O que é este blog?

Este blog trata basicamente de ideias, se possível inteligentes, para pessoas inteligentes. Ele também se ocupa de ideias aplicadas à política, em especial à política econômica. Ele constitui uma tentativa de manter um pensamento crítico e independente sobre livros, sobre questões culturais em geral, focando numa discussão bem informada sobre temas de relações internacionais e de política externa do Brasil. Para meus livros e ensaios ver o website: www.pralmeida.org. Para a maior parte de meus textos, ver minha página na plataforma Academia.edu, link: https://itamaraty.academia.edu/PauloRobertodeAlmeida.

Mostrando postagens com marcador economista. Mostrar todas as postagens
Mostrando postagens com marcador economista. Mostrar todas as postagens

domingo, 9 de outubro de 2022

Os desafios econômicos da Rússia decorrentes da guerra de agressão contra a Ucrânia - Sergei Tsyplyaev, economista (Rosbalt)

Russian Economic Expert Tsyplyaev: Russians Will Have To Forego A Great Deal As Partial Mobilization Strains The Economy

Rosblat (Rússia), October 3, 2022

 

In an interview with Peter Golevsky of Rosbalt media, Sergei Tsyplyaev, predicts a rough ride for the Russian economy, as the war in Ukraine is now in its seventh month and has become a war of attrition rather than the anticipated short triumphal operation. Sanctions are causing production difficulties that are compounded by the partial mobilization that has called up key personnel and has prompted others to flee Russia.

 

Tsyplyaev also highlights a point that has been played down in Soviet and contemporary   Russian history. Russia's heroic efforts against Germany during WWII enjoyed massive US support in the form of equipment and food deliveries. In the current struggle, Ukraine is the beneficiary of such assistance from not only the US, but from other countries with huge economic potential. Tsyplyaev signs off with the aside "all this could have been predicted.

 

The interview with Tsyplyaev follows below:[1]  

 

"The partial mobilization that started in Russia on September, 21 sparked a heated discussion on the prospects of not only for the further course of the special military operation [hereafter – the SVO], but also for the Russian economy per se. Many experts predict its inevitable transition to a "war footing." Sergei Tsyplyaev, Authorized Representative of the St. Petersburg University of Technology, Management and Economics and Editor-in-Chief of Vlast magazine, analyzes the current situation.

 

- What are the main economic consequences of partial mobilization for both the public services sector and private businesses?

 

- First and foremost, any military campaign constitutes a serious burden on the economy. It has always been the case. The question is always the following: will the economy withstand this military campaign, or not? There were times when it simply couldn’t support the war efforts, for instance, at the end of World War I, a lot of countries [including Imperial Russia] simply collapsed.

 

Therefore, now, when we have a concentration of human, material, and financial resources on the military campaign, it’s clear that all of these resources are being withdrawn from the economy.

 

There are several factors that have hit it hart. I must say that first and foremost it’s sanctions. The sanctions, that are associated with the departure of high-tech companies, and many of our plants are experiencing problems with the supply of components that many Russian plants are experiencing, as well those sanctions that bar us from exporting certain goods.

 

The second serious issue, naturally, is precisely the number of people who are involved in the economy and may be mobilized. At first glance, may seem that 300,000 conscripted people is not a lot. The working-age population accounts for half of Russia’s population, about 70 million but we are observing the outflow of people who are simply fleeing the country. I have to say, very often people who work in quite serious public offices are being pulled out. This can have an impact even with a small number of conscripts.

 

Now there are entire industrial sectors that are beginning to come forward with complaints and requests in order to limit the draft to a certain extent, or to seek accommodation for take business interests. Additionally, they ask for draft immunity for management and key employees. Operations of an entire enterprise will simply grind to a halt no matter how many workers are left there, provided one drafts CEO and few key administrators. This is a serious test for the economy and, in general, its serious restructuring, which is, in fact, underway right now.

 

- Is this very restructuring of the economy, as they are currently talking, on a "war footing" really implementable considering today’s conditions?

 

- Naturally, it’s possible to restructure the economy towards a military footing This is an understandable task, and it’s happening. Many defense enterprises operate in three shifts. This means withdrawal of finances and revenues from other spheres. And this means, naturally, the withdrawal of a certain amount of material assets.

 

Once again, I repeat that the key question: how long will the economy be able to withstand it? It’s obvious that this will cause a drop in living standards. Naturally it means forgoing a lot of things. But if you cross a certain line, the civilian economy will crumble. The military economy is also not isolated from civilian one; it cannot exist without the entire infrastructure of the civilian economy being preserved.

 

We understand that those people, employed at enterprises that produce tanks, missiles, guns, everything else, they don't go shopping for tanks and missiles, but for meat, milk, bread, and etc. If this is not provided, then, in the end, the economy will simply collapse.

