History of world economic crises. Reference

For those who are panicking due to the economic crisis,
Pope Benedict XVI reminds that “money is decay” (2008)

The decline in global economic growth by the end of 2008

Great Recession ( English Great Recession), global recession of 2009, global crisis - a decline in the global economy that began in 2007-2008. This recession is a long-term event that began in 2008 and has not ended to this day.

Origins and reasons

The emergence of the crisis is associated with a general cyclical nature economic development, imbalances in international trade and capital flows, as well as overheating of the credit market and especially the mortgage crisis that manifested itself as a consequence of it - as a result of the credit expansion deployed in the 1980s - early 2000s.

High commodity prices

In the pre-crisis 2000s, there was a consumption boom, accompanied by a steady increase in prices for raw materials. In January 2008, oil prices exceeded $100 per barrel for the first time in history: “when the market for high-yield, but also very risky, structured debt backed by assets in the United States experienced a significant decline due to the subprime crisis in America, hedge fund money poured into the commodity markets, which led to an unbridled increase in oil futures prices...,” analysts noted in December 2007.

In one day on June 6, 2008, oil prices rose by $10 per barrel, as Vedomosti noted; oil prices have not risen so sharply in one day since the crisis in the 1970s. On July 11, 2008, the price of WTI oil reached an all-time high of $147.27 per barrel, after which a sharp decline began that continued until December 2008, when oil prices fell to a four-year low of $36 per barrel.

In January 2008, for the first time in history, copper prices exceeded $8,000 per ton on the London Metal Exchange. At the beginning of July, prices increased to $8,940 per ton, which became an absolute record since 1979, when trading began on the LME.

According to FAO, in April 2008, a record high was recorded for the composite index of food raw materials (274 points).

The beginning of the crisis in the USA

On October 31, 2008, Prime Minister V. Putin announced a possible reduction in budget expenditures and state monopolies; further business support will have to be provided primarily without additional government expenditures.

2009-2010

Nezavisimaya Gazeta journalist Mikhail Sergeev concluded that stagflation awaits Russia in 2009: a combination of recession while maintaining high inflation, and that the government has come to terms with the inevitability of such a negative scenario.

According to Forbes magazine, from May 2008 to February 2009, the number of Russian dollar billionaires decreased from 110 to 32 people, and their total wealth decreased by almost 5 times.

Nezavisimaya Gazeta wrote that based on the results of the first half of 2009, “Russia has become the undisputed leader among large countries in the relative rate of economic decline compared to the pre-crisis period.”

According to data published on March 11, 2010 by Forbes magazine, the number of billionaires in Russia almost doubled in 2009, increasing from 32 to 62 people, which experts explained by rising oil prices and the growth of stock markets - including due to anti-crisis injections from the Russian government .

In March 2010, a report World Bank It was noted that the losses of the Russian economy were less than expected at the beginning of the crisis. According to the World Bank, this was partly due to the large-scale anti-crisis measures taken by the government.

Stock market

On October 6, 2008, there was another, record in the history of the Russian stock market, drop in the RTS index (over the day by 19.1% - to 866.39 points; in London, where trading did not stop, Russian blue chips fell in price by 30 - 50 %).

From early August to early October 2008, the capitalization of the Russian stock market decreased by 51.7%, while the capitalization of stock markets in developing countries as a whole fell by 25.4%.

At the end of 2009, the Russian stock market turned out to be the world leader in growth, the RTS index grew 2.3 times. On March 12, 2010, Nezavisimaya Gazeta noted that the Russian stock market managed to win back most of the decline that occurred at the beginning of the global financial crisis.

By April 2010, there were practically no industries left in the Russian manufacturing industry that were in recession.

Anti-crisis measures

Measures to strengthen the financial sector implemented in 2008:

• subordinated loans - 450 billion rubles;
• recapitalization and other direct support measures - 335 billion rubles;
• recapitalization of the Deposit Insurance Agency - 200 billion rubles;
• recapitalization of banks - 75 billion rubles;
• recapitalization of the Agency for Housing Mortgage Lending - 60 billion rubles.

Measures to support the real economy implemented in 2008:

• fiscal incentive measures aimed at supporting manufacturers - 272 billion rubles;
• reduction of the tax burden - 220 billion rubles;
• support for industries - 52 billion rubles;
• fiscal stimulus measures addressed to the population - 32 billion rubles;
• purchase of housing for military personnel and for socially vulnerable groups of the population - 32 billion rubles.

According to the remark of academician V.V. Ivanter (2014): “During the crisis of 2008-2009, deposits and incomes of the population were preserved, the free exchange of the ruble for foreign currency. And about 200 billion dollars from reserves were spent. But at the same time, the economy “fell” by almost 8 percent.”

On October 10, 2008, Finance Minister A. Kudrin said in Washington that the possibility of using pension savings to support the Russian stock market would be considered; he also said that the crisis could last “more than two years,” and the growth of Russian assets “will have to wait for 3-5 years.”

Crisis duration estimates

In 2008 and 2009, most politicians and economists predicted that the crisis would end soon. However, there were those who spoke about its long-term nature. In particular, Russian economist Mikhail Khazin estimated the duration of the crisis at 5-8 years. A close look at previous deep financial crises suggests that there is reason to worry that the decline in employment will be disastrously deep and the recovery incredibly slow.”

In 2009, national governments' forecasts regarding the consequences of the crisis for their own economies were in most cases more optimistic than for the economies of other countries and the world as a whole, and most often referred to the end of 2009 or the beginning of 2010.

In 2011-2012, more and more economists began to talk about the prolonged nature of the crisis. It is especially emphasized that the crisis is far from over and it continues to develop.

Russian experts' assumptions about when the crisis will end vary greatly: from several months (Dvorkovich) to several decades (Kudrin, Ershov). Foreign authors give similarly varied, although not so radical, forecasts. The reasons for the dispersion are that government officials, on the one hand, fear negative sentiment and even panic among market participants, including consumers, and try to reassure people with optimistic forecasts and assurances that “Everything is under control.” On the other hand, we have to justify ourselves for taking unpopular measures, which is easier to do against the backdrop of pessimistic forecasts.

The economic crisis goes hand in hand with deteriorating health conditions (due to rising unemployment and poverty and the widening gap between rich and poor), but is not always accompanied by rising mortality rates. Financial difficulties are causing suicides around the world.

Proposals for resolving the crisis

Fiscal expansion and financial regulation

To combat the global crisis, the US, in addition to setting a target of 2% growth, proposed that G20 countries restart cost accounting. This policy was rejected. At a meeting of G20 finance ministers, delegates agreed to pursue monetary policy and fiscal expansion as long as economic growth continues. There has also been a proposal to help developing countries through IMF grants and improved financial regulation, including requiring hedge funds to register (whether private, unregulated or less regulated) investment funds) and their managers.

