Socio-economic and demographic problems of modern Russia. Natalya Kasperskaya: Intel bought McAfee Natalya Kasperskaya

Natalya Mikhailovna Sokolnikova Fundamentals of composition FINE ARTS Part 3 Fundamentals of composition Textbook for students in grades 5-8Recommended by the Ministry of Education of the Russian FederationOBNINSK PUBLISHING HOUSE "TITLE"

The traditionally high level of both fundamental science and education of the population is taken into account.

It is no coincidence that the main components of the national innovation system are the reproduction of knowledge, primarily basic research, and training of scientific personnel and specialists in organization and management in the innovation field. Joint efforts of science and education, various shapes, including organizational and legal,

fruitful cooperation between universities and academic institutions, good personal connections - all this and much more can make an important contribution to solving the problem of growing the well-being and power of our country and each of its citizens.

It is not difficult to notice that the plans mentioned above, the tasks that life objectively sets for our society, are designed mainly for young people and for their future.

N. M. Rimashevskaya

SOCIAL VECTOR OF RUSSIA DEVELOPMENT

The radical social transformations taking place in Russia, which are undoubtedly of a civilizational nature, have so far affected mainly the economic aspects of the country’s life (privatization of property, marketization industrial relations, formation of labor markets, housing, services). If any actions were taken in the social sphere, they were either erroneous or ineffective in terms of solving social problems. This could not but lead to an aggravation of disproportions in the economic and social aspects of transformation processes. The policy of the federal authorities strictly followed the requirements of the Washington Consensus, based largely on the economic paradigm, within which

Rimashevskaya Natalya Mikhailovna -

corresponding member RAS, director

ISEP RAS.

Solving the problems of the social sphere was postponed “until later,” when a steady increase in social production, GDP and national income would be obvious. This attitude of the Russian young reformers, professing the purest liberalism, based on already outdated concepts of globalization processes, turned out to be not only extremely harmful for Russian society, but also pulls it “backward,” inhibiting, among other things, economic development. Both Russian and foreign experts have long formulated the framework of the “post-Washington” consensus, reflecting a new stage in the dynamics of globalization processes, assigning a fundamentally different place to social policy and social infrastructure designed to ensure social security and social protection of the population (“social safety net”) 1. Market reforms were carried out virtually “from above”, without using the necessary

1 Nekipelov A.D. The influence of globalization on the relocation of resources in transition economies // Problems of the theory of management practice. - 2003. - No. 2; Stiglitz J. More diverse tools, broader goals: movement towards a post-Washington consensus // Questions of Economics. - 1998. - No. 8.

social shock absorbers. Having “shock therapy” as a starting point, the authorities did not take care to take into account and prevent negative social consequences. Crisis phenomena have flourished in the social sphere, dangerous not only in practical terms. politically, activating the protest potential of almost all groups of the population. They block economic development, actually slowing down the pace of its dynamics, increasing the negative factors affecting the market economy. This primarily concerns the formation of a high-quality workforce capable of adapting to the challenges of post-industrial development in the context of the information society. The ten-year discussion regarding what is “primary” and priority - economic dynamics or solving social problems - has finally lost all meaning. There have been negative changes in the living conditions of the population in all spheres of its activity, which could not but affect the condition of people, their behavior and the quality of human potential. The population has entered such a phase of depopulation that, subject to the continuation of trends in the field of demographic reproduction, the onset of irreversible consequences regarding the decline in numbers and deterioration in the quality of the Russian people becomes dangerous. The current situation is such that the economy, with all its components, must, first of all and immediately, guarantee each citizen a certain minimum of well-being, measured by a set of social standards, and not at the level of tired rhetoric, but in real provision. IN otherwise it is doomed to mark time or go backwards.

Activation of the social functions of the state, in addition, requires the “social contract” fixed in the current Constitution (Article 7) of the country, according to which the Russian Federation is a social

a state whose policy is aimed at creating conditions that ensure decent life and the free development of every citizen of the country. This defines a mechanism for consolidating the state, business and society around the goal of increasing prosperity. A social market state, promoting the development of entrepreneurship and thereby activating economic development in conditions of democracy and liberal relations, provides minimum social guarantees, a policy of economic justice, support for vulnerable groups of the population and social protection of citizens. It is obvious that all this is not only alien and incompatible with state paternalism, but, on the contrary, is aimed at creating conditions for each family to choose an individual strategy of behavior, as well as the most effective forms of life activity.

Russian neoliberals carried out reforms, and their epigones continue this today, guided by the principles of the Washington Consensus, which demanded: a) absolute freedom of the domestic market and prices established on it; b) the speedy integration of the country into international structures in all areas; c) macroeconomic balancing (regardless of the situation in the country) as the main priority in financial policy; d) privatization of all types of property and withdrawal of the state from the sphere of regulation economic relations. At the same time, the authorities sought to implement reforms as quickly as possible, without considering or assessing the social consequences. For those who were so blindly and resignedly guided by Western models that were far from Russia, it would be more useful to use the country’s historical experience and remember the words of Alexander II, spoken by him in connection with the preparation of measures to free the peasants from serfdom. He unequivocally emphasized “that the nobility, for the sake of society and Russia, must sacrifice part of their benefits.”

And further - “the abolition of serfdom in no case, even at the first stage, should worsen the life of the peasants, but, on the contrary, even improve it.” This is how the Russian Tsar posed the issues of reform, in contrast to Russian liberals, who left the population without heat and light.

The economic and social vectors of the country's development have come into sharp conflict with each other. And no matter what positive indicators the government statistics record on the economic and social development of the country, it is clear that this “growth” is determined by an extremely low initial level, when GDP production and the value of real income of the population fell by 2 - 2.5 times compared to what it was in pre-reform Russia 2. The average growth rates of real incomes should not be misleading, because today they are only half of what the population had in 1991. In addition, average indicators, in the context of the existing polarization of living standards, can create illusions of well-being in contrast to reality.

Let's try to consider and analyze the current situation by answering the questions: how have the living conditions and characteristics of the population changed as a result of the reforms? Who won and who lost among the country's citizens? How and why do “formal institutions and real practices” diverge and confront each other? What should the authorities have done and what should they not have done? What urgently and immediately should be done in the social sphere, including to neutralize wrong and harmful decisions?

Two preliminary remarks that are necessary for a correct assessment of the factual material used below.

2 Russia: 10 years of reforms. Socio-demographic situation / Ed. N.M. Rimashevskaya. - M.,

First note. All provisions and conclusions presented below are based on data from the State Statistics Committee of the Russian Federation and are commented on by them. This does not at all mean that they are “integrity.” On the contrary, many claims can be made against them related to clarifications of a methodological nature; but this is largely a different subject of comprehension. When using indicators obtained by the State Statistics Committee of the Russian Federation, one should always keep in mind that existing estimates social phenomena and trends proposed by individual experts are very different, and each percentage point related to the total population today amounts to almost 1.5 million people. Thus, the share of poor citizens is determined by the State Statistics Committee of the Russian Federation at 25% of the total population 3, the World Bank - 27%, and ISEPN - 33%4. If Goskomstat does not have relevant information, then we use our estimates.

The second remark concerns significant differences in socio-demographic indicators across regions of the country, their deviation from average Russian data and trends. The territorial aspect will be fully considered in a special section.

According to estimates by the Institute of Economics and Social Sciences of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and not only, as a result of the implementation of economic reforms, about one-fifth of the Russian population has benefited today, and the remaining four-fifths

The popular majority largely lost. But to varying degrees: some more, others less. Conventionally, we consider the “winners” to be those who managed to adapt, integrate into market structures and find themselves in the flow of upward mobility. Since all social relations have radically changed - from top to bottom and

3 Socio-economic situation in Russia. VII, 2003 - M.: Goskomstat. - P. 233.

4 Rimashevskaya N. Man and reforms. Secrets of survival. - M., 2003. - P. 29.

from left to right, then no one was left without change.

Changes in the conditions, level and quality of life of the country's citizens were transformed into socio-economic problems, and the people of Russia found themselves captive of five acute problems, which caused three no less acute demographic consequences. Among them are:

A high proportion of the poor group of the population, including the “social bottom”, with an extremely “meager” poverty line;

Unprecedented social polarization, determined by differentiation of wages and incomes, cash savings, differences in property and housing provision;

Significant levels of unemployment and non-payment of wages to this day;

Degradation of social security, including the pension system, and the actual destruction of the social sphere, which is rolling along the old rails, but has lost the character of free and generally accessible.

The aggravation of socio-economic problems affecting the main aspects of human life has led to disturbances in the dynamic stereotype of higher nervous activity, which, in turn, causes a weakening of immune defense, the development of pathological processes, depression and other mental disorders. The state of “wear and tear” and “fatigue” of the population leads to the fact that the generation of children does not reproduce the generation of their parents not only quantitatively, but also qualitatively. This reduces the population, destroys human capital, posing a threat to national security. Ultimately, the current situation caused natural decline and depopulation, a decline in the quality of each next generation, and ineffective external and internal migration.

1. Social consequences of economic reforms

“Shock therapy” led to the fact that the population with their monetary income found themselves in a deep “pit” and with weak hopes of getting out of there in the coming years. Indeed, in 2002, real incomes only reached the 1997 level, and the 1991 level is still far ahead 5.

1.1. Falling wages. The main factor in the two-fold decline in living standards is inadequate wages. Contrary to the current Constitution and the provisions of the Labor Code, the minimum wage today is just over a quarter of the subsistence level (ML), while one third of workers (20 million people) have earnings below the subsistence level, and two thirds (about 40 million people) have earnings below the subsistence level. receive wages that do not provide a living wage for the employee and his child. In addition, the ratio of the average salary of the least and most paid 10% is 30 (!) times 6.

Due to the fall in wages to a level “below the lowest” limit, she stopped performing:

Reproductive function, because does not even ensure the simple reproduction of the worker’s labor power;

Economic function, because does not stimulate motivation for quality and high productivity;

Social function, because causes disintegration of society due to the existing differentiation in wages.

At the same time, one cannot ignore the widespread use of hidden forms of wages, which in 2000, according to the State Statistics Committee of the Russian Federation, amounted to 27.7% of the total fund7.

