forty years. Now the refrigerator serves no more than ten years, respectively, it makes no sense for manufacturers of this household appliance to put a large resource of work into it.

The same applies to the car - they change it, firstly, because they want a new one, and secondly, because of the rapidly developing technological progress: models quickly become obsolete. Already now, for example, driving a car without an electronic stability program (ESP) is not only unfashionable, but rather unsafe. “People want to drive more comfortable, safer and more dynamic cars,” says TatyanaNatarova, director of public relations of the representative office of Nissan in Russia. “Model changes and new vehicle features are happening so fast these days that even seemingly new cars can quickly become outdated.”

As for the Russian market, then, perhaps, in the future, the terms of car ownership here will increase, gradually leveling off with the indicators of developed countries. “As the number of cars per capita increases, they will indeed move into the vehicle category,” forecasts Yaroslav Zaytsev of TNS. “The price-quality ratio will play an increasingly important role, the status component will decrease, and the importance of functional characteristics, on the contrary, will grow.”

The authorities like to repeat that we, the population of Russia, pay the lowest income tax in Europe and the world - 13%. This has long been accustomed to and people also think. But this is hard to believe. Is it true? Let's look at the example of four countries: Norway, Australia, Germany and Canada, - offers Maxim Panov.

So what kind of taxes does a hard worker pay, who works hard to feed his family, working in white and paying all due taxes to the state budget?

1. personal income tax 13%. This is an official personal income tax paid by you through your employer.
2. VAT 18%. Since the citizens of the Russian Federation, that is, you and I, are the last subjects in the link for the purchase of material assets, the value added tax (VAT) falls entirely on the shoulders of citizens. Pay attention to the checks that you get in stores and markets, it is there that the information is indicated that you paid in addition to the cost of the goods and another 18% of the cost of the goods. We were left with no choice whether or not to pay this tax, so it is an indirect tax on our wages.
3. Social contributions 30%. This is a contribution to the Pension Fund of Russia (PFR) - 22%, the Social Insurance Fund (FSS) - 2.9%, the Federal Compulsory Medical Insurance Fund (FFOMS) - 5.1%. All these deductions for you are also deducted from your salary by your employer.

Why do we pay the employer's expenses for deductions to these funds? I can give an example of buying goods in a store. If the store owner gets checked and needs to pay off, he will add the cost of the bribe to the price of the goods.

The situation is similar with the employer, for him these deductions are additional expenses that he deducts from wages. Without social contributions, the employee would receive 30% more.

TOTAL: 13%+18%+30% = 61% - this is the real rate, which is charged from your hard-earned money.

For example and for greater understanding, everything must be considered in comparison. So here is an example of income tax in some countries.

1. Norway. Income up to $67.4 thousand income tax - 28%, from $67.4 thousand to $110 thousand - 37%, after $110 thousand - 40%. VAT - 25%. Social charges from the employer 0% if it falls within the lower limit. In total, by their standards poor”, pay 53%, and the richest over 65%. If we take into account that the average salary in Russia is about 35 thousand rubles, then it turns out that the level of taxes in Norway, the country with the highest human development index, is lower than ours in Russia.
2. Australia. Income up to $4.6 thousand income tax - 0%, from $4.6 thousand to $28 thousand - 9%, after $140 thousand - from 30%. VAT - 10%. Social fees from the employer 0% (all taxes are paid by the employee). With an average salary of 35 thousand rubles, we fall into the middle group with an income tax of 9%. If we add VAT, then the final cost will be 19%, which is significantly lower than in Russia, as much as 42%.
3. Germany. Income up to 8.5 thousand € - income tax - 0%, after 8.5 thousand € it is calculated according to a complex formula, but we don't need it. Base VAT - 19%. Social fees from the employer 28%. With an average wage in the Russian Federation, we still fall into the lower zone with 0% income tax. A total of 47%, which again is significantly lower than the domestic 61%.
4. Canada. Income up to $ 42.7 thousand income tax - 15%, from 132.4 - 29%. Social fees from the employer 0% if the income is at the lower limit. Base VAT - 7%. The Russian average wage falls on the lower income level of a developed country. As a result, the Russian salary rate would be equal to 22%, which cannot be compared with domestic 61%, the difference is 39%.

In all the above countries, the income tax is lower than in Russia. All countries have a progressive taxation scale, however, this does not mean that most of what they earn is taken from the rich.