Increased birth rate

Italian economist Gotti Tedeschi is of the view that the true origin of this crisis lies in the “falling birth rate in Western countries.”

Encouraging consumption and boosting confidence

The Council of Chambers of Commerce and Industry and 18 major Spanish enterprises carried out their advertising campaign on February 25, 2010 to build confidence and create positive sentiment among the public in order to overcome the economic crisis.

Increasing budget deficit and spending

According to economists Paul Krugman and Robin Wells, the ossification of various economic and political authorities portends a prolonged crisis with high unemployment and low economic growth unless solutions are found to promote a deep recession in the short term, such as government action aimed at borrowing money and increased costs.

Agriculture support

The agricultural sector often remains in the shadow of industrialization. It, in turn, still uses new technologies and knowledge, but has lost its importance, which has noticeable consequences in cultural terms. It's time to take agriculture into account again, not for nostalgic reasons, but as a necessary resource for the future."

World economy after the end of QE2

Global economic downturn

In June 2011, the second monetary policy of quantitative easing (QE2) ended in the United States. Opinions have emerged that the recession is largely over. According to General Electric CEO Jeffrey Immelt in August 2011, “the recession was fast, severe and affected all businesses to some extent. Some are emerging from the crisis to this day... the USA, Western Europe, and Japan were especially hard hit. There was something of a labor recession in Brazil. The country continued to grow, as did China. Russia felt the crisis due to falling oil prices, and some regions of the world were not affected by the crisis at all. The blow fell mainly on the USA and Europe.”

On August 18, the American bank Morgan Stanley released a report in which it noted that the United States and European Union countries are currently on the verge of a second wave of recession.

In the summer of 2011, the crisis affected US sovereign debt, leading to a debt ceiling crisis.

August 2. The US Congress approved a plan to increase the national debt limit and reduce the budget deficit. If the plan was not accepted, the United States faced a technical default, since the country would lose the ability to service its debt.

August 6. On the night of August 5-6, Standard & Poor’s for the first time in history downgraded the US long-term credit rating from the maximum level of “AAA” to “AA+” with a negative outlook.

Gold rose in price by 12% in August. Investors view gold as a reliable alternative to volatile currencies.

Quantitative easing program

The quantitative easing program, as an instrument of monetary policy of various states, involves government cash injections into the country's economy in order to increase the money supply on hand. An increase in money from the population and enterprises should lead to:

• To an increase in consumption and production, and as a consequence, to the restoration of a stable economic situation and the possible end of the economic crisis in the world, as well as a greater strengthening of the US dollar;

1. The first quantitative easing program is QE1. 1.7 trillion was spent on the implementation of this program, completed in 2009. dollars. It consisted of the repurchase of mortgage bonds and treasury securities from the market. The consequence of QE1 was the revival of the US economy, the gradual recovery of the securities market and a significant increase in indices (up to 100 percent), with a gradual devaluation of the dollar. Mortgage rates were reduced to historical lows, which stabilized the real estate market that had collapsed during the crisis;

2. The second quantitative easing program (QE2) was carried out from November 2010 to June 2011. According to most experts, the results of the second quantitative easing are mixed. After all, the program led to the fact that the Fed received an excess money supply instead of accelerating US GDP growth, as well as an ever-increasing rate of inflation, and a drop in the purchasing power of the population. All of these factors became an untimely “anchor” for the country’s economy. The Federal Reserve allocated $600 billion for this program. Thus, taking into account the costs of implementing the first wave of quantitative easing, a total of over 2.3 trillion was spent on liquidity injection. dollars, which also led to a weakening of the dollar;

3. Operation Twist. In order to overcome the consequences of the crisis that broke out in 2008, the Fed had already twice launched quantitative easing programs (QE1, QE2): they bought US Treasury bonds with the constant printing of additional volumes of banknotes.

The new program to stimulate the economy was called “Operation Twist” (or, as it was also dubbed, “Operation Turn”). In the 60s of the previous century, the Federal Reserve System already carried out a similar program. Then, treasury securities with a further maturity of up to 30 years were purchased in the amount of $400 billion. These funds were planned to be obtained through the sale of securities, the maturity of which was no more than 3 years.

US economy, QE3 and the dollar exchange rate.

At the beginning of 2012, the United States' GDP level was 20 percent of global gross domestic product, with 45 percent of final global demand.

US Federal Reserve assets in dynamics

Only thanks to the colossal emissions of the Federal Reserve, carried out since the beginning of the crisis in 2008, which in total exceeded 2.5 trillion. dollars (or 17 percent of the country's GDP), it was possible to avoid the economy sliding into recession, that is, the complete collapse of the financial system, the impoverishment of the population, and the collapse in industry.

In the first quarter of 2011, US economic growth accelerated from a low of 0.4 percent to 3.0 percent at the end of the year.

As we see, Washington manages to maintain the illusion of stability and the prospect of the emergence of “sprouts of growth.” But in fact, all this growth is directly sponsored by huge injections from the Federal Reserve.

The second wave of the global economic crisis

According to a number of experts, a second wave of the crisis is inevitable. The constant increase in the financial deficit and public debt in the United States, accompanying government measures to save the national economy, marked the beginning of the debt crisis: “The world economy faces the risk of a “second bottom.”

The IMF's World Economic Outlook report (October 2012) notes that the global economy could slide into recession, the risks of which are alarmingly high.

Presenting the World Bank's semi-annual World Economic Outlook report (June 2013), leading economist and First Deputy Chairman Kaushik Bazu noted that “we are now at the bottom, but we are ready to begin the recovery. We will see some improvements starting next year.”

The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (June 2013) expects global economic growth to strengthen and the world economy to almost fully recover to pre-crisis levels in 2014.

In August 2013, the end of the two-year economic recession in the eurozone was announced.

In January 2014, the International Monetary Fund raised its forecast for global economic growth based on expectations of an acceleration in GDP growth rates in the United States, the Eurozone and Japan: “The economy continues to recover,” it said head economist IMF Olivier Blanchard. IMF experts also note that developed countries have become the locomotive of global growth, rather than developing ones, as was the case in the first years after the 2008 financial crisis.

In June 2014, the World Bank lowered its forecast for global economic growth as the crisis in Ukraine, coupled with unusual cold weather in the US negatively impacted growth rates in the first half of this year.

In the summer of 2014, the capitalization of world stock markets reached a historical high of $66 trillion in August, surpassing the previous peak of $63 trillion. 2007 (during the crisis, collapsing to $25 trillion).