5 Russia: 10 years of reforms. Socio-demographic situation. - M., 2003. - P. 139.

6 Statistical Bulletin No. 9 (93). - M., 2003. - P. 35-36.

7 Russian statistical yearbook. - M.: Goskomstat, 2003.

1.2. Poverty and misery. The second, no less acute socio-economic problem is the impoverishment and poverty of the Russian population. At the UN session dedicated to the problems of “Copenhagen + 5”, which was held in Geneva in 2000, it was determined that a standard of living below 1 dollar per day per person is defined as poverty, and in the range of 1-2 dollars - as poverty . Of course, these are only rough estimates, because... The poverty line significantly depends not only on living conditions (for example, north-south), but to a greater extent on the economic situation of the country. And in Russia it is also different in territorial terms.

In 2002, the poverty line in the country was one and a half times lower than what existed in 1991, and amounted to 1,800 rubles. or $60 per month, or $2 per day, which, according to UN recommendations, applies to developing countries. The income distribution shows that:

the share of the poor has dropped to a quarter of the total population (36 million people);

half of the country's citizens have incomes of less than $4 per day, or $120 per month per capita;

a tenth of the population is not provided with income, even at the level of the food basket, which takes up half of the subsistence level budget.

There are a few things to note specific features poverty in Russia, namely:

About half of the children are in poor families;

A layer of the so-called “new poor” has formed, representing those groups of the population that, in terms of education, profession, and social status, have never been low-income before; in a significant part, these are the working poor, when their earnings do not provide not only a decent lifestyle, but even biological survival;

Two forms of poverty have emerged - “stable” and “floating”: the first, as a rule, perpetuates poverty, because those born as permanently poor remain so throughout their lives; the second form is much less common and refers to those poor people who make incredible efforts and “jump out” of the social circle in which they find themselves.

There is a process of feminization of poverty, determined by a complex of socio-demographic factors:

a) 97% of single-parent families are a mother with children; b) low wages most often affect women; c) the level of pensions for women is significantly lower than for men.

The structure of poverty in Russia is significantly determined by its factors, namely: one third (approximately) is associated with low wages, which for a third of workers is below the minimum wage; the other third have an inadequate level of pensions, which is still below the minimum monthly wage for a third of pensioners, and the rest are the so-called traditional poor, i.e. single mothers with children, large families, disabled people and families of disabled people, families with unemployed people.

Poverty, unemployment, economic and social instability intensify the process of marginalization of the population. As a result, it appears social layer paupers, as a consequence of descending social mobility, which forms the so-called “social bottom”, including beggars, “homeless people”, street and neglected children, street prostitutes.

1.3. Social polarization. The most severe consequences of economic reforms are associated with social polarization in society, which is based on differentiation in wages, income, material security, savings, property of citizens, and above all, housing. In fact, “two Russias” arose on the same territory, opposing and moving away from each other, if

judge by their behavior, orientations, preferences. Representatives of the “two Russias,” without intersecting in everyday life, speak different languages and do not understand each other well. Two levels of living with their own incomes and monetary units, two consumer markets, differing in prices and a set of consumer goods, were formed. Two layers of citizens are formed from childhood on the basis of alternative forms of upbringing and education. This is all the more dangerous because the “country” of the rich and very rich, as well as the highly wealthy, actually includes the political elite.

In order to correctly assess the problems of economic stratification of the population and existing inequality, it is necessary to emphasize the specifics of their formation in Russia.

Firstly, the state of polarization of the population arose, one might say, “overnight,” unnaturally quickly, as evidenced by the dynamics of income differentiation indicators. For 5 years (1989

1994) the decile coefficient increased by 2.5 times while the income level decreased by 2 times 8. This is an unprecedented change that could not remain without consequences.

Secondly, monstrous polarization arose as a result of the “shock therapy” of 1992 and was marked by its growth throughout the 90s; Since 2000, the dynamics of income differentiation have only slowed down in pace, but have not decreased.

Thirdly, social polarization in Russia is a consequence of multifaceted and heterogeneous adaptation, which, by definition, cannot proceed at a rapid pace, and most importantly, different layers of the country’s citizens have specific resources for this. According to our estimates, today only one fifth of the population has integrated into new market relations, one quarter due to their personal characteristics Not

8 Russia: 10 years of reforms. Socio-demographic situation. - M., 2002. - P. 143.

will be able to adapt, and the rest ( more than a half), are still hesitating.

Fourthly, Russian society is beyond the limit short term transformed from an egalitarian alignment with ideology in all directions into a highly polarized one, approaching in this respect the countries of Latin America.

The mechanisms for the formation of social polarization of the Russian population include the following components.

First of all, there is an unprecedented differentiation in wages. From the pre-reform period to the present, it has grown 5 times 9; and also the gaps in actual size are unprecedented: the ratio of average incomes in the 10 percent extreme groups is 30-40 times.

But wages are the foundation on which the market components of inequality are formed. And here the main thing becomes the distribution of income, which shows that in 2003 the decile coefficient of funds is 14.2 times, the Gini coefficient exceeds 0.4, the decile coefficient of differentiation reaches 8.2 times, the ratio of incomes of the “top” and “bottom” 5 % of groups reaches at least 50 times. At the same time, the “top” 20% group of the population owns 46% of the total income fund, and the “bottom” group only about 6%10.

No less important in the formation of social polarization is the distribution of savings (money savings), which, according to our research, is significantly higher: half of the population has no more than 2% of the savings, and 2% of the “very rich” own half of the savings fund; At the same time, 40% of households have no savings at all.

9 Russia: 10 years of reforms. Socio-demographic situation. - M., 2002. - P. 116.

10 Socio-economic situation in Russia, VII, 2002 - P. 230.

11 Savings of the population of the Russian Federation. Analytical report. - M., 1997. - P. 34-35.

However, the most significant differences arise in the area of ​​housing provision. A thin layer of apartment owners have luxury housing of enormous size and luxurious amenities, including cottage buildings. At the same time, one third of the housing stock is deprived of basic utilities, and a quarter of families have a living space of less than 9 square meters. m per person. According to the State Construction Committee of the Russian Federation, 77% of the Russian population needs improved housing conditions.

The structure of incomes of various population groups indicates that economic inequality has developed primarily as a consequence of the redistribution of property. In 1990, 76.4% of the total income of the population was wages, and 6.2% was income from property; in 2000, the share of earnings decreased to 61.4%, and the share of income from property increased to 23.0%, i.e. almost 4 times. Actually specific gravity wages decreased by 15 percentage points, and the share of income from property increased by 16.8 percentage points. As much as some have “lost”, so many others have “gained” 12.

The gap between rich and poor, which has arisen as a result of social polarization, embitters people, arouses aggressive moods in the family and in society, destroys Orthodox values, disorients youth, disintegrates the population as a whole and in a negative way affects health status.

1.4. All types of unemployment. Fourth socio-economic problem

This is unemployment in all its forms and non-payment of wages, which can be considered as “quasi-unemployment”. Its severity in Russia is largely due to some “novelty,” perhaps not so much in form as in scale. Involuntary unemployment

12 Social status and standard of living

villages of Russia. - M: Goskomstat, 2001. - P. 103.

existed in the era of the planned economy, but it was a structural imbalance in the distribution and use of predominantly labor resources, and for the sake of ideologically consistent rhetoric, the principles of economic efficiency were violated.

The Employment Law of 1994 legally formalized the status of the unemployed, while in order to avoid monstrous figures, different estimates of the number of unemployed were used:

number determined according to ILO methodology;

number of registered unemployed;

* number of people receiving unemployment benefits;

* number of partial unemployment;

* number of hidden unemployment.

And all this - different people and different

indicators.

The economically active population in 2001 was 70.9 million people, i.e. 49% of the country's total population. Of these, 64.66 million were employed in the economy (91.1%) and 6.3 million (8.9%) did not have a job, but were actively looking for it (unemployed according to the ILO methodology). 1.1 million people were registered with the state employment service. or 17% of the unemployed; an even smaller share of them received unemployment benefits

1.0 million people or 15.9% 13. As for partial and hidden unemployment, here, in the absence of statistics, one can only use expert estimates, according to which its size ranges from 5 to 10 million people.

Analysis of the phenomenon of unemployment in Russia allows us to draw a number of conclusions regarding the nature of employment:

> The risk group includes: young people, men and women at pre-retirement age, demobilized from military units; employees of military enterprises

13 Ibid. - P. 71.

industrial complex; migrants and forced migrants (excluding labor migrants); women with young children.

> There is a steady trend of expansion of “stagnant” unemployment, when able-bodied citizens are deprived of a stable job for more than a year.

> Unemployment is one of the factors in the formation of poverty; one fifth of the poor is determined by it.

> The state of employment and unemployment varies significantly regionally and depending on the specifics of settlements.

> Unemployment in Russia is accompanied by an increase in vacancies, one part of which is occupied by labor migrants from the CIS, while the other remains unclaimed due to the lack of necessary professional training among those wishing to take up jobs.

The development of a real labor market is possible only with a real, and not virtual, housing market, which in Russia is still in its infancy. Our population mainly looks for work where they live, while in a developed market people live where they work.

1.5. Social Security. And finally, the fifth socio-demographic problem is related to the deformation of social security and social infrastructure. We are talking about the pension system, healthcare, education and housing and communal services.

Since 1990, the pension sector has been constantly reformed. However, despite the steps taken, including the transition to the so-called funded system, the principles of organizing pensions to this day remain the same and represent the worst version of distribution relations, which have crossed out the insurance principles that are most acceptable for Russian conditions. This is evidenced by the main characteristics of pension provision:

Catastrophically low level of pensions, amounting to 1024 rubles in 2001. per month (or $34, or $1 per day), which is in relation to the average wages reached only 32%, and with the subsistence level - only 90%; the minimum pension was 474 rubles, i.e. 41% of PM; Meanwhile, the law initially provided for the amount of the minimum pension at the level of the pensioner’s subsistence level,4;

The size of the pension is weakly or not at all linked to the level of remuneration of the employee and his work experience; differences in the level of pensions15 today are 1:1.6 for the extreme 10% groups of pensioners versus 1:32 for the same indicator of wages; the pension has actually turned into a social benefit, paid to almost everyone equally, without taking into account the length of service and insurance payments;

Until recently, an extremely high difference in the size of pensions was established for working and non-working pensioners, in favor of the latter; Meanwhile, workers actually compensate for their pensions with payments to the pension fund and, as a rule, occupy unattractive jobs;

~ using part of payments to the pension fund to transform into a funded pension model and pay pensions only after at least 10 years; in addition, a significant part also goes to the pensioner who did not earn it, but to the payment of a basic pension, which can be received by a citizen who either has not worked at all or has very little work experience; Only half of the payments are allocated for the payment of labor pensions.