And in our country, everyone pays the same, a factory worker and an official who buys a new apartment in the center of Moscow.

And although capitalism is a mechanism for well-organized theft, and although under capitalism the most notorious crooks, among whom there are oligarchs, bankers, ministers and prime ministers, are regularly sent to prison in orderly rows, despite this, there is an equally harmonious system of regulation of relations between those who work and those who appropriate the fruits of labor. And although it is known in advance who will pull the rope to their side, this sporting activity is not interrupted until the workers let go of their end of the rope ...

Pavel Krupkin
APN
2008-12-26 10:42

Pavel Krupkin's article "In Defense of Labor", published on the website of the APN, is devoted to some issues of relations between labor and capital.

I noted with interest for myself the fact, the author writes, that our conservative liberals have appointed decent wages for people as one of the factors of the country's uncompetitiveness: “ In Russia, until recently, private companies were outperformed by foreign companies in many areas. due to high wages, transport costs, poor work organization, corruption component, sometimes due to the level of taxation. That's why lower wages in a certain part of the business will have a positive impact on the economy as a whole." This is from the statement of V. Fadeev, my emphasis.

And here is what V. Leibin said: "Orientation towards European salaries is the path to stagnation, to general disability and a decline in production."

Such statements are explained by the need to establish the dependence of income growth on labor productivity growth.

After analyzing this problem, the author comes to the following conclusion: In 2007, compared to 1990, labor productivity in Russia increased by 1.6 times, and people's incomes have just returned to the level they were then. Those. in terms of people's incomes, we have a growth reserve of one and a half times. In this case, the share of people in GDP will rise to 70% and will approximately equal the similar value for the distribution of US GDP (75%).

So a decrease in wages in our conditions means an even greater increase in the super-exploitation of the people for the sake of our inefficient bourgeoisie, who cannot develop the country in any way, having 36% of GDP as a profit, while their colleagues from the States are quite capable of managing similar tasks, having only 17% of GDP.

In general, the misfortune of the country is not people who are ready to work hard and efficiently, but lazy and greedy mouth-ass, who for some reason call themselves entrepreneurs, and at the same time do not perform the main entrepreneurial function - the function of developing the country's economy.

So in our current conditions of "socialism for the super-rich", the growth of wages is necessary for the country to continue development.

Now remember that wages represent only a part of the value of the commodity. In other words, the total amount of money received by workers as wages, lacks for the purchase of all manufactured goods just by the amount of the profit share that the owners of enterprises "storage on the side."

To test the indicated understanding of the "harmfulness" of too high profits for the economic system, let's look at the data over time on the incomes of the 0.1% of the richest people in the United States. We see that when the share of the super-rich in US GDP exceeds 6% (the usual end result of laisser-faire policies), the resulting "bubbles" can become very large, causing catastrophic consequences when they collapse (such as the Great Depression or the current global crisis). ). At the same time, for example, the decrease in this share due to the "New Deal" of F. Roosevelt and the trends laid down by him did not stop the development of the country at all - the States successfully moved forward during the period of the 30-60s.

It was not until the 1970s that stagnation occurred in the US economy, which served as a trigger for the subsequent Reaganomics. As a result, the incomes of the super-rich rose again to 8%, and the "bubbles" in the States went one after another...

Thus, the author writes, we get the right to conclude that the structure of distribution of the accumulated by society in terms of socio-economic development has an optimum, deviations from which are accompanied by an increase in negative processes in the economy.

For example, in the 1970s, the US wage share was higher and profits were lower than optimal, and this led to economic stagnation. At present, we have reverse deviations - and now we all have a crisis.

It also becomes clear that in Russia, the share of labor is still significantly below the optimum. As a result, all those who are interested in the development of the country along the “normal” path are obliged require from our "bourgeois" to step on the throat of their greed and not hinder the growth of people's salaries.

The birth rate is significantly lower than in Russia

The development of the population of St. Petersburg has always been in line with the processes taking place in the country. However, compared with other Russian regions, demographic processes in St. Petersburg traditionally had an extremely low or high level. The current age and sex structure of the population and fluctuations in birth rates, mortality, and migration have shaped the current demographic situation. Its distinguishing feature was the decrease in the population of St. Petersburg due to natural population decline, as well as due to significant changes in the size of migration. Currently, a small migration increase cannot compensate for the natural decline in the city's population.