In October 2014, the head of the IMF, C. Lagarde, made a statement that the global economy would face a long period of low growth, high unemployment and geopolitical problems - the latter, in turn, leading to an even greater deterioration in the economic situation.

The impact of LTRO and QE on the US stock market

Introduction

The topic of crisis is one of the most popular today. The whole world is now literally in a fever from the word “crisis”. It is called the banking crisis, financial crisis, economic crisis of 2008, global crisis, and also the crisis in Russia. The media is throwing out more and more negative information, and every day analysts' forecasts are becoming more frightening. Today, the words “financial crisis” are on the lips not only of company owners and top managers, but also of ordinary workers.

The relevance of the research topic is determined by the fact that the search for ways to prevent financial crises has become a problem for the world community. This is due to the increasing risk of crises in the context of economic, including financial, globalization. As a result, crisis shocks in different segments of the financial market have become more frequent, and their spread as a result of a chain reaction periodically takes the form of an avalanche. Financial crises contribute to a slowdown in the rate of economic development of countries and lead to negative social consequences.

The purpose of this work is to study the crisis phenomenon itself, the causes of its occurrence, as well as its impact on the financial and real sectors of the economy.

The goal defines the following tasks:

Explain the economic content of financial crises;

Study the impact of the crisis on the financial and real sectors of the economy;

Study economists' forecasts about the further development of the economic situation in the world;

Identify the relationship between the real sector of the economy and banking sector in times of crisis;

Consider measures aimed at overcoming the consequences of the crisis.

The object of the study is the global financial and economic crisis.

The subject of the study is the economy of the Russian Federation during the crisis.

When writing the work, materials from educational and periodical literature were used. Information base The research was based on reference data and methodological materials of the Central Bank (CB), Federal Law. This issue is most fully covered in the works of G.E. Alpatov and L.N. Krasavina. Tabular, graphical, analytical research methods, as well as a comparison method, were used.

1. The concept and essence of financial crises

1.1 Financial crises as part of the economic system

The development of world monetary and credit relations is accompanied by outbreaks of financial crises. Before the formation of the world economy, financial turmoil affected national systems individual countries. In the last century they began to acquire an international character. The pronounced international nature of financial crises manifested itself in the 30-90s, which belonged to the lower phase of the long wave of development market economy. To a large extent financial crisis They became a reflection of the ongoing structural changes in the world economic system.

There is a debate among economists about whether a complex classification of international crises is needed, or whether all crises have common features and characteristics, which allows us to talk about a single crisis model. Most experts believe that it is justified to separate the two types of systemic crises.

The first type assumes that as a result of the weak positions of a particular national currency, capital owners seek to withdraw their assets from this currency, and “capital flight” is observed, which leads to general economic difficulties. In this case, much depends on which currency is going through difficult times: if it is the currency of a developing state, then the crisis will be limited to national or regional borders, but if it is a currency of international importance (for example, the dollar), then the crisis becomes global.

The second type of crisis is called “contagious” by some experts, since it is not related to a separate national currency, but is associated with distrust in one or another type of asset or security. For example, in a national economy that has a strong position in the global economic system, there is distrust in a certain type of asset, which leads to a fall in prices around the world (for example, a fall in prices for real estate, land or banking sector assets). In this case, there is a chain reaction that is difficult to stop, even if the situation in the economy that is the source of the “infection” has already returned to normal.

The potential for financial crises lies in the nature of the forms of capital flows and in the functioning of the market. Capital markets transactions mean financing future value that has yet to be created. Therefore, cash flows serve “expectations” of future income during the real gap between the actual (advanced) and future value (profit). This happens due to the fact that in the financial market, property requirements financial assets(tools) are documented long before there is property capable of generating income. Claims are made between a large number of market participants, who are often involved in many financial transactions simultaneously. The gap between future income and the search for liquidity creates a risk of non-repayment to the lender. Since the existing risk insurance system is far from perfect, a break in one link leads to disruption of many other transactions, often leading to crisis situations in national and international markets.

The international financial crisis is understood as a deep disorder of credit and financial systems in a number of countries, leading to sharp imbalances in international monetary systems and interruption of their functioning. A financial crisis usually, to one degree or another, simultaneously affects various areas of the global financial system. The center of financial crises is money capital, and the immediate sphere of manifestation is credit institutions and public finances.

There are cyclical and special international financial crises. The former are harbingers of economic crises of production, the latter arise regardless of the economic cycle under the influence of special reasons. But the latter also affect the economy and foreign economic relations through reverse reflection. When a deliberate motivation for the development of a crisis is carried out, a pseudo-crisis occurs - this is the manifestation of crisis symptoms in a “healthy” economic system. A pseudo-crisis can be provoked, for example, with the aim of ousting competitors from the market, as well as veiling certain actions of business participants.

Thus, the main feature of a crisis is that, even being a local or micro-crisis, like a chain reaction, it can spread to the entire system or the entire development problem. Because in the system there is an organic interaction of all elements and problems cannot be solved separately.

1.2 The largest financial crises of the twentieth century

History knows a lot of global crises: comprehensive or affecting a narrow circle of countries, protracted and shorter - their causes, as a rule, are always different, and the consequences are extremely similar. Crisis phenomena leave their mark not only on the economies of countries, but also on human destinies, turning many people (sometimes even the wealthiest) into beggars literally in a day.

The 20th century was rich in global economic crises. The First and Second World Wars played a significant role in this, during which the financial markets of countries turned into “ruins”, like cities after bombing.

The series of crises of the twentieth century opens with the crisis of 1907, which affected 9 countries. The reasons for this are purely economic, expressed in the Bank of England increasing the discount rate to 6% from the original 3.5%. The purpose of such actions by Great Britain was the desire to replenish its gold reserves. The influx of capital into the country turned out to be simply incredible, with the United States becoming its main source. Accordingly, in the United States itself, this led to negative consequences: a stock market crash, a decline in business activity, a liquidity crisis and a protracted economic recession. These events immediately affected Italy, France and some other countries.

The global financial crisis of 1914 arose in the run-up to the First World War. Its reason was the complete sale of securities issued by foreign issuers. States needed monetary resources to finance ongoing military operations, and the USA, Great Britain, Germany, France and some other countries sold their securities without hesitation. This global crisis is perhaps the only one of all that did not develop according to the “domino principle”, but arose in most countries almost at the same time. Global and national markets for goods and money have collapsed. In a number of countries, the situation was saved thanks to the intervention of Central Banks.

The First World War also ended with the crisis of 1920-1922, caused by post-war deflation amid an economic recession, as well as currency and banking crises in a number of countries.

