ARTS & ECONOMICS

Arts & Economics

Arts & Economics

Task I: Issues for Modern Economists

The modern economy does not stand still. Falls on the world economic crisis shows that people still have not learned to fully realize the consequences of their actions. Therefore we can not expect that the knowledge gained from old textbooks that may be useful today, in a situation when the world had changed. 

In late 1960 the American philosopher A. Toffler wrote a book called "Future Shock" (Futuroshok). In it he predicted the disease, which can be both mentally ill individual, and a problem that will be able to hit the entire country. "Future Shock" due to the fact that an individual or a whole society is unable to respond to the accelerating pace of life, the pace of change that befalls the world.

Indeed, we see that in the second half of the twentieth century, the world began to change with the previously unknown rate. Disappear and there are countries that are changing technology, new technology replacing old before they have time to become accustomed. As a consequence, the economy begins to work as she had never worked before. Very many of the measures being taken at the level of individual companies and at government level, are done out of habit, the old fashioned way, by thus the above-mentioned old textbooks, without taking into account the fact that the world was quite different. A changing world means that the usual prescriptions are either not work or will lead to quite unexpected consequences.

Speaking of the decade, which is in the public consciousness consistently associated with the concept of "market reform", you first need to recognize that economic reforms (or, anyway, is that for them extradited) led to a result different from social expectations, as well as on the purpose of proclaiming the initiators and supporters of social change. In this case, I do not mean the quantitative parameters - growth, inflation, the level and quality of consumption, etc., although they certainly are of great public importance. Yet more important to me, a qualitative goals and objectives, primarily the creation of the country's new socioeconomic system, as in the long run it is this, the system determines the degree of dynamism of the economy and living standards and prospects of solving the major social and economic problems. 

So, the economic system in Russia as a result of reforms the 1990's, of course, changed dramatically since the Soviet period. At the same time establishing a new system is radically different not only from the Soviet planned economy, but also from the originally stated goals and benchmarks. In principle, the fact that in reforming the economic reality may ultimately differ from the original plans - normally and naturally. In the end, the economy - it's not physics, and accurate predictions, not to mention the planning, there is in principle impossible. The problem - in fact (and I insist on it), which in our case, differences are very deep, fundamental nature. 

The country has not developed the conditions for effective intra-and inter-industry competition, not a mechanism of market concentration and capital accumulation in efficient firms, do not generate the necessary ...