14 Social status and standard of living of the population of Russia. - M.: Goskomstat, 2002. - P. 174.

15 Rimashevskaya N. Man and reforms: secrets

survival. - M., 2003. - P. 32.

Pension Fund. In 2001, the level of pensions was 23% lower compared to 199216.

1.6. Deformation of health care and education. The practice of a strictly state-run healthcare organization in Soviet times had a number of significant shortcomings, the main one of which was the low efficiency of the industry from the point of view of the health of the nation as the goal of its functioning; however, every citizen could receive the necessary medical care free of charge at any time. Today, the previous system has turned out to be virtually destroyed, and the new one has not yet acquired any certain features, while efficiency has not increased, and the free provision of services is increasingly being reduced to nothing. This is evidenced by the following facts:

> The existing system of medical services has largely lost its free access to consumers. According to data for 1997, government funding in total health care costs amounted to 45%, 39% was covered by households, including payments to private health insurance and shadow payments, 16% fell on the compulsory health insurance fund, contributions to which are made by the employer and essentially there are deductions from the employee's earnings.

> There is a high differentiation of conditions, quality, scale and nature of medical services provided to the population by various institutions, regardless of the sources of their financing. According to data for 1999, in the total amount of population expenditure on medical services, the first decile group (the poor) spent 1%, and the last (rich) - 35.0%17. This way

16 Statistical Bulletin, No. 8(82). - M.: Goskomstat, 2001. - P. 120.

17 Social status and standard of living of the population of Russia. - M., 2000. - P. 142.

Thus, the differences in spending on medical services are higher than the overall differentiation in final consumption.

> With formally free medical care, citizens often refuse hospitalization due to the inability to pay for the relevant services. The high and rising cost of medicines and services forces approximately a quarter of the population to deprive themselves of medicines and health services.

> Current prices have led to the fact that the poorest 10% receive only 1.0% of total costs for medical services and 0.4% for health and wellness activities, while the richest 10% receive 35 and 63%, respectively. 18.

During the period from 1990 to 2001, the number of preschool institutions decreased by almost 2 times 19, mainly due to the inability of enterprises to support them, if they were departmental organizations, and the refusal of parents from this type of service due to high fees, which is painful hit primarily low-income, large families and single mothers. At the same time, private preschool institutions have emerged with a high level of cost of services (up to $100 or more per month). About 5% of children from the wealthiest families use them. Proclamation of free school education does not prevent the fact that about 2 million 20 school-age children do not attend school; 3% of children study in private educational institutions; Parents pay extra for textbooks and teaching aids, for routine repairs, school security, for children’s meals and extracurricular activities. In the field of higher and secondary special education There are two strategies for paying for the services provided: the first -

19 Social status and standard of living of the population of Russia. - M.: Goskomstat, 2002. - P. 333.

20 On the situation of children in the Russian Federation.

2000. State report. - M., 2000. - P. 44.

basically paid education, second

Payment for certain types of services in the free education system (it covers 40% of students). Constant dis-

The expansion of paid education is perceived pessimistically by citizens, whose incomes are still trending downward. 60% of families with school-age children believe that they will not be able to pay for their children’s education at universities 21.

1.7. Depopulation. The results of a decade of reforms influenced and could not but influence the processes of demographic reproduction.

According to preliminary data from the 2002 All-Russian Population Census, 145.2 million people live in Russia. The natural decline between the two censuses amounted to 7.4 million people, of which 5.6 million were compensated by a positive migration balance, i.e. the real decline in numbers is only 1.8 million people.22 The all-Russian natural decline began in 1992, the year of the intersection of the birth and death curves, and it is not yet clear when during the current century they would change their direction. Currently, migration compensation has decreased to 4%, and the dynamics of the Russian population depends entirely on the ratio of births and deaths.

But the situation here is not as rosy as we would like, as evidenced by the following data:

e" the absolute number of births over the past 15 years has decreased by almost 2 times

From 2.5 million in 1987 to 1.4 million in 200223

the total fertility rate today is 1.25, while 2.15 is needed to ensure simple reproduction - this largely determines the effect of depopulation 24;

21 On the situation of children in the Russian Federation.

2000. State. report._ M., 2000.

22 Statistical Bulletin No. 1(94). - M.: Goskomstat, 2003. - P. 222-223.

23 Demographic Yearbook of Russia. - M.: Goskomstat, 2002. - P. 55.

24 Ibid. - P. 94.

o for various reasons, society is steadily oriented towards a one-child family;

o there is a decrease in the absolute number of women in the reproductive contingent;

c" timing shifts in fertility had a certain impact, as a result of which women fulfilled their reproductive plans in the 1980s;

o there is a postponement and abandonment of births due to the systemic crisis and political instability;

at the same time, unfortunately, up to 20% of married couples, according to expert estimates, are infertile;

h> and about 30% of births are out of wedlock, which negatively affects the health of those born 25.

These factors are superimposed on global trends in declining fertility. In Russia, there is not only a natural population decline (in recent years, 900 - 950 thousand people per year), but also the comparative level of depopulation turned out to be higher than in other European countries with a population decline, with the exception of Ukraine. In terms of the total fertility rate, Russia is among the third of countries with the lowest values ​​of this indicator 26.

An even more dramatic situation is observed in the area of ​​mortality:

The overall mortality rate in Russia is steadily increasing, in contrast to aging European countries;

The number of deaths during the year is 1.7 times higher than the number of births 27;

Russia differs from all developed and developing countries in the excess mortality of men, especially in working age, as a result of which it has the lowest life expectancy in Europe - 58 years 28.

25 Ibid. - P. 149.

26 Ibid. - P. 389.

27 Ibid. - P. 55.

28 Ibid. - pp. 391-392.

For the period from 1992 to 1999. the dynamics of mortality was determined by the interaction of economic and social factors that were characteristic of Russia at that time. The increase in mortality, starting from 1992 and up to 1994 inclusive, was influenced by the “shock” of the beginning of reforms, the events of the end of 1991 and 1993, which brought with them extraordinary shocks. Decrease in mortality in 1995 - 1998 did not have any economic basis, but is consistent with the assumption that it is problematic psychological adaptation society to new social realities. The period of adaptation was limited by the economic crisis of 1998, after which the mortality rate began to rise again. Change social status and the associated increase in psychological stress were the most important factor that determined the dynamics of mortality in Russia in the 90s of the 20th century.

If the current mortality rate remains the same, less than half of the Russians who reached 16 years of age in 2000 will live to reach 60 years of age. The life expectancy of today's men aged 25 and older is equal to or lower than the 29 they had at the end of the 19th century, despite the fact that the life expectancy of those born 30 at that time was 29 years, and today is twice that.

The increase in mortality is based on factors that were caused by a systemic crisis, namely: the “breakdown” of the dynamic stereotype of higher nervous activity, which caused a weakening of immune defense, the development of pathological processes, depression, and hence the increase in suicide and alcoholism, the spread of drug addiction; inaccessibility effective medicines for the bulk of the population; deterioration of balance and diet; ignoring norms

29 Population of Russia over 100 years (1987-1997): Stat. collection. - M., 1998. - P. 167.

30 Ibid. - P. 164.

occupational health and safety; “liberalization” of road traffic, which caused an intensive increase in mortality from road accidents31; falsification of food and alcohol imported into the country.

Infant mortality, despite its decline in 2002, was about 13.3%, i.e. 3-4 times higher than in developed countries32.

Currently, in terms of life expectancy, Russia firmly ranks among underdeveloped countries. The situation does not look so gloomy (16th place out of 50 among Asian countries) only when compared with African states. We can say that in Russia at the end of the 20th century a unique regime of population reproduction developed: European fertility and Afro-Asian mortality33.

Forecasts of the total population of Russia by various organizations indicate that in 2025 there will be only 125 million people in our country, and in the middle of this century - about 100 million people, i.e. the number will decrease by 45 million people.

1.8. Declining population quality. The second significant consequence of transformation processes that affected the state of the population is a decline in its quality characteristics in three main groups of indicators: 1) health (physical, mental, social); 2) intellectual potential and professional readiness; 3) spiritual and moral values ​​and orientations.

There is an increase in morbidity, especially for diseases of social etiology (tuberculosis, syphilis, AIDS/HIV, hepatitis). Forecasts show that by

31 Healthcare in Russia. - M.: Goskomstat,

32 Russia in numbers. - M.: Goskomstat, 2003. -S. 70.

33 Rybakovsky L. Applied demography. - M.,

2003. - pp. 153-154.

By 2010, 8-11% of the population will be infected, which is about 13 million people. - mainly among young people. In the first half of 2003 alone, 16,307 HIV-infected patients were identified34. According to international experts, Russia is at the stage of a concentrated HIV epidemic. A quarter of HIV-infected people are women of the most active reproductive ages. This means that HIV infections can lead to direct demographic losses. Drug addiction is growing exponentially, especially among children aged 11 to 17 years. The number of drug addicts is estimated to reach 4 million people; 70 thousand people die from drugs every year.

Particularly dangerous is the decline in reproductive health. The proportion of pregnant women suffering from anemia has increased 3.6 times over the decade. As a result, the birth of already sick children, whose health potential only decreases with age, has increased 2.6 times. The main concern is the fact that the generation of children has less health potential than their parents, and their children (grandchildren of their parents) have even less potential. Already at birth, 40% of children are sick. This creates a “social funnel” into which the younger generation is increasingly drawn: health problems move from older population groups to groups of children and youth. In order to get out of the “funnel”, if this is still possible, more than one generation is needed.

In terms of healthy life expectancy, Russia is in 107th place. Its expected duration for men is 51.5 years, and for women - 61.9 years. Since 1999, there has been an intensive increase in the number of disabled people (by approximately

1 million people in year). The total number of in-

34 Socio-economic situation in Russia. VII. - M.: Goskomstat, 2003. - P. 261.

The valid population was about 11 million people in 2001, and according to forecasts it will increase to 20 million in 2015, with a population of 134 million people, i.e. will be 15 versus 7.5% today35.

The decline in intellectual potential, both as a consequence of direct “brain drain” and the transition of professionals to other sectors of the economy, as well as entry into foreign companies, continues, although with less intensity. This, unfortunately, is complemented by a decline in the quality of school and vocational education, which is typical for educational institutions in rural areas and small towns.

No less acute are the problems of the crisis of social values ​​and orientations, the decline of morals and moral principles based on the lack of law and order and violation of the rule of law. In the mass consciousness there is a process of “erosion” of moral norms characteristic of Russian culture. Pragmatism and an orientation towards personal gain, reflecting the American model of interpersonal communication, are becoming increasingly widespread.