There are many “dark” days in the history of crises, and most of them are associated with the United States. It was with “Black Thursday” on October 24, 1929 that the next world crisis began, which turned into a great depression that affected the whole world. It all started with a sharp drop in the Dow Jones index and stock prices on the New York stock market. After the end of World War I, the US economy experienced an unprecedented rise, and the securities market became an attractive platform for investment by other countries, which caused an outflow of capital from Latin America and Europe. Stock market crash amid tightening monetary policy The US Federal Reserve has led to multiple stock crises around the world. This was immediately followed by a decline in production in all countries affected by the crisis, by an average of half, and, as a consequence, huge unemployment. Under the dominance of the “gold standard” system, the authorities of many states were unable to make the necessary cash injections into the economy, which only aggravated the situation. The crisis dominated the world until 1933, and its echoes were felt until the 40s of the last century.

After the end of World War II, the first crisis that affected several countries at once was the crisis of 1957. It struck the USA, Canada, Great Britain, the Netherlands, Belgium and a number of other countries of the capitalist system. The crisis continued until mid-1958.

The 1973-1974 crisis was called the oil crisis because it was caused by a sharp and unprecedented increase in oil prices, which increased by almost 400% (from 3 to 12 dollars per barrel). Part of the reason for this phenomenon was the decrease in oil production in Arab countries, and partly the Israeli war against Syria and Egypt. All allied countries of Israel (including the United States) stopped receiving oil supplies from Arab countries. During the crisis, the dependence of the economies of developed countries on energy prices was clearly exposed.

Once again, the United States experiences a black day - “Black Monday” on October 19, 1987, when another collapse of the country’s stock market occurs due to a sharp drop in the Dow Jones Industrial index by 22.6%. Following the United States, the stock markets of Canada, Australia, South Korea, and Hong Kong also collapsed.

The 1998 crisis turned out to be one of the most difficult in history for Russia. Devaluation, default... The causes of the crisis lay in the huge amount of public debt, the low level of prices for raw materials in the world, as well as the large debt of the state to repay state bonds, the deadlines for which had already passed.

Next up is the global financial crisis of 2008. Starting with the problems of the largest US companies, the crisis quickly developed into a global financial crisis, and the “domino principle” came into play here.

Thus, financial globalization and the rapid development of financial markets, an increase in the number of participants and the volume of transactions, and an abundance of instruments, including new ones, contribute to the growth of losses when crisis phenomena occur.

1.3 Forms of manifestation of financial crises

The financial crisis includes the following phenomena:

Collapse of exchange rates;

Sharp rise in interest rates;

Banks withdrawing their deposits in other credit institutions en masse, limiting and stopping cash withdrawals from accounts (banking crisis);

Destruction of the normal settlement system between companies through financial instruments (settlement crisis);

Currency crisis;

Debt crisis.

Many factors determine the occurrence and development of financial crises. Often the causes of a crisis remain a mystery. Typically, the conditions for financial crises are violations and problems in the relationship between various types of assets in certain parts of the financial system. Thus, if there are signs of an unfavorable situation in the company or a deliberately created situation, shareholders begin to dump shares, which can cause a downward trend in stock exchange rates. When doubts arise about the reliability of banks, depositors tend to withdraw their deposits as quickly as possible, and since banks have limited liquid funds, they cannot immediately return a significant part of the deposits. Due to the interconnectedness of the elements of the economic system, a chain reaction may begin, leading to a financial crisis. Foreign capital is leaving the country, at the same time, and perhaps earlier, national capital is fleeing. Capital flight from the country leads to an increase in the demand for foreign currency. Even a high level of foreign exchange reserves may be unable to satisfy growing demand. The widespread use of information technology has led to crises that arise in national financial markets quickly becoming international in nature.

In recent decades, internal preconditions for financial crises have been superimposed on external ones, associated with huge flows of capital crossing borders, which can undermine the financial position of the country due to the weakening of government regulation. The globalization of capital movements, the development of offshore operations, and the reduction of the regulatory role of the state have increased the possibilities for purely speculative actions in the global financial system. These include operations aimed at extracting excess profits through the deliberate use financial indicators(exchange rates, stock prices, discount rates). For this purpose, huge funds amounting to tens and hundreds of billions of dollars are being mobilized. There are opportunities for this.

There are about 4 thousand hedge funds in the world that specialize in speculative operations. They concentrate 400-500 billion dollars of liquid funds, which, if their actions are coordinated, can be used in any center to obtain speculative profits. According to the IMF, the 5-6 largest funds are capable of mobilizing up to $900 billion to attack a particular national currency or stock market. Not all financial centers are able to withstand such pressure.

The last quarter of the last century was characterized by an increase in financial crises. Moreover, they occurred more often in developing countries than in developed ones. Thus, currency crises occurred in more than 60 countries in the 1990s, including 41 countries with emerging markets. The financial systems of Brazil, Mexico, Argentina, South Korea, Southeast Asian countries, and Japan experienced the greatest shocks.

Financial crises were a reflection of the instability of global economic development, its hierarchy, as well as structural imbalances in the field of mobilization and placement of capital, management of foreign exchange reserves in crisis countries. They showed that the most important reason for the emergence of financial crises was the massive attraction of foreign loan capital, especially in the short term. The ratio of short-term debt to total external debt before the crisis for developing countries in crisis was twice as high as for countries not in a crisis situation.

The accumulation of short-term debt and a significant portion of liabilities secured or indexed in foreign currency weakened the stability of national monetary systems. Large external imbalances (negative balance of payments, large interest payments, high share of short-term debt, predominance of external liabilities over assets, etc.) make the economy very sensitive to external changes, including changes in the cyclical development of developed countries, constant changes in international financial markets and exchange rate structures of leading currencies.

The financial crisis has a negative impact on the material production sector and capital formation. The most pressing problem is labor employment. As the crises developed in the 1990s, the countries affected by them lost up to 14% of their GDP at the annual level, and it took up to six years to restore the pre-crisis level of economic growth. Crises caused balance of payments deficits in crisis countries to increase by more than 2% of GDP compared to non-crisis countries. The crises of the 90s had a negative impact on the development of the production and monetary sectors of the world economy. A sharp reduction in production in crisis farms led to a decrease in the growth rate of foreign trade and increased competition due to changes in exchange rates.

Thus, financial crises have shown the need to rebuild the global financial system, introduce greater openness, improve reporting, and strengthen national economic policies.

2. Current financial and economic crisis

2.1 Reasons for the emergence and manifestation of the current financial crisis in the United States

The global financial crisis is a persistent financial crisis of countries that are part of the global financial system, based on the dominance of the American financial system over other systems.

Figure 1 - Map of the spread of the global financial crisis in 2008: - countries in which the global financial crisis led to recession; - countries that suffered greatly due to the financial crisis in 2008

Figure 1 shows that the crisis affected all economically developed countries. It was particularly acute in the USA and European countries. Latin America and African countries remained completely unaffected by the crisis.