Since the founding of the city, there have repeatedly been periods when the number of deaths in St. Petersburg exceeded the number of births (Fig. 2). Mortality from infectious diseases dominated in the city. For example, from 1883 to 1917 in St. Petersburg there were 8 epidemics of smallpox, 10 - relapsing fever, 10 - typhus, 4 - cholera, 2 - measles. When since 1885 the natural growth of the city's population became positive, in the report of the mayor Likhachev, this was called "a completely unusual phenomenon" for St. Petersburg.

Figure 2. General birth and death rates in St. Petersburg in 1764-2002 (per 1000 population)

The demographic development of St. Petersburg is characterized by a low birth rate. Its level in the city is lower than in the country as a whole (Table 2). In the 1990s, the inhabitants of St. Petersburg had a dominant attitude to the birth of only 1-2 children. The total fertility rate, which characterizes the average number of children born to a woman in her entire life, in St. Petersburg in 1996-2000 fell below 1 child per woman. Then it slightly increased and in 2002 amounted to 1.03 per inhabitant of the city.

Table 2. Total fertility rate in Russia and St. Petersburg
in 1990-2001

* Sources: Population of Russia 2001. The ninth annual demographic report. M.: Book house "University", 2002, p. 36.
** Data of current statistics of Petersburgkomstat.

A slight increase in the birth rate observed at the present time is explained by the implementation of the births of children postponed in the 1990s, mainly first-borns. In addition, in the formation of the current level of fertility, a significant role belongs to the structural factor - the number of women in active childbearing ages. Now this age includes a large generation of women born in the mid-1980s. Therefore, in the coming years, the number of people born in St. Petersburg will increase.

At the end of the last century, against the background of a general decline in the birth rate in the country, there was an absolute and relative increase in extramarital births. This growth is associated with the further spread of actual, legally unregistered marriage unions. It should be noted that the proportion of births out of a registered marriage in the 1990s in St. Petersburg until very recently was consistently higher than in Russia as a whole (Table 3), and only in 2000 and 2001 did the ratio of St. Petersburg and all-Russian indicators turn out to be opposite. . In 2002, illegitimate children accounted for more than a quarter of all those born in St. Petersburg - 28.8%.

Table 3. Percentage of births out of a registered marriage in Russia and St. Petersburg in 1988-2001 (% of all births)

*Sources: Population of Russia 2000. The ninth annual demographic report. M.: Book house "University", 2002, p. 51.
**Data of current statistics of Petersburgkomstat.

In the last decade in St. Petersburg, the number of children in families that break up as a result of divorce has decreased. From 1990 to 2002, the share of families with children under 18 in the total number of divorced marriages decreased from 59% to 52%. Thus, parental divorces affect fewer and fewer young children. At the same time, the average number of children under the age of 18 per divorce in St. Petersburg in the early 1990s was consistently lower than in Russia as a whole (Table 4). In 1990, in the city, this figure was 1.29, and in Russia - 1.35 children. In 2001, the figures almost converged. In 2002, there were 1.19 children under the age of 18 per divorce in St. Petersburg.

Table 4. Average number of children per divorce in families with children under 18 in Russia and St. Petersburg in 1990-2001

*A source: Population of Russia 2001. The ninth annual demographic report. M.: Book house "University", 2002, p.33
** Calculated according to the current statistics of Petersburgkomstat.

Probably, the decrease in the number of children in divorcing families is associated not only with the general decline in the birth rate in the 1990s, but also with the ongoing transformations in the modern family. Unfortunately, a detailed analysis of these processes is impossible due to the reduction at the state level of the volume of statistical information collected on births, marriages and divorces. Some approximate idea of ​​the transformation of these processes is given in Fig. 3. The past twentieth century was marked by sharp fluctuations in the levels of general indicators of marriage and divorce in St. Petersburg, upswings in marriage after two great wars. In the post-war period, the rates for marriages were declining, while those for unions being dissolved were growing. Against the background of a certain increase in the marriage rate in modern conditions in the city, there is an almost complete coincidence of the values ​​\u200b\u200bof the marriage and divorce rates. In 2002 they were 7.7 and 7.1 per 1,000 people, respectively.

Figure 3. Marriage and divorce rates in St. Petersburg in 1764-2002 (per 1000 population)

3 - Message from the St. Petersburg mayor V.I. Likhachev at a meeting of the City Duma on December 15, 1889 - St. Petersburg, no date, p.2