2. The need for a “sharp” turn towards social reforms

By the end of the 1990s, especially after the 1998 default, it became obvious that it was no longer possible to continue the formation of the market in Russia, without paying attention to the situation and condition of the country's citizens. However, the neoliberal ideology professed by the ruling structures did not allow them to adequately respond to social challenges. The main focus of the Government’s social actions from the very beginning (“shock therapy”) and to this day has been focused on reducing the level of social obligations of the state, which actually contradicts the Constitution, which defines the Russian state

35 Social status and standard of living of the population of Russia. - M.: Goskomstat, 2002. - P. 304.

social.

What should be commented on from the decisions made in the field of social reform?

Firstly, the introduction of a flat tax scale on income from individuals, directly aimed at the poor and low-income groups of the population, because for them:

The tax rate increased from 12 to 13% and

The tax burden has increased, which was previously twice as high for low-paid people.

In addition, the flat scale exacerbated social polarization and destabilization in society, increasing the income gap between the bottom and top 10% groups from 14 to 17 times.

Taking into account the unified social tax for those who earn up to 30 thousand rubles. per year, the payment was 48.6% (i.e. almost half), but those who receive over 600 thousand per year pay in total only 15% (13+2%) 36.

Secondly, the introduction of a single social tax (USS) actually crossed out the emerging insurance system with extra-budgetary funds. As a result of this “transformation”, contributions from entrepreneurs, actually paid from the wage fund, were transformed into a regular state tax going to the federal budget, which forced to freeze wages. The unified social tax becomes the property of the state and therefore actually loses its target orientation, directly helping the state budget, if necessary, to the detriment of the interests of the population.

Thirdly, the introduction of the accumulative principle into the pension system by slowing down the growth of pensions for existing pensioners. In fact, the cumulative model has a twofold goal: a) final

36 On the way to a social state. The concept of the social state AT and SO. - M., 2003. -S. 31.

justification for reducing existing pensions, allocating a “basic” pension in the labor structure, paying it largely from “insurance” contributions made by entrepreneurs; b) accumulation of “long” rubles under the auspices of the state for their use as an investment resource.

Fourthly, the housing and communal services reform conceived by the authorities is aimed not so much at correcting the deplorable state of this sector as at obtaining at its disposal a housing subsidy fund, which in size is close to the pension fund, and its use will be even less transparent.

Fifthly, reform in the education sector, led by a unified state exam. In the conditions of today's Russia, where a third of schools not only do not have a staff of teachers, but they also lack running water, sewerage, and in winter heat and electricity, students in such schools do not receive a standard of knowledge, and the quality of their education is an order of magnitude lower than what is required by the Unified State Exam. The Unified State Exam turns out to be a guarantee of privileges for children studying closer to the “center”, with all modern amenities and computer classes.

Sixth, the introduction of targeted social assistance, the effectiveness of which is close to zero. And there are two reasons for this when it comes to cash transfers: 1) benefits in the population’s income today account for only 2%; 2) administrative costs in determining the right to social assistance will significantly exceed their amount, opening a new source for corruption of officials.

Pursuing a purely liberal policy, the state is only concerned economic situation big business, actually neglecting the conditions for the survival of the main part of the population, which cannot but destroy the country's people's potential and increase the protest resource. At the same time the state

“wear and tear” and “fatigue” of the population leads to the fact that the generation of children does not reproduce the generation of their parents, not only quantitatively, but also qualitatively. This reduces the number of citizens in the country, destroys human capital, posing a threat to national security. There is a disintegration of social ties and a weakening of social potential, which is comparable to the process of depletion of nature in the absence of activities to restore it.

2.1. Towards the establishment of social justice. Everything that has been said about the social consequences of economic transformations leads to the urgent need for a decisive and radical turn towards the implementation of social reforms to achieve the dual task of ensuring social protection of the population and transferring the social sphere to market “rails”. Moreover, the real marketization of social relations and social sectors, to everyone’s satisfaction, will reduce government social spending without worsening the financial situation of the population.

The situation in the social sphere requires an immediate deep maneuver towards a specific person, a positive change in the conditions and standard of his life, opportunities for social and professional development. Social reform involves resolving the most pressing problems in order to prevent threats to social security and “saving” the Russian people, expanding the adaptive capabilities of the population and forming a middle class as a guarantor of social and political stability, comprehensive support for the family as the main social institution that contributes to the expansion of demographic reproduction and serves as a support for the development of "private" person. The main task of social reform

Response to social challenges that have led to the deterioration of the population's condition.

The social sphere includes citizens of the country, on the one hand, as a subject of social activity in the main spheres of social life, and on the other hand, as an object of state social policy at all levels of its implementation. The population interacts with industries that produce social services and shape the social ecology, i.e. ensuring the quality of social life itself in the context of reproduction and the state of the population. Among the sectors of the social sphere, the main ones are occupied by healthcare, education, social and housing and communal services. An organic characteristic of the social sphere is social relations determined by the system of social insurance, pensions and social protection of the population.

The ultimate goal of the socio-economic transformations taking place in the country is to improve the quality of life not only on average, but also of all layers and groups of the population, every citizen, and above all those who are outside decent living conditions. The basis for achieving this goal is intensive economic growth within the framework of structural reforms. Social restructuring enhances economic development primarily by improving the quality of the workforce, including improving its physical, mental and social health, as well as high intellectual and educational potential, spirituality and morality. Sociocultural factors in maintaining the prestige that has developed in the country are becoming essential. high level education and participation in creative activities. Intellectuality and spirituality are still quite significant for the majority of the country's population. Equally important from the standpoint of economic growth is the expansion of the domestic consumer market for goods and services associated with rising household incomes.

2.2. To increase the value of work and work motivation. One of the main factors in increasing GDP is a system of radically increasing work motivation, aimed at all groups and segments of the population: youth and the elderly, highly and poorly educated, those engaged in physical and mental labor, entrepreneurs and employees, the social elite and the bureaucracy. Without intensifying the activity of every able-bodied person, there can be no economic development and growth in well-being. It is necessary to overcome the polarization of incomes and wages that arose as a result of Russian methods of economic liberalization. Hyper-differentiation of income becomes an active incentive for trade intermediary and financial activities that promise quick and extremely high profits, but reduces interest in participation in the real economy, science, education, undermining public morality, establishing purely mercantile values, intensifying criminalization and social isolation in society. Two main conditions for intensifying labor are visible: providing everyone with opportunities for vertical mobility and increasing the prestige of education, professionalism, and creativity. Both conditions can be met only on the basis of reducing social polarization. The main factor in the growth of human capital as a factor in GDP growth remains the effective development of education and healthcare.

The goals of social policy today and for the coming years are determined by the current situation in society as a result of a decade of economic reforms. Analysis of what is happening allows us to identify two main directions.

The first direction is focused on amortizing the negative social consequences caused by economic transformations. Ignoring the social component from the very beginning of economic

transformation has become the main obstacle to effective change and the crisis situation as a whole. Economic and social processes came into sharp conflict with each other; the social component began to hinder and block economic transformations. The active discontent of a significant part of the country's citizens has jeopardized the social security of the state. A way out of this situation required, on the one hand, a broad and multifaceted adaptation of all groups of the population to market conditions, and on the other, social protection of those who have not yet integrated or are not at all capable of this.

The transformations taking place in Russia affect the deepest, civilizational foundations of society in the sense of changing models and regulators of social activity. The functioning of economic entities is moving towards a market economy, main feature which are private enterprise and private ownership of the means of production. The usual norms of social relations are destroyed, a change in the value system occurs, when old stereotypes are discarded (but not by everyone), and new ones are just being formed. Thus, the egalitarian principle of “equality in poverty” is not accepted by the majority, but the emerging polarization of income (due to its irrational scale) cannot be perceived as a social norm. Quite the contrary. The rich (“new Russians”) are assessed by the population in a predominantly negative way; and not simple regulation, but the redistribution of income in favor of the poor and very poor (beggars), is becoming increasingly urgent, which is what social policy should also be aimed at.

Significant changes also concern the official attitude towards the value of work. If in Soviet society labor was viewed as the primary value (“a matter of valor and heroism”),

tation of the population - to live in order to work, then today the positive principles of labor

Quality, qualifications, professionalism lose to a large extent public recognition, especially if we consider payment for it as a public assessment. After all, incentives to work have weakened primarily due to low wages.

Expanding adaptive capabilities is a serious basis for supporting and forming a middle class in Russian society as the foundation of market relations and guarantees of socio-political stability. The socio-economic stratification of Russian society today can be presented in the form of a classic pyramid, in which the higher the economic status, the thinner the layer. In fact, it should take a “pear-shaped” shape, where the share of the rich will reach 10%, the poor - no more than 20%, and the middle class, with its upper stratum, - 70%.

The second target area is focused on overcoming newly emerged and aggravated socio-demographic problems, described in detail in the first part of the article. Seven problems (challenges) and seven answers to them.

Firstly, the problem of increasing real incomes of the population, the main source of which is the increase in the minimum and average wages; Following the increase in wages, the level of pensions will inevitably increase. The minimum wage should not be lower than the subsistence level of a working-age person, and wage gaps cannot exceed the corresponding indicators related to income. Income and wage gaps are in one-to-one correspondence. Only under such conditions will wages fulfill their reproductive function, ensuring the restoration of the workforce, their economic function, stimulating motivation to achieve high quality

labor and the introduction of innovative technologies, its social function, implementing fair conditions of distribution, and finally, the “reformer” function, promoting the implementation of reforms and restructuring of wages, including in the social sphere.

Secondly, overcoming poverty and poverty of the population from the position of a minimum consumer budget, which implies not only the physical survival of a person, but also the satisfaction of the necessary set of social needs of the country's citizens, providing them with a decent life. The state must combat the processes of marginalization of the population, the formation of a “social bottom” in society, as well as the feminization of poverty, expressed in the growing proportion of women below the poverty line.

Thirdly, the problem of the monstrous polarization of the population's living standards, which, based on hyperdifferentiation of income, led to the formation of a deep social divide. The reduction in differentiation in wages, income, and property security will take place on the basis of the intensive formation of the middle strata of the population, which form the main subject of effective demand, which underlies economic growth. The absence of these layers blocks the development of the domestic market and segments it: at one end there is an elite demand for mainly expensive, high-quality imported goods, and at the other - for low-quality cheap goods, which are again satisfied mainly with imports, which negatively affects domestic production. Economic stagnation leads to a crisis in investment activity, and capital accumulated by the elite strata of society goes abroad; domestic production falls, the number of jobs is reduced, the incomes of the bulk of the population are reduced, the process becomes self-renewing

producing character. The main effect of reducing polarization is the consolidation of society, the urgent need for which is increasingly felt.