Starting with the problems of the largest US companies, the crisis quickly developed into a global financial crisis, and the “domino principle” came into play here (Fig. 1). One of the symbols of the global financial crisis was the collapse of the American bank Lehman Brothers. In Europe, the first sign of the global financial crisis in 2008 was the scandal surrounding the Société Générale bank, which, as a result of the fraud of its trader, lost 5 billion euros in stock trading.

The current financial crisis is distinguished by both depth and scope - it is perhaps the first time since the Great Depression that it has gripped the entire world. The “trigger” that set the crisis mechanism in motion was problems in the US mortgage market. However, there are more fundamental reasons behind the crisis, including macroeconomic, microeconomic and institutional. The leading macroeconomic reason turned out to be excess liquidity in the US economy, which, in turn, was determined by many factors, including:

General decline in confidence in emerging market countries since the 1997-1998 crisis;

Investing in American securities by countries accumulating foreign exchange reserves (China) and oil funds (Gulf countries);

The low interest rate policy pursued by the Federal Reserve in 2001-2003 in an attempt to prevent a cyclical downturn in the US economy.

Under the influence of excess liquidity, the process of formation of market bubbles—distorted, inflated valuations of various types of assets—intensified. In certain periods, such bubbles formed in the real estate, stock and commodity markets, which became an important part of the crisis mechanism. According to cross-country studies covering long periods of time, credit expansion is one of the typical conditions of financial crises. Thus, the risks of a crisis developing as a result of a weakening of monetary policy, which materialized in 2007-2008, are not an exception, but a general rule.

Against this background, microeconomic factors also contributed to the onset of the crisis - the development of new financial instruments (primarily structured derivative bonds). They were believed to reduce risks by distributing them among investors and ensuring correct pricing. In fact, the use of derivatives has effectively masked the risks associated with low quality subprime mortgages, and their non-transparent distribution to a wide range of investors. Finally, among the institutional reasons, we note the insufficient level of risk assessment by both regulators and rating agencies.

The loose monetary policy pursued by the US Federal Reserve since the early 2000s has stimulated banks to issue loans. Average annual growth rate of bank consumer lending in 2003-2007. were at the level of 5%, the increase in consumer loans in the third quarter of 2007 amounted to 7.2%. The volume of mortgage loans issued increased from $238 billion in the first quarter of 2000 to $1,199 billion in the third quarter of 2003.

As the US economy entered a recession, there was a tendency for a gradual reduction in the volume of issued bank loans. In the third quarter of 2008, the volume of mortgage loans issued to the population amounted to only $415 billion (Fig. 2). The growth rate of consumer loans decreased significantly - in November 2008, compared to October, their volume decreased by 3.7%.

Information asymmetry played a key role in the development of the current crisis. The structure of financial derivatives has become so complex and opaque that assessing the true value of financial companies' portfolios has become virtually impossible. Because the credit market could no longer effectively identify potentially defaulting borrowers, it fell into paralysis. The development of the situation in the financial sector has seriously affected the real sector of the economy. Soon after the problems in the financial system worsened, the United States entered a recession. The US National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), a council of academic economists considered the official arbiter of when a country's recession begins and ends, announced in December 2008 that the US recession began a year ago - in December 2007.

Figure 2 - Mortgage loans in the USA (billions of dollars) as of December 2008

Gradually, the financial crisis in the United States began to spread throughout the world. American corporations have begun urgently selling assets and withdrawing money from other countries. According to Bank of England estimates, the total losses from the crisis in the economies of the US, UK and EU have already amounted to $2.8 trillion.

US GDP fell by 0.5% in the third quarter of 2008, which was the most significant drop since 2001, due to the largest decline in consumer spending in 28 years (by 3.8%). At the same time, the decrease in this indicator was somewhat offset by an increase in government spending, an increase in exports and a decrease in imports. According to the US Congressional Budget Office, GDP growth in 2008 was 1.2%.

The volume of capacity employed in the US economy fell to 75.4% in November compared to 76.3% in October, which is 5.6 percentage points below the average level in 1972-2007. The index of business activity in industry (ISM manufacturing index)1 in December 2008 decreased to 32.4 points compared to the October value of 36.2 points. This is the lowest index value since June 1980, when it was at 30.3 points. In 2007, its average value was 51.1 points.

According to the US Department of Labor, in December 2008 the American economy lost 524 thousand jobs, and in total for the year - 2.6 million. This is the maximum figure since 1945, when the country's economy was being rebuilt on a peaceful basis. The unemployment rate in the US reached 7.2%, the highest level since 1992 (4.4% before the financial crisis). If we take into account the layoffs of part-time workers, it increased to 13.5% (at the end of 2007 - 8.7%).

The volume of new home construction in the United States in November 2008 decreased by 19% compared to the previous month. This is the lowest figure since the beginning of its observation. Compared to November 2007, the decrease was 47%. On an annual basis, new home sales in November 2008 were 35.3% less than in November 2007.

Events in the US economy have had a negative impact on stock markets in developed and developing countries. Figure 3 shows the dynamics in 2007-2008. one of the main American stock indexes S&P 500 and stock index for emerging markets MSCI EM, developed by Morgan Stanley (the data in the figure does not reflect the intramonth dynamics of the indices).

Figure 3 - Stock indices of the USA and developing countries

In 2007, stock markets in developing countries grew at a faster pace than developed countries, driven by portfolio investments from the world's leading economies. In 2008, the massive influx of funds from abroad into developing markets ceased, and the dynamics of the stock index for developing countries practically repeats the dynamics of the leading American stock index. During 2008, the S&P 500 index fell by almost 40%, and the MSCI EM index fell by more than 50%.

An analysis of the situation in the global economy based on the results of 2008 allows us to predict a slowdown in global growth this year. In the November forecast of the IMF it is estimated at 2.2, and the World Bank - 0.9%. In the future, we can expect a decrease in these values. The most developed economies are facing a serious decline in the coming year.

Thus, the European Commission predicts a fall in eurozone GDP by 1.8%. According to estimates by the US Congressional Budget Office (hereinafter referred to as the CBO), presented in the 2009-2019 Economic and Budget Outlook, in 2009 the US is expected to experience a strong contraction in economic activity. Real GDP excluding the economic stimulus program will decrease by 2.2%, and real consumption by more than 1%. A slow economic recovery is possible in 2010: real GDP will grow by 1.5%. The BUK predicts a further decline in average property values ​​by another 14% between the third quarter of 2008 and the second quarter of 2010. The US budget deficit in 2009 is expected to be the largest since World War II. According to BUK forecasts, it will amount to $1.2 trillion, or 8.3% of GDP. The entry into force of the economic stimulus program will increase the budget deficit, but in 2010 it will decrease to 4.9% of GDP.