 

Let’s take, for example, the times of the Great Patriotic War. Back then under the Lend-Lease agreement we were receiving a rather large amount of equipment and goods. For instance, there were three times more Lend-Lease trucks, than locally produced, for locomotives, the Lend-Lease supplies exceeded by nearly 300% the production capabilities of the Soviet Union. Since 1943, food accounted for a very serious volume of Lend-Lease (more than 25%), because one had to feed the country somehow. That is, in fact, the situation.

 

- In the current year, defense spending increased by a third, from 3.5 trillion rubles to 4.7 trillion rubles. In 2023, the government plans to spend 5 trillion rubles on defense, as well as another 4.2 trillion rubles on national security and law enforcement. Will the budget withstand it?

- It’s not about the budget. The budget is essentially a purse. The question is whether the economy will withstand it, because this money has to be collected for the budget. We are already hearing talks that an additional export duty is being introduced.


There will be additional taxation, which means, that it will be necessary to increase the money withdrawal from the economy for the budget.

All defense spending should show up in the price of meat, milk, bread, housing and utilities, etc., so that this money can then be taxed and withdrawn into the budget. It all depends on the terms of the SVO. If initially there were talks about a very short term and there was hope that it would have almost no effect on the economy, today we already witnessing a seven-month-long history.

It looks like it's going to be a "game of attrition" to see who can hold out longer. Ukraine is largely maintained by the Lend-Lease supplies, an "external supply" regime. According to Kyiv's declarations, 40% of the budget is covered by external revenues. I believe that military equipment will be supplied by a huge number of countries that have quite large economic potentials. Thus, we will face very tough competition ahead, and the economy will be under incredible pressure from this campaign. By and large, it was predictable.

 

[1] Rosbalt.ru, September 29, 2022.

==========


 Comentário de Paulo Roberto de Almeida: 

De fato, a Rússia euroasiática ainda tem “espaço” e condições sistêmicas propensas a aceitar um importante peso de restrições de toda ordem, pois assim foi nos séculos precedentes. Ela nunca desfrutou uma real prosperidade, liberdade menos ainda, ou de um regime minimamente decente do ponto de vista da vida humana.

As atuais sanções são limitadas, não podendo provocar um colapso iminente do sistema econômico, mas o acúmulo de mortes na guerra de agressão à Ucrânia, e a emigração maciça de mobilizáveis pode acabar criando um desconforto com o tirano de Moscou, e dissensões na alta cúpula que induzam à sua partida antecipada.
Quem virá em seu lugar? 
As possibilidades estão abertas, mas enquanto a Rússia tiver o ativo apoio da China, a tendência é para o pior, e isso por culpa dos americanos lá atrás, nos anos 90 e 2000, quando passaram a tentar conter a China. Ela então inverteu sua postura estratégica.
Decisões miseráveis de dirigentes arrogantes.


terça-feira, 9 de julho de 2019

Thomas Sowell: Happy Birthday (89): o maior e melhor economista americano

Thomas Sowell: A Birthday Appreciation

As I mentioned last month in an homage to one of his regular features, my intellectual hero is Thomas Sowell. Today is Dr. Sowell’s 89th birthday. Since turning 80, he has published Intellectuals and Race, Wealth, Poverty, and Politics (with a second revised edition coming a year later), a couple of new editions of his Basic Economics, and Discrimination and Disparities. I read Sowell’s memoir, A Personal Odyssey, in one sitting when it came out, and I’ve never read a Sowell book and thought it a poor use of my time.
The essence of Sowell’s approach to the world is evident in this clip from Milton Friedman’s Free to Choose series:
Consider what he’s saying here: “I think we’re talking at cross purposes. On the one hand, we’re talking about results that we’re hoping for. On the other hand, we’re talking about processes that we’re setting in motion.” It’s the essence of the Conflict of Visions he would write about in his 1987 book of that title, republished in 2007. He explains the conflict of visions here:
Conflict is part of an (informal) trilogy that includes The Quest for Cosmic Justice and the book with the best subtitle I’ve ever read, The Vision of the Anointed: Self-Congratulation as a Basis for Social Policy. These books had a profound effect on me as a graduate student and young faculty member in the 2000s. They hold up well even after several decades, and, I think, they should be studied carefully by every social scientist and commentator.
While he retired from writing his regular column several years ago, he remains an active participant in the Great Conversation. In addition to his books, he is a regular guest on the Hoover Institution’s “Uncommon Knowledge,” where he is usually discussing a new book or a new edition of one of his older books, as in the video below where he discusses Discrimination and Disparities. It’s not a bad record for someone who is turning 89.
Sowell’s work continues to challenge me. This is obviously true in the case of issues like immigration on which I disagree with him and other issues like “cultural” practices and individual prosperity where I don’t want to agree with him, but it’s also true even when we’re talking about old standbys like basic economic ideas—price controls, for example, where he writes with clarity and insight few authors can match.
Happy birthday, Dr. Sowell, and may you have many more.