Fourthly, this is the problem of unemployment and non-payment of wages. The fight against unemployment should also concern its registered part, as well as its regulatory, hidden and partial part. Risk groups deserve special attention. The main task is to increase the effectiveness of state assistance to the unemployed not only at the level of social benefits, but, mainly, by integrating them into new relationships. Reducing unemployment guarantees against the disqualification of professionals, the aging of labor potential, the constant stressful state of the population and the destabilization of social relations.

2.3. Towards the effective development of healthcare and education. Fifthly, the need to reform sectors of social infrastructure, including pensions. IN the latter case The task is to ensure that the transformation of existing pension payments strictly depends not only on the level of remuneration, but also on length of service.

Health care activities should be brought into line with the requirements of the Constitution on free medical care, providing it with state guarantees, broad social insurance, as well as the availability of care from qualified doctors for the entire population. The motivation of medical personnel to provide quality treatment should be significantly increased, and the allocated budget funds should be expanded to preserve the network of state treatment and preventive institutions and unique specialized centers.

In the field of education, it is necessary to fully realize the constitutional rights of citizens, taking into account

gradual transfer of this industry to market footing.

Extremely serious challenges are faced in the sphere of housing and communal services, where the housing stock and basic utilities are worn out by more than half. Reforming this extremely important area of ​​people's lives requires not only serious government resources, but also a wide time frame.

Sixth, the problem of natural population decline and depopulation, which became acutely evident after 1992, requires special attention and its immediate solution not only (and not so much) in the context of increasing the birth rate, but on the basis of reducing mortality, which since the early 2000s gg. again tends to increase, especially since at the same time the replacement of natural population decline with migration growth is seriously decreasing.

And finally, the seventh problem is aimed at stopping the decline in the quality of human potential, which today is characterized by a decline in the health of each next generation. This is all the more important because innovative technologies require a higher quality workforce today than yesterday.

2.4. Towards overcoming social polarization. The implementation of social reforms in Russia is based on the following principles, without which they cannot be successful.

> The main condition is a systematic implementation format, parallel and interconnected restructuring in the main segments of the social sphere. It is impossible to reform the pension system without changing wages, because... the first organically depends on the second. Workers with inadequate wages (below the subsistence level and below the minimum pension), upon entering their well-deserved retirement, will receive a pension from the insurance payments of other insured persons;

You cannot increase wages in the education sector while freezing them in the healthcare sector, because this will only increase the already unfounded differentiation.

> In conditions of monstrous polarization, the ideology of social reforms cannot but have a redistributive nature. Redistribution mechanisms include taxes and the social insurance system; its goal is to reduce differences in material security and to establish a social structure adequate to market relations, which should include not only the poor and the rich, but also an active “middle” - the middle class.

> Activation of local governments, charitable communities, social initiatives as important components civil society, where a special role belongs to the municipal level of government, closest to to a specific person. Social policy, including social protection, is implemented “on the ground”, and state policy is designed to create foundations for the future, support the restoration and renewal of specialized social institutions based on the values ​​of freedom, justice, human solidarity and mutual assistance. Part of the work on the implementation of social programs should be assigned to self-organizing social institutions, including their formation in the business environment, for the participation of business in humanitarian actions.

> Optimal interaction between federal and regional authorities is of utmost importance, and the cardinal problem of social policy is determining the boundaries of their mutual responsibilities. The presence of a significant number of regions that benefit from federal subsidies increases the severity of this problem. It is necessary to abandon an extremely centralized system associated with decision-making exclusively in the Center. On the other hand

rons, unjustified differentiation in social security must not be allowed; population of different territories of the country, because the development of this trend leads to the undermining of the fundamental foundations of social justice, affecting the main rights of Russian citizens. It is necessary to constantly take into account regional specifics in such a vast territory.

» In relation to the technology of constructing a social program of action, as well as to the development of strategy and tactics within the framework of social policy, it is necessary to establish echeloning of activities in time, bearing in mind that: a) reforming the social sphere requires a long period (at least 10 years); b) the entire set of measures aimed at various segments of this area is implemented “in parallel”; c) it is necessary to distinguish between strategic and tactical measures, which should not only not contradict, but support each other.

Finally, gender and national-ethnic aspects of the population should be strictly taken into account. This means, first of all, the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women, ensuring equal opportunities for their social activities, as well as the sociocultural development of all ethnic groups. As for the gender aspect of social transformations, strategic and tactical steps must overcome all types of vertical and horizontal segregation (breaking through the “glass ceiling” and “glass walls”), and have a clear focus on reducing gender asymmetry in Russian society.

2.5. Towards reforming social protection. The main tools for implementing social protection of the population and reforming the social sphere come down to three: a) minimum social guarantees provided by the state; b) an expanded and expanding social insurance system;

c) taxes as a way to reduce the differentiation of wages and income.

Minimum living standards are not a subject for debate. This is a social imperative. They must be given the highest priority and brought to the attention of every person. The functioning of the social protection system is based on social consensus on fundamental values ​​that determine acceptable levels and security of access to the means of satisfying basic needs and realizing basic rights. Minimum social guarantees include at least the following standards: minimum subsistence level, minimum wage, minimum social payments (pensions, benefits, scholarships), minimum free education, primary health care program, right to basic housing.

An integral part Social protection of the population is a comprehensive compulsory system of state insurance against social risks: (job loss, illness, old age, loss of a breadwinner), the set of which is determined by the legislator. In modern conditions of extremely high differentiation of incomes of the population, a decisive role belongs to the implementation of the principle of solidarity, which promotes the redistribution of income from some “financing” subgroups of society in favor of the “receiving” subgroups, i.e. sick, elderly, disabled, unemployed. The main source of financing in this segment is compulsory social insurance funds, formed on the basis of insurance payments by the employer and employee. The funds operate exclusively as state-owned insurance companies, adapting to changes in the social sphere. A new role is played by trade unions, which in all social security sectors become representatives of insured workers to protect their rights.

The main tool for reducing the polarization of wages and income is the tax system, which

on the basis of differentiated tax scales, ensures a ban on extremely high earnings and incomes.

3. Social program of action.

Specific steps

3.1. Increasing minimum social guarantees. The initial component of social reforms is to increase minimum social guarantees. The main social norm today is the subsistence minimum (MS), or the minimum consumer budget (MCB). In fact, it defines all other standards. Modern PM is a rigid structure, which essentially includes only physiological needs and forming an extremely low poverty line; all families whose incomes are below the subsistence minimum are considered to be in poverty. Such a budget cannot support any additional family expenses, including an increase in payments for housing and utility services, not to mention paid healthcare, education or the expansion of social insurance.

The transfer of social sectors to a market economy requires “saturation” of the PM due to higher compulsory insurance payments than today, as well as full payment for housing and utilities. In this case, the PM receives the structure of a “full subsistence level budget” (FSBM), its size should increase by 2.4 times.

PM (PBPM) determines the minimum wage, minimum pension, minimum benefits. If we use PBPM, we get a minimum “market model of remuneration”. Only under such conditions does a worker have an adequate salary when entering the labor market and is fully included in the compulsory state insurance system as a basis for social security of the population. At the same time, sectors of the social sphere begin to function in accordance with market principles.

3.2. Reforming the wage system. The foundation of social reforms is the reform of the wage system. The basis for social transformations of this kind are the restructuring of the labor market and its remuneration. Only under conditions of consistent wage growth can the employee’s interest in more efficient work be ensured and a constant increase in his productivity realized. An increase in wages ensures the fulfillment of its functions.

Positive dynamics of wages is actually the basis for increasing the quality potential of the workforce and solving the problem of social protection for one third of Russian families who are living below the poverty line due to low wages. Without increasing wages, the problem of poverty cannot be solved. Moreover, an increase in wages is the main factor in the expansion of consumer demand and the domestic market, and after it, the development of production. Ford at one time discovered what later became the generally accepted law of growth national economy. If we want to develop the automobile industry intensively, cars must be available as consumer goods, and potential buyers must earn enough money to be able to buy them. Therefore, for three months he paid the workers the equivalent of the price of one of the Ford models.

Social reforms in the field of wages include three interrelated components:

> dynamics of the living wage in order to include not only the traditional consumer set, but higher taxes, social contributions, full payment for housing and utilities;

> radical increase in the guaranteed minimum wage and its average value, taking into account changes

“structures” of wage expenses, including the composition of mandatory payments;

> significant reduction in wage polarization.

Thus, wage reform is a simultaneous implementation of three interrelated actions: increasing wages, reducing their differentiation and increasing mandatory payments. The shifts must be such that, on the one hand, the reform achieves its goals in the context of improving living standards, and on the other, the important relationships at the macro and micro levels between wage growth, increased labor productivity, income and efficiency are not violated economic activity enterprises.

The first component of reform concerns radical change in wages based on a significant increase in its level and, above all, a guaranteed minimum. The minimum wage cannot be lower than the subsistence level or the minimum consumer budget, which must include a significant social component. Moreover, the “wage minimum” is the subsistence minimum, taken with a coefficient of 1.2 -

1.5, because even the minimum wage must contain the amount of resources necessary not only for the reproduction of the worker, but also his child (at least partially).

The second component of wage restructuring serves to balance the interests of the employee and the employer. An increase in the level of wages, together with an increase in taxes and mandatory social security payments made by the employee, is combined with a decrease in taxes and social payments and the employer. Today, the entrepreneur (employer) pays more than one third of the wage fund in the form of social tax. This complicates his economic

economic position, and he seeks to take part of his wages into the “shadow”. But the employee also loses in such a situation, because his pension provision is determined by the level of open wages. At the same time, it is obvious that payments to insurance funds made by the employer are nothing more than part of the remuneration. Therefore, it is advisable to divide the accruals on her fund in such a way that their employer will pay one third, as before, to social funds, and two thirds

To the employee, increasing earnings. Part of this “increase” for the employee will be spent on taxes and mandatory insurance contributions for social and professional risks; The main thing is that the level of these deductions from earnings will be different for low-, medium- and high-paid people. Such an approach will help reduce wage differentiation, because the lower the wage, the higher the increase, and vice versa.

Thus, there is some “exchange” between the entrepreneur and the employee, as a result of which not only nominal, but also actual earnings, as well as income tax on it, will increase; the amount of social tax will generally remain without much change, but the employee will be interested in withdrawing his earnings from the “shadow”, because the amount of his insurance for all types of risk depends on this. Another equally important source of increasing average earnings is the state budget, especially if this concerns those employed in the public sector.