Spending by state and municipal governments will only slightly soften the decline in economic activity. In response to lower-than-expected revenues and the need to balance the budget, they are cutting spending on goods and services and, according to BUK estimates, no real increase in spending on these purposes is expected in 2009.

According to BUK forecasts, the current recession in the United States will last until the middle of this year and will become the longest since World War II (the recessions of 1973-1974 and 1981-1982 lasted 16 months each). If it goes beyond the second half of 2009, it will last at least 19 months. The current crisis will also be the deepest in the post-war period - over the next two years, GDP will be 6.8% below its potential (the level possible with full use of production and human resources). However, this recession may not result in the highest level of unemployment. It is forecast to rise to 9.2% at the beginning of 2010 (from 4.4% at the end of 2006). but will still be lower than at the end of the 1981-1982 recession. (10.8%).

Some analysts predict such a deep recession on a global scale based on the results of 2009, which did not occur even during periods of the largest economic crises in leading countries in previous years. The most significant slowdowns in the world economy occurred in 1975, when global growth was only 0.93% relative to the previous year, and in 1980, when its value approached zero (0.3%).

Thus, the main macroeconomic reason that provoked the current global crisis was excess liquidity in the US market. Against this background, microeconomic factors, such as the development of new financial instruments, also contributed to the onset of the crisis.

2.2 Consequences of the financial crisis in the United States

The most striking consequences of the financial crisis in the United States were the nationalization of mortgage agencies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the bankruptcy of the largest systemically important US banks and the nationalization of the insurance giant AIG. And in September 2008, the mortgage crisis in the United States provoked a liquidity crisis for world banks. Thus, due to the financial crisis in the United States, Bear Stears bank went bankrupt, Lahman Brothers bank went bankrupt, and Merrill Lynch was bought by Bank of America. The Fed bought an 80% stake in American International Group (AIG), the world's largest insurer, essentially nationalizing it.

As a result, the pillars of the US financial system found themselves in difficult situation or disappeared completely. The Federal Reserve created a fund to buy back bad debts, and the Paulson Plan was adopted to support the country's financial system. The essence of the plan is to create a state corporation that will buy out problem assets from banks; $700 billion is allocated for this; subsequently, the asset buyout was abandoned; instead, $800 billion was allocated to banks to support consumer lending.

According to many experts, such actions by the American authorities during a crisis could lead to the devaluation of the dollar and undermine confidence in the American economic model, which is based on stimulating final demand with cheap loans.

The expected level of world oil prices is also consistently decreasing (Fig. 4). According to the latest forecast presented on January 13, 2009 by the US Energy Agency, the average price of 1 barrel of WTI oil in 2009 is estimated at $43 (which corresponds to approximately $40 per barrel for Urals). This means that compared to 2008, oil prices will fall by almost two and a half times. Figure 3 shows the dynamics of the US Energy Agency's monthly forecasts of the average oil price for 2009. It is noteworthy that over the past four months (October 2008 - January 2009) it has fallen almost three times. This is explained by the expected decline in global oil demand.

Figure 4 - Change in the US Energy Agency's forecast for changes in the average oil price for 2009 (dollar/barrel)

The International Energy Agency has revised its forecast for world oil demand in 2009 downward by 1 million barrels. per day after reducing the forecast growth of GDP of the world economy to 1.2%, taking into account the deteriorating environment3. Global oil demand in 2009 is now adjusted to 85.3 million barrels. per day (a decrease of 0.6% compared to 2008, which corresponds to 0.5 million barrels per day on average for the year). According to OPEC's forecast, global oil demand in 2009 will amount to 85.7 million barrels. per day (versus 85.8 million in 2008 and 85.9 million in 2007). The main factor in the significant reduction in oil demand is a decrease in demand from the United States by 1.1 million barrels. per day.

This conclusion is confirmed by the latest long-term study by OPEC5. Its experts note the increased influence on the pricing process of investors and stock speculators, who evaluate oil not by its consumer properties, but as an asset attractive from a financial point of view. And if in 2003 on the New York Mercantile Exchange there were six paper barrels per barrel of oil actually sold, by 2008 this figure exceeded 18.

Figure 5 - Dynamics of world prices for Urals oil (dollar/barrel)

According to the OPEC forecast until 2030, presented in the “World Oil Market Outlook 2008” (Fig. 5), population growth rate in 2006-2015. will be higher than in 2015-2030. (1.1 and 0.9% per year, respectively). In addition, in the second half of the period under review, the working-age population will begin to decline, which will have an impact on economic activity and a decrease in energy consumption.

Thus, the consequences of the crisis in the United States turned out to be extremely destructive for the economy. To overcome the crisis, the state had to nationalize large mortgage agencies and banks and create a special fund to buy out bad debts that had accumulated as a result of the banks’ rash desire for super-profits.

2.3 Economists’ forecasts about the further development of the economic situation in the world

Economists have different forecasts regarding the development of the global financial crisis. Optimists say that the crisis is expected to subside at the end of 2009; pessimists are confident that the crisis will last at least another three years.

The head of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), Dominique Strauss-Kahn, believes that we should not expect high growth rates in the global economy in the next two or three years. The most serious reductions are expected in the United States and developed European countries. Developing countries, primarily China, India and Brazil, will maintain economic growth, although it will be much weaker than expected. The first half of this year will be the most difficult for everyone, but there is a possibility of some improvement in the second. Russia will avoid a recession due to a significant stimulus package and the beneficial effect that a more flexible ruble exchange rate will have on demand for domestic goods. Growth will slow from 5.9% in 2008 to 1% in 2009 and recover to 2.25% in 2010.

Economic recovery and recovery from the international crisis in developing countries, including Russia, may begin earlier. Economic growth is predicted to slow from 6.8% in 2008 to 4% in 2009. A sharp slowdown in capital inflows will hit the availability of credit, and a decline in oil prices will reduce the country's income. However, a sharp economic slowdown will be avoided, as the authorities have reduced the banking sector's dependence on external financing. Moreover, with the exception of the oil sector, the Russian economy is marginally vulnerable to a decline in global trade.

According to Sberbank estimates, the period of economic difficulties will last up to one and a half to two years. In this regard, the bank especially recommends that clients use a conservative approach to forecasting and long-term business development and borrowing plans.

Thus, 2009 will be a turning point for the economy: In the first quarter of 2009, GDP will decline by 3%, but by the end of March the decline in economic activity should stop. The second quarter will be a period of stabilization; in the third, the beneficial effect of ruble devaluation will be increasingly felt and the first signs of an improvement in the world economy will appear.