The third component of wage reform requires that personal income taxes, in conditions of unjustified polarization, not be based on a flat scale.

It is advisable to establish a four-level scale of income tax for individuals: employees with earnings below and at the subsistence level are unconditionally exempt from income tax, employees with

those earning below 2 monthly wages pay a minimum tax of 10%, employees with earnings below the monthly wage are subject to an average level tax of 15%, others

20% tax. Exemption from income tax for wages below the subsistence level will help increase the income of those families that are in distress. In addition, such a step corresponds to the solution of the general task - increasing the minimum wage to the subsistence level.

At the same time, as mentioned above, social payments for compulsory insurance are divided between the entrepreneur (employer) and the employee in a ratio of 1:2. One part is covered by the employer, and two parts by the employee. Of course, such a restructuring of taxes is possible only with a corresponding increase in wages. Higher taxes are provided not only in the structure of the subsistence minimum, and, consequently, in the structure of the minimum wage, but also, accordingly, in the composition of any earnings. Ultimately, the share of taxes in obligatory payments from the manufacturer (entrepreneur) will significantly decrease. In this direction, there will be changes in the ratio of insurance payments between the employer and the employee towards an increase in the latter’s share. The scale and nature of redistributions are carried out taking into account the interests of all participants in this process: policyholders, insurers and the insured.

Exempting the state budget from subsidies for housing and communal services will not only reduce taxes on entrepreneurs, but will also open up reserves for investment in the production sector. In addition, reducing taxes on enterprises will strengthen incentives for their self-development and provide their own source of investment, loan payments, and replenishment of working capital. There will be a salary increase

encourage enterprises to reduce the number of employees, fire redundant personnel, and reduce inefficient production. Incentives for enterprises to create new jobs through the development of small and medium-sized businesses should also be intensified. The increase in wages is partially offset by a threefold reduction in social payments for entrepreneurs.

Thus, the third component of the reform involves reducing the polarization of wages and incomes so that the ratio of earnings of the extreme 10% of workers (decile differentiation coefficient) should not exceed 4-5 times compared to 8-10 times today. This is convincingly evidenced not only by world experience, but also by real relationships in the efficiency of labor of different quality. To do this, it is necessary: ​​a) to introduce certain restrictions on the growth of maximum earnings, primarily at state-owned enterprises; b) establish “prohibitive” taxes for high earnings and incomes; c) introduce highly differentiated tax scales;

d) establish differentiated scales for tariffs for compulsory social insurance; e) in collective agreements, provide for restrictions on high wages for employees of the enterprise.

Reducing differences in wages will ultimately make it possible to increase its level with a smaller fund as a component of cost. Changes in tax payments and mandatory insurance contributions, increasing the share of workers, will be a certain balance to the increase in wages.

Without an increase in wages, it is impossible not only to transform the labor market, but also to transfer the social security system to a market basis.

Projections for 2010, given the above premises, show that the minimum wage should increase compared to 2003.

(in uniform prices) almost 7 times, and the average - 2.5 times; At the same time, differences in wages, measured by the decile differentiation coefficient, will decrease to 5.7 times, i.e. will decrease by 40%, and the share of workers with wages below the minimum will fall to one tenth37.

3.3. Restoring the solidarity component of pension provision. The most acute social problem It turns out that pension provision has been reformed since 1990 and continues to exist in a state of restructuring, already along a cumulative path, essentially directed against the elderly population living today. It is necessary to turn the pension system absolutely into the insurance channel, using a system of personification of employees for the purpose of organically linking the level of pensions with the accumulated amount of wages received by the employee during his working life and the amount of length of service. The pension system should be based on the principle of solidarity and distribution, which is the most fair for Russian society, taking into account the religious and moral basis that determines society’s attitude towards the family, parents and grandparents. The demographic aspect of the problem cannot be ignored. After all, about one fifth of pensioners live alone, among the elderly there are 2 times more women than men (i.e. these are our mothers); half of the elderly population found themselves far from their loved ones and relatives. Due to the intensive involvement (in Soviet times) of the population and especially women in social production, new intra-family relationships (between spouses) were formed, based on the economic independence of individual family members. There is also a certain psychological moment in relation to pensions,

37 Social protection of the population / Ed. N.M. Rimashevskaya. - M.: ISEPN RAS, Carleton University, 2002. - P. 143-145.

when the second part of the employee’s career is, as a rule, associated with concern for obtaining its maximum value. In addition, our population has lost its savings three times over the past 10 years, which is especially painful for the elderly, who today have difficulty balancing their family budget.

Taking into account the current situation, as well as the practice of pensions, which was founded more than forty years ago and has already undergone certain adjustments, when reforming the pension system it is necessary to be guided by a number of principles, the main one of which requires postponing the use of the funded component at least a decade into the future, during which life expectancy should increase significantly population level along with overcoming poverty among all segments of society.

The system should include three levels of pension provision: a) social pensions; b) labor state pensions; c) non-state (private) pensions.

Social pensions are received by all elderly people who are not entitled to labor benefits: they must be financed entirely from the country’s budget through general taxes and payments received into the budgetary network. The social type includes all additional payments to the labor pension that are not directly related to labor insurance. Civil servants who are financially and financially supported by the state also receive pensions from the state budget. Thus, the basic pension that exists today radically changes its content and, as a consequence, the source of financing.

The right to a labor pension applies exclusively to insured employees, and its size depends on the length of the insurance period and the amount of the contribution. A certain type of labor pension is Professional, which is assigned

workers of a limited range of professions; Additional contributions to professional pensions are made by the state and entrepreneurs. Another type of special labor pensions are territorial ones, paid to persons who worked in difficult and extreme climatic conditions.

Non-state pensions allow the personal initiative of the employee and employer to be implemented. They are aimed at providing the opportunity for every resident of the country to voluntarily provide themselves with additional protection in old age by choosing any of the existing programs. Unlike government systems, these pensions may be more flexible in size and conditions for their receipt within the framework of non-state pension programs implemented on the basis of special legislation. Essentially, they are an alternative to a funded pension without the obligation to use it.

The main “level” principle of the pension system is the fact of establishing a minimum pension not lower than the subsistence level of a disabled citizen of the country, determined and legislated once every four years. The retirement age for the general labor pension is proposed to remain the same - 55 years for women and 60 years for men. It is possible to revise this provision only in the event of a sustainable increase in the life expectancy of the country's population by 5 - 10 years compared to the existing one. A disability pension is paid in case of permanent loss of ability to work upon expiration of the period for payment of temporary disability benefits, if the medical commission determines the health condition as incurable. The labor pension is calculated at a level of at least 40% of the salary for the entire period of work experience, updated at the time of retirement. This principle can be implemented

only if there is a personalized accounting of insurance premiums.

Taking the principles formulated above and the growth in wages, pension forecasts for 2010 (in uniform prices) show that:

a) social pension will increase by 2.3 times;

b) the average labor pension will increase by 3.6 times; c) the ratio of labor pensions to average wages will reach 54% 38.

3.4. Reforming the healthcare system. The healthcare system requires serious reform, not only in terms of a clearer definition of funding sources that meet the requirements of free medical care, but also in terms of updating technologies in the production of healthcare services and organizing appropriate assistance.

In doing so, the following principles must be observed.

Firstly, the existence of three sources of healthcare financing, each of which has a strictly targeted purpose:

^state budget providing minimum social guarantees in the field of health care, the necessary reorganization of the health care system and the development of science in order to obtain new medical technologies;

o compulsory health insurance, which provides the bulk of medical services;

^direct costs of the population (paid services), including various exclusives.

In healthcare, budget funding is directed to a certain range of diseases or other medical services that are of acute social importance. Such diseases include tuberculosis, HIV/AIDS, occupational nosologies, etc. Same

38 Social protection of the population / Ed. N.M. Rimashevskaya. - M.: ISEPN RAS, Carleton University, 2002. - P. 151-152.

also applies to certain categories of patients whose ill health is associated with economic, environmental and man-made disasters. Budget expenditures in this case are determined in the context of minimum social guarantees provided by the state.

Secondly, insurance for medical care applies to the entire population of the country and should be organized according to a single scheme. Workers are insured in cases of temporary disability, work injury and occupational disease, maternity, death of the insured person or disabled dependent family members.

Thirdly, it is advisable to concentrate the risk insurance of the Social Insurance Fund (SIF) and the Compulsory Health Insurance Fund (MHIF) in one fund, creating special insurance funds, which will eliminate the dependence of the employee’s insurance protection on the employer.

Fourthly, for medical care insurance the rate is set differentially by region, because Regions' capabilities and needs for medical care are different. Payment for medical services is carried out at prices determined by the tariff agreement between professional medical associations, the insurer and trade unions as representatives of the insured. The insured person becomes the buyer of medical services. For each disease included in the compulsory medical insurance program, a standard of medical care is required, which includes a list of means of prevention, diagnosis and treatment. Information about standards and prices for each type of service should be publicly available. All services in excess of those guaranteed by the compulsory medical insurance program provided by state health care facilities are paid for by the patient independently, also according to payment documents and at approved prices.

The scheme for “purchasing” medical services solves a number of pressing problems in a healthcare organization:

♦ the redundant intermediary - CMO - is eliminated; The Medical and Social Insurance Fund becomes a full-fledged insurer;

♦ the employer’s accounting department is liquidated as an intermediary; the employee receives payment for temporary disability regardless of the employer’s wishes;

♦ the insured receive real opportunity choose a doctor, get treatment in a private clinic, paying the difference in the cost of services yourself;

♦ there is an opportunity to change the doctor’s payment system: in addition to the minimum wage according to the unified tariff system (UTS), he receives an additional percentage of payment for services provided from insurance funds and funds received for paid services established in the price - the more patients the doctor treats, the his earnings will be greater;

♦ a competitive environment is created in the field of medical services, which is an incentive to restructure the healthcare system; Unclaimed jobs are gradually being eliminated in medical organizations (clinics, hospitals).

Administrative costs for the formation of insurance funds will be partially compensated by the release of personnel from two funds due to a reduction in the volume of work on collecting insurance funds, conducting business under an offset scheme with each policyholder, and conducting business in the insurance company.

Forecasts of financial resources for medical and social insurance for 2010 were made subject to an increase in wages; they provide insurance benefits, basic health care program, and administrative expenses. Per capita consumption will increase by more than

3 times, and the tariff rate will be no more than 5.2% 39.