3. Global financial crisis in Russia

3.1 The impact of the global financial crisis on monetary policy and the banking sector in Russia

On the eve of the crisis, the Russian economy demonstrated very good macroeconomic indicators: a significant budget and current account surplus, rapid growth in gold and foreign exchange reserves and funds in budget funds. At the same time, in recent years there has been some weakening of monetary and budget policies. Thus, in 2007, federal budget expenditures increased in real terms by 24.9%, that is, their growth was more than three times higher than GDP growth. The economy experienced persistently low interest rates, actually negative in real terms, which led to rapid growth in lending. The natural result was the “overheating” of the economy. On the one hand, this contributed to increased inflationary pressure, and on the other, to a rapid increase in external borrowing. In just three years (2005-2007), the external debt of the non-state sector increased almost fourfold.

Figure 6 - External debt of the non-state sector (billions of dollars)

At the beginning of 2005, it amounted to 108 billion US dollars, and at the end of 2007, 417.2 billion (Fig. 6). Rapid growth in government spending and imports was masked by rising prices for oil and other Russian exports. However, in fact, the processes described did

The attraction of funds by Russian banks on the global capital market allowed them to expand in the credit market, which led to an increase in the availability of monetary resources and a reduction in rates on the domestic borrowing market. The net international investment position of credit institutions has steadily deteriorated. At the end of 2005, its value was -20.827 billion US dollars, and at the end of the third quarter of 2008 - -99.651 billion.

Table 1 - Balance of payments of the Russian Federation (billion US dollars) for 2008 (“+” - increase; “-” - decrease)

The decline in oil prices since May last year and the restriction of borrowing on the foreign market caused a significant weakening of the balance of payments in the second half of 2008. A net inflow of private capital of $83 billion in 2007 turned into a net outflow of $130 billion dollars in 2008. In the fourth quarter of last year, compared to the first quarter, the current account decreased 4.5 times - from $37 billion to $8 billion, and for the year as a whole it amounted to 99 billion US dollars (see Table 1).

A zero current account balance is expected in 2009.

As a result, last year foreign exchange reserves decreased by $45 billion (and gold and foreign exchange reserves by 51.7 billion) and actually ceased to serve as a source of money supply. Their reduction led to a serious slowdown in the money supply. Over the 11 months of 2008, the volume of M2 money supply even decreased by 0.3%, while in 2007 over the same period it increased by 35.2% (see Fig. 7). The main source of money supply was the replenishment of liquidity by the monetary authorities. The steps taken made it possible to saturate the market with short-term liquidity, but could not compensate for the shortage of long-term resources. The supply of “long-term” money in the economy and the stabilization of the money market in the long term should be ensured by institutional investors, as well as commercial banks themselves through lending activity.

One of the sources of “long” liabilities are deposits legal entities and deposits individuals placed for a period of more than three years. Over the past two years, their share in total liabilities was 5 - 6%.

Figure 7 - M2 money supply (growth, in % compared to the beginning of 2008)

In conditions of a shortage of “long” money, banks are forced to use “short” liabilities as a source of formation of “long” assets. Moreover, this situation is typical not only for the period of current financial instability, but also for the last few years, when short-term liabilities covered at least 10 - 14% of banks' long-term assets. Obviously, a further increase in long-term loans at the expense of short-term liabilities could have a negative impact on the liquidity of the banking system.

Recently, the slowdown in the growth rate of the loan portfolio has become pronounced. In November 2008, compared to October, the volume of loans issued to the population even decreased by 0.7%, the increase in bank loans to enterprises was only 0.7% (see Fig. 8). At the end of eleven months of 2008, debt to credit institutions of non-financial organizations increased by 32.6% compared to 46.9% for the same period in 2007.

The dynamics of bank loans in 2008 was also influenced by the fact that during the crisis, many organizations began to curtail investment programs and reduce current expenses. Banks began to tighten requirements for the financial condition of citizens due to the increasing risks of non-repayment of loans (decrease in purchasing power, increase in the number of unemployed). In the near future, banks will have to pay more attention to attracting resources from the domestic market.

Figure 8 - Slowdown in deposit growth (as a percentage of the previous month)

Increased competition in the domestic financial market in 2008 led to an increase in rates on bank deposits. Thus, the weighted average rate on ruble deposits of the population in credit organizations for a period of up to one year increased from 5.4% per annum in January 2008 to 6.2% per annum in October, and the weighted average rate on ruble deposits of enterprises for a period of up to one year - from 3 to 6.7%.

Let us note that until now the increase in interest rates on retail deposits by banks has been very modest and has not compensated for the acceleration of inflation. At the same time, the growth rate of bank deposits decreased (Fig. 8).

In addition to deposits of the population and enterprises in 2008, the main sources of formation of resources of commercial banks were loans, deposits and other funds received from other credit institutions, as well as funds of organizations in settlement and other accounts and bonds. The share of these items, including deposits, at the beginning of December 2008 accounted for 71.3% of the total amount of liabilities (Table 2).

The cost of resources for commercial banks is affected by changes in the cost of the main items of bank liabilities, that is, primarily by changes in rates on deposits of households and enterprises. To maintain their activities, commercial banks cannot lend at a lower interest rate than deposit rates. Rates in the economy are determined primarily by the level of inflation, the formation of incentives to save and the level of risk.

Table 2 - Structure of liabilities of credit institutions

According to preliminary data, as of July 1, 2010, the total debt of organizations amounted to 34.8 trillion. rub., which is 3.4% higher than the same indicator as of June 1, 2010 and 9.4% higher than the level a year ago (July 1, 2009). The amount of total overdue debt at the end of June decreased both in nominal and percentage terms, amounting to 1095.4 billion rubles. or 3.1% of total debt (versus 1,108.6 billion rubles or 3.3% in May).

Accounts payable, which had shown a slight decline since the beginning of September 2009, began to grow slightly this year. However, overdue accounts payable are predominantly decreasing: as of early July 2010, they were estimated at 962.8 billion rubles, which is 17.4% lower than the same period last year.

Accounts receivable, after declining at the end of last year, are showing strong growth: in June it increased by 2.2% compared to May. Overdue receivables, on the contrary, have been consistently declining since the beginning of the year, in June decreased by 3.7% compared to the previous month.

Thus, based on aggregated financial results by type of economic activity, we can talk about the strengthening of positive trends. At the same time, the recovery in different sectors of the economy is extremely uneven and some industries continue to be affected by the negative consequences of the crisis. In the most advantageous position, as before, remain export-oriented industries, which are experiencing a positive impact from the improvement in foreign economic conditions, and industries aimed at satisfying domestic consumer demand, which was less affected by the crisis.