Russian healthcare needs serious innovations related to its organization, including the use of hospital-replacing technologies - day hospitals, hospitals at home, “one-day surgery” hospitals, diagnostics, nursing and rehabilitation either on an outpatient basis or in cheaper rehabilitation beds; expansion of the team of doctors general practice and family doctors to provide primary health care.

3.5. Employment insurance. The risk of job loss (unemployment) remains in market conditions, regardless of the success of economic development. For hired workers who have no other source of income other than wages, insurance for this social risk is vital. It is based on the following principles:

> Insurance is compulsory and applies only to workers of working age.

> Insurance premiums are collected from the employee’s salary. Until the minimum wage reaches the subsistence level, which includes the corresponding insurance contributions, the employer pays them for employees with wages below the subsistence level.

> Only insured persons have the right to unemployment benefits, therefore the system of accounting for contributions and payment of benefits should be based on individual insurance and personalized accounting.

> The right to receive benefits arises for the employee upon continuous payment of the contribution during the 12 months of work preceding unemployment, and upon dismissal not of his own free will.

39 Social protection of the population / Ed. N.M. Rimashevskaya. - M.: ISEPN RAS, Carleton University, 2002. - P. 155-157.

> Benefit amount: in the first 3 months

65%, next 3 months - 50%, next 6 months - 45% of insured wages.

> The maximum duration of benefit payment is no more than 1 year.

> The maximum benefit amount is determined by limiting the maximum amount of insured wages. It is advisable to establish a “ceiling” similar to pension insurance.

The tariff rate ranges from 2 to 1.1%.

Instead of a conclusion

Increasing wages, pensions, expanding social risk insurance, as well as a state guarantee of a minimum level of satisfaction of needs will actually make it possible to overcome in Russia not only the problem of poverty, but the even more terrible problem of the social field.

’ rization, destroying human ’ capital and preventing the population from adapting to new living conditions.

"The average cash income in 2010 will increase by 3.5 times, the decile differentiation coefficient will decrease by 30% 3 and amount to 5.7 times; the share of the population with cash per capita income will decrease to 10.5%, t i.e. 2.5 times in relation to the current situation.40 Among the poor group of the population there will remain mainly large families with a non-working mother, pensioners living alone receiving a social pension, as well as families with disabled children. These groups of the population will receive benefits (subsidies). A possible doubling of GDP will allow us to move even further towards improving the living standards of the population. The nationalization of natural resource rent will act in the same direction.

V. A. Ilyin

DEVELOP THE SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL POTENTIAL OF THE REGION

Doubling the gross domestic product by 2010 is the first priority of Russia's modern development. The essence of the process of doubling GDP is not simply to increase the quantity of products, but to ensure a new quality of economic growth. World experience convincingly shows that all countries where success has been achieved in social and economic development have followed the path

Vladimir Alexandrovich

Doctor of Economics, Prof., Director

All-Russian Scientific and Research Center CEMI RAS.

gaining leading positions in the scientific and technical field. Moreover, research by leading domestic scientists suggests that there is no other option for accelerating Russia’s development than strengthening and increasing its scientific and technical potential.

Unfortunately, the current state of this potential can be defined as critical in a number of ways. The number of personnel involved in research and development has decreased significantly compared to the pre-reform level. Has weakened sharply innovation activity enterprises. Currently, Russia’s share in the global market of civilian high-tech products is less than 0.3%,

SOCIO-ECONOMIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC PROBLEMS OF MODERN RUSSIA

N. M. Rimashevskaya

BULLETIN OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES Vol. 74, No. 3, p. 209-218 (2004)

The article brought to the attention of readers is based on scientific communication, which was heard at a meeting of the Presidium of the Russian Academy of Sciences last July. The discussion materials are published in summary form.

Original

Rimashevskaya Natalya Mikhailovna- Corresponding Member of the Russian Academy of Sciences,
Director of the Institute of Socio-Economic Problems of Population of the Russian Academy of Sciences (ISEPN).

Market reforms and transformational changes carried out in recent years have strictly followed the requirements Washington Consensus, were carried out from above and without the necessary social shock absorbers. As we all remember, they began with “shock therapy”; the negative social consequences were not taken into account. As a result, radical changes occurred in the living conditions of the Russian population, and this could not but affect the physical and psychological state of people, their behavior and the quality of human potential.

While adhering to overseas recommendations, our reformers did not pay due attention to the historical experience of Russia. But it would be useful to remember, for example, what Alexander II said in connection with the preparation of measures to free the peasants from serfdom. The autocrat emphasized that the nobility must, in the name of society, in the name of Russia, sacrifice part of their benefits and that the abolition of serfdom in no case, even at the first stage, should not worsen the life of the peasants, but, on the contrary, improve it. This is how the Russian Tsar posed the question, unlike Russian liberals.

I will try to analyze how the living conditions and characteristics of the population have changed during the next breakdown of the socio-economic foundations of our society. Who won and who lost as a result of reforms? What should the authorities have done and what did not they do? What steps should be taken immediately in the social sphere?

I will preface the following presentation with two remarks.

First. All presented provisions and conclusions will be commented on by data from the State Statistics Committee of Russia, which has never allowed and does not allow itself to give a worse picture than it actually is. This does not mean that I agree with all the assessments of this respected institution. But it is necessary to take into account his data, otherwise one cannot avoid discussions of a methodological nature. A note regarding Goskomstat is very important: the indicators used in the social sphere vary significantly, but 1%, when it comes to the total population of the country, is 1.5 million people. Thus, the number of poor people is determined by the State Statistics Committee at 25%, the World Bank - 27%, and the Institute of Socio-Economic Problems of Population of the Russian Academy of Sciences, which I head, - 33%. Even larger deviations in estimates are typical, for example, for the Gini coefficient, which reveals inequality in income distribution.

Second. We will also have to abstract from territorial features; they are large and significant, but this is the topic of a special report, which involves regional monitoring of living standards.

According to our (and not only our) estimates, as a result of the reforms, one fifth of the population benefited, while the majority basically lost. For some, living conditions have not changed. We consider those who managed to adapt and integrate into market structures to be the “winners”.

Changes in the level and quality of life of the population transformed into acute socio-economic problems, which had no less acute demographic consequences. Among them:

Catastrophic decline in income and material security of the main part of the population;

High proportion of poor people with extremely poor definition of poverty level;

Unprecedented polarization of living conditions;

Significant levels of unemployment and non-payment of wages;

Degradation of social security and actual destruction of the social sphere, including housing and communal services.

All this could not but affect the state of the population: its natural decline and depopulation began, the quality of the population decreased, and an ineffective model of external and internal migration emerged.

“Shock therapy” led to a sharp drop in the population’s monetary income (Fig. 1); hopes for their recovery in the coming years are low. In 2002, real incomes reached only the 1997 level.

Rice. 1. Main indicators of monetary income of the population
in real terms (1990 = 100%)

1 - real cash income,

2 - real accrued wages,

3 - real size of assigned pensions
(including compensation)

The main factor in the twofold decline in the living standards of Russians (compared to 1991) is inadequate wages. To date, the situation has developed as follows:

The minimum wage today is 600 rubles. per month, that is, 26% of the subsistence level (SL) of the working-age population (RUB 2,328);

The average monthly accrued salary in 2002 was 4414 rubles, or 141 US dollars, that is, 4.7 dollars per day;

One third of workers (20 million people) have earnings below the monthly minimum;

60% of workers (40 million people) do not provide income for even their minimum needs and the needs of one child;

The difference in pay between 10% of high- and 10% of low-paid workers is 30 times. An increase in average wages in 2002 by 18% with a change in its minimum level even from 300 to 450 rubles. does not mean anything other than a significant increase in it in high-income groups of the population.

As a result of its decline, wages have ceased to fulfill their basic functions: reproduction, since they do not even ensure the simple reproduction of the labor force of the worker himself; economic, since it does not stimulate improvement in the quality and productivity of labor; social, as it enhances the disintegration of society due to growing property differentiation.

Today, the poverty line is 1.5 times lower than the level adopted in 1991 and amounts to 1,800 rubles. (2002), or 60 dollars per month (2 dollars per day), which, from the point of view of UN standards, corresponds only to the level of developing countries. The distribution of income of the population shows that the share of the poor in our country reaches 25% (36 million people); half of the country's citizens have incomes of less than $4 a day; a tenth is not even provided with a food basket; half of Russian children live in poverty.

The extremely low level of consumption is evidenced, first of all, by the fact that on average food costs reach half of the total expenses of families, while in developed countries this figure does not exceed 20-30%. This does not mean that Russia is a poor country. On the contrary, it is very rich, especially in resources. Only the bulk of its population lives poorly and very poorly.

The most severe consequences of the reforms are associated with the extraordinary increase in social polarization. This is evidenced by the distribution of income of the population. Thus, the ratio of average incomes of the top 10% and the bottom 10% (decile coefficient of funds) is 14.2; Gini coefficient - about 0.4; decile coefficient of income differentiation - 8.2 times; the income gap between the 5% extreme groups with the highest and lowest incomes reaches at least 50 times; The “top” 20% group of the population owns 46% of the total income fund, while the “bottom” group owns only about 6% (Table 1).

Table 1. Distribution of cash income of the population, %

Cash income by 20% groups

first (lowest income)
second
third
fourth
fifth (with the highest income)

Coeff. Gini (income concentration index)

6.0
11.6
17.6
26.5
38.3

6.1
10.7
15.2
21.7
46.3

5.8
10.5
15.2
22.3
46.2

6.0
10.5
15.0
21.5
47.0

6.0
10.4
14.8
21.1
47.7

5.8
10.4
15.1
21.9
46.8

5.6
10.4
15.4
22.8
45.8

5.6
10.4
15.4
22.8
45.8

We can say that now there are two Russias that live in different dimensions, understand each other poorly, have different orientations and preferences, their own demand and market for goods and services. Polarization of income entails the disintegration of society and causes aggression from certain groups population, especially young people, leads to instability and mass deviant behavior. This is the main factor in the criminalization of society and the increase in drug and alcohol consumption.

Based on a composition of statistical data from various sources and using special methods, a socio-economic pyramid of Russian society was built, which reflects the economic stratification of the population (Fig. 2).

Rice. 2. Economic stratification of the Russian population

It is necessary to emphasize one methodologically important fact: given the existing polarization of wages and income, their average indicators do not reflect the dynamics of the ongoing processes. The growth in real incomes of the population, which amounted to 30% over three years, according to Goskomstat estimates, in reality means an increase in the incomes of only the rich and high-income strata, while the real incomes of the poor are actually frozen. As an average characteristic, one should use a modal value that characterizes the most common level of income and is significantly lower than the statistical average. The presence of motor transport in one quarter of families (Goskomstat data) should not be misleading: the factor of purchase history (15-20 years ago) and the use of the car for self-employment are at play here.

It would be possible to continue the description of the situation, also touching on the problems of unemployment, deformation of social security and infrastructure. But what has been said is enough to further show how a decade of reforms influenced the processes of demographic reproduction.

According to preliminary data from the 2002 All-Russian Population Census, 145.2 million people live in Russia. The natural decline between the two censuses amounted to 7.4 million, of which 5.6 million were compensated by the influx of migrants, so the real decline in numbers was only 1.8 million people.

Rice. 3. Russian Cross - dynamics of crude birth and death rates (per 1000 population)

1 - birth rate, 2 - death rate

Natural population decline in Russia began in 1992, when the fertility and mortality curves intersected (Fig. 3), and there are no signs yet that their direction may change. To date, migration compensation for population loss has decreased to 4%, and the dynamics of the number of Russians depends entirely on the ratio of births and deaths. But the situation here is not at all rosy.

As for fertility, it is characterized by the following trends:

The absolute number of births over the past 15 years has decreased by almost 2 times - from 2.5 million in 1987 to 1.4 million in 2002;

The total fertility rate (the average number of children born to one woman in her entire life) today is 1.25, while to ensure simple reproduction (replacement of parents by children) it must reach 2.15, hence depopulation;

For various reasons, society steadily focuses on a one-child family: 54% of families have one child, 37% have two, 9% have three or more; According to expert estimates, 15-17% of married couples are infertile;

Now about 30% of children are born out of wedlock, which entails various kinds of negative consequences.

It should be borne in mind that the decline in fertility is a global trend. However, in modern Russia, in addition to this trend, the process of population reproduction is influenced by some negative social factors (Table 2), which aggravate the situation. Temporary shifts in the birth rate have had a certain impact: births are being postponed and abandoned due to the systemic crisis and political instability in society.

Table 2. General fertility, mortality and natural increase rates (per 1000 population)

Number of births

Number of deaths

Natural increase, decrease (-)

Russia
Austria
Great Britain
Germany
Denmark
Italy
Netherlands
Finland
France
Sweden
USA
Japan

13.4
11.6
13.9
11.4
12.4
9.8
13.3
13.2
13.5
14.5
16.7
9.9

8.7
9.6
11.4
9.2
12.6
9.4
13.0
11.0
13.2
10.2
14.0
9.4

11.2
10.6
11.2
11.5
11.9
9.4
8.6
10.0
9.3
11.1
8.7
6.7

15.4
9.3
10.3
10.1
10.9
9.7
8.8
9.5
9.1
10.5
8.5
7.6

2.2
1.0
2.7
-0.1
0.5
0.4
4.7
3.2
4.2
3.4
8.0
3.2

-6.7
0.3
1.1
-0.9
1.7
-0.3
4.2
1.5
4.1
-0.3
5.5
1.8

The situation with mortality in Russia is even more dramatic:

The crude mortality rate (the number of deaths per 1,000 population) is steadily increasing, in contrast to aging European countries;

The number of deaths is 1.7 times higher than the number of births over the same period of time;

There is an excess mortality rate among men, especially those of working age; the life expectancy of Russian men is very low, even in comparison with many developing countries - 58 years.

If the current mortality rate remains the same, of Russians who reached 16 years of age in 2000, less than half of the men will live to reach 60 years of age. The life expectancy of men who are now 25 or more years old is equal to or even less than the life expectancy at the end of the 19th century, although at that time the life expectancy of those born was only 29 years (which was due to high infant mortality).

In the country, according to modern ideas, infant mortality remains high, despite its decline in recent years: now this figure reaches 13 per 1000 children under the age of 1 year, which is 3-4 times more than in developed countries. In terms of infant mortality, Russia has one of the highest rates in Europe (higher only in Romania) and not only in Europe: in Japan, the USA, and Australia the situation is also better than ours.

Forecasts for the total population of Russia offered by various organizations are disappointing: by 2025 there will be 125 million Russians, and by the middle of this century - only about 100 million people, that is, there will be 45 million fewer of us.

The second significant consequence of the great transformations is a decline in the qualitative characteristics of the population in three main groups of indicators: health (physical, mental, social), intellectual potential and professional preparedness, spiritual and moral values ​​and orientations.

Assessing the health of the population through the characteristics of ill health, we have to note an increase in morbidity, especially for diseases of social etiology (tuberculosis, syphilis, AIDS/HIV, infectious hepatitis). Projections show that by 2010, 8-11% of the population will be HIV-infected, which is about 13 million people, mostly young people. According to international experts, Russia is at the stage of a concentrated HIV epidemic. A quarter of HIV-infected people are women of active reproductive age. This means that HIV infection can lead to direct demographic losses. Drug addiction is growing exponentially, especially among children aged 11 to 17 years. It is estimated that the number of drug addicts reaches 4 million people; 70 thousand people die every year due to drug use.

Particularly dangerous is the decline in reproductive health. The proportion of pregnant women suffering from anemia has increased 3.6 times over the decade. As a result, the number of children sick at birth increased 2.6 times. The main concern is the fact that the generation of children has less health potential than their parents, and their children (grandchildren of their parents) have even less potential. Already at the moment of birth, 40% of children are sick, and during the life cycle their health only worsens. This creates a “social funnel” into which younger cohorts are increasingly drawn: health problems move from older population groups to groups of children and youth. In order to get out of the “funnel” (if this is even possible), more than one generation of healthy people is needed.

In terms of healthy life expectancy, Russia ranks 107th in the world. Its expected duration for men is 51.5 years, for women - 61.9 years. Since 1999, there has been an intensive increase in the number of disabled people (by approximately 1 million people per year). Their total number in 2002 was more than 11 million people (7.5% of the population); according to forecasts, in 2015 it will increase to 20 million (15% of the population).

The decline in intellectual potential - both as a result of direct "brain drain" and the departure of professionals to non-core sectors of the economy - continues, although with less intensity. The decline in the quality of school and vocational education, especially characteristic of educational institutions in rural areas and small towns, is also important.

No less acute is the problem of the crisis of social values ​​and orientations, the decline of morals and moral principles against the backdrop of the lack of proper law and order and widespread violation of the rule of law. In the mass consciousness there is a process of erosion of moral norms characteristic of Russian culture. Pragmatism and an orientation towards personal gain, typical of the American model of interpersonal relationships and life orientations, are becoming more and more widespread.

By the end of the 90s, especially after the default of 1998, it became obvious that it was no longer possible to continue to form the market in Russia, without paying attention to the physical and psychological state of the country's citizens. However, neoliberal ideology did not allow us to adequately respond to social challenges. The main focus of the social program of the Russian Government from the very beginning (from “shock therapy”) to this day is the reduction of state obligations in the social sphere, which actually contradicts the Constitution of the Russian Federation (Article 7), which defines the Russian state as social.

In this regard, it is worth commenting on a number of social measures taken by the government.

Firstly, the introduction of a flat tax scale on personal income turned out to be directly directed against the poor and low-income groups of the population. For them, the tax rate increased from 12 to 13%; The tax burden has increased, which was previously 2 times more burdensome than for highly paid groups. As a result, the polarization of the population increased, and the income gap grew from 14 to 17 times. For those whose earnings do not exceed 30 thousand rubles. per year, the tax burden (including the unified social tax) amounted to 48.6% (almost half), while those who receive over 600 thousand per year pay in general only 15% (13 + 2%) of their income.

Secondly, the introduction of the unified social tax (UST) crossed out the emerging insurance system with extra-budgetary funds. As a result of this “transformation,” contributions from entrepreneurs, actually paid out of the wage fund, were transformed into a regular state tax, and this forced employers to freeze wages. The unified social tax becomes the property of the state, losing its target orientation, and, if necessary, is used by the state for needs other than intended, supporting the budget.

Third, The introduction of a funded pension system by slowing down the growth of pensions of today's pensioners actually has a twofold goal:

a) the final justification for reducing the current pension rates, including the allocation of a basic pension in the labor structure, and

b) accumulation of “long” rubles in the hands of the state in order to use them as an investment resource.

Fourthly, The housing and communal services reform planned by the authorities is aimed not so much at bringing this sector out of its deplorable state, but at getting at its disposal a housing subsidy fund, which is close in size to the pension fund; its use will be even less transparent, given the depreciation of funds at the level of 70-80%.

Fifthly, reform of the education sector, the introduction of the Unified State Examination (USE) turns out to be a guarantee of privileges for those who study closer to the center in schools equipped at a modern level and staffed with teachers. Today in Russia, a third of schools do not have not only a full complement of teachers, but often water supply, sewerage, heating and electricity; the quality of education in such schools is an order of magnitude lower than what is required by the Unified State Exam.

At sixth, One cannot fail to mention the introduction of so-called targeted social assistance, the effectiveness of which is close to zero. In fact, the share of cash transfers in household income today is less than 2%, while at the same time, administrative costs associated with establishing eligibility for social assistance will exceed the amount of benefits, opening a new source of corruption among officials.

So, all that has been said allows us to formulate a number of conclusions.

Unfavorable living conditions resulted in a violation of the dynamic stereotype of higher nervous activity in a significant part of the Russian population. This, in turn, caused a weakening of the immune defense, the development of pathological processes, depressive states and other mental disorders.

The state of “wear and tear” and “fatigue” of the population leads to the fact that the generation of children does not reproduce the generation of their parents not only quantitatively, but also qualitatively; The population is declining, human capital is being destroyed, and this is a threat to national security.

There is a process of disintegration of social ties and weakening of social potential, which is comparable to the depletion of nature in the absence of its restoration.

The state's liberal policy is aimed at maintaining the economic well-being of large businesses; the survival of the main part of the country's population is not actually taken into account; As a result, Russia's people's potential is being destroyed and the protest resource is growing.

In order to reverse the trends disastrous for the country, it is necessary to immediately and radically change state policy, turn it towards the social sphere, guided by the ideology of the welfare state. This presupposes the implementation of a comprehensive doctrine aimed at systematically solving aggravated problems, providing the population with at least minimal state guarantees, and the widespread development of social insurance. Economic growth and the use of redistribution mechanisms will not only allow us to revise the cost of living by modern basis, but also to ensure decent wages for all workers.