Choosing an exchange rate policy also turns out to be a very difficult task. At the beginning of the development of crisis processes in the global economy, the Bank of Russia maintained a constant exchange rate of the national currency against the bi-currency basket. This was accompanied by a decline in international reserves and a contraction in the money supply. From mid-November 2008, he began a gradual weakening of the national currency by gradually expanding the corridor of permissible fluctuations in the value of the bi-currency basket. During 2008, the real effective exchange rate of the ruble against foreign currencies strengthened by 4.5%, including in December relative to November it weakened by 3.6% (Fig. 9).

Figure 9 - Real effective exchange rate of the ruble to foreign currencies (increase, in% compared to December of the previous year)

Thus, curbing the weakening of the ruble required significant volumes of intervention from the Bank of Russia in the foreign exchange market. Experts agree that the gradual weakening of the national currency is more costly in terms of spending international reserves. In anticipation of ruble devaluation, the demand for foreign currency increases many times over. At the same time, the gradual weakening of the exchange rate allowed banks to create the necessary foreign exchange reserves and ensure the stability of the passive part of the banking system.

3.2 The real sector of the Russian economy in times of crisis

Today, the real sector of the Russian economy is experiencing a deep recession. Production in the real sector of the economy is declining due to a contraction of effective demand, a decrease in the real money supply, high lending rates, a cessation of lending, and high tariffs for electricity, gas and water.

Entire industries turned out to be unprofitable - metallurgy, mechanical engineering, wood processing, production of building materials, textiles and clothing, leather and footwear, pulp and paper, chemicals, rubber and plastic products.

Having begun in the financial sector, the current crisis is destroying not financial capital, but real production, the profitability of which is lower than the profitability in the sphere of financial speculation. This deepens the fundamental cause of the crisis, namely the colossal overaccumulation of capital, which does not correspond to the values ​​actually produced.

The fullest impact of the financial crisis on the real sector of the economy is reflected through its interaction with banks. The situation on the business loan market remains relevant. Some businesses are just planning to take out a loan as a new bank client, others are concerned about using their credit lines.

Many companies that until recently actively used bank loans, during the financial crisis, were faced with the problem of finding a source of financing for their activities. Many business leaders are now looking for a source Money not so much for development, but for maintaining their own business, and one of the ways out of this situation is lending, which is becoming inaccessible for many.

In the current environment, problems arise for both small and large businesses. However, each segment in the current situation has both its own advantages and weak spots. Thus, small businesses, due to their scale, are more mobile and flexible, which allows them to quickly change their business model and thus adapt to new conditions. In addition, historically, small businesses in Russia developed mainly at the expense of their own funds, without wide access to credit resources, which created a certain financial independence from external sources of borrowing, in particular from bank loan. Large enterprises benefit from continued access to financing due to partnerships with banks formed over the years. The significance of such enterprises for the country’s economy also inevitably involves the state in solving a number of their problems.

But, it would seem, having found a solution, you are faced with a new problem: at the moment, getting a loan is not so easy. It is the problems in the credit market that are one of the main characteristics of the crisis that is currently developing in the global economy. Money for business has become much more expensive, and about attracting foreign borrowed money There is no longer any question - refinancing loans already received is expensive and difficult. Also, the conditions for issuing loans have become more stringent (the loan rate is rarely lower than 18 - 20%, or even higher) and their supply has decreased. The main reason for this was the failure of borrowers to fulfill obligations on already issued loans.

Now banks evaluate each lender separately, carefully analyzing its solvency and financial position and require a larger amount of information about the borrower, the enterprise, and necessarily draw up complex financial schemes of the lender’s behavior for a long period of time in various development conditions.

The tightening of conditions for issuing loans resulted in non-fulfillment of obligations between counterparties. Therefore, due to the growth accounts receivable and when banks impose unacceptable lending conditions, the enterprise is forced to reconsider the terms of sales, which in turn entails a decrease in sales volumes.

In such a situation, the enterprise cannot fulfill the planned production volume and obtain the necessary profit. The actual drop in volumes at some Russian enterprises has already amounted to more than 30%.

In the fall of 2008, interest rates on loans increased by 3-4%. Credit conditions have also changed dramatically:

1) the discount on collateral has increased: from 30% to 50%;

2) the attitude towards the types of collateral has changed (inventory and materials as a type of collateral is unacceptable for many credit institutions);

3) the terms of short-term lending have changed, from 1.5 to 1 year.

However, as the bankers themselves say from a formal point of view, the approaches and requirements for corporate clients have not changed. The risks associated with financing corporate business in general have changed qualitatively. Long-term loans, for example, disappeared not only due to a lack of liquidity, but also due to the impossibility in some cases of making long-term forecasts, due to the fact that delays in loan payments became more frequent, since the financial crisis significantly worsened the payment discipline of the organization, as a result why overdue loan debt is growing.

However, the financial crisis played into the hands of some companies, since not only did the stock market collapse, but there were also changes in the balance of power in the market and the emergence of new leaders. These could be companies that manage their finances most effectively. The most correct response to the crisis is to search for new opportunities for business development.

For example, many companies have a chance to implement their investment programs at lower costs (by reducing the cost of building materials and labor). Now it is possible to resolve personnel issues more effectively, since qualified specialists without inflated salary expectations have appeared on the market. There are options for purchasing assets that are falling in price, in particular shares of mining and processing companies. Finally, the financial crisis makes it possible to reduce the debt burden, in particular, through the repurchase of significantly cheaper bonds. There are other options for strengthening market positions during an economic crisis. True, all this requires money.

Companies that, on the one hand, do not have a large debt load, and on the other hand, were able to form a significant reserve of cash in their accounts in the pre-crisis period, are currently in the most advantageous position. If just a few months ago, excessive reserves of money in accounts were considered a negative factor, since a business does not use capital effectively enough, now such enterprises have the opportunity to develop most efficiently, due to the fact that they have the cash that many people lack.

In a growing economy, most companies preferred to reinvest financial resources, and credit funds were actively used to implement ambitious development programs. Now businesses need to learn to manage finances in new conditions: the rising cost of financial resources and the decreasing availability of money. As a result, previously popular methods of debt financing are reducing their relevance. Attracting resources through the stock market is also largely difficult: it was exchanges, as a tool for attracting investments, that suffered the most from the crisis. We can expect that in the next few years, direct investment will show the most significant growth dynamics.

In times of crisis, certain sectors of the economy are also doing well, in particular collection firms. The crisis has created demand for this service. So, if deposits of individuals amount to up to 700 thousand rubles. are compensated by the Deposit Insurance Agency, then the balances on the current accounts of enterprises with the bank automatically fall into the category of hopeless.

An analysis of the current situation allows us to conclude that the key problem is that money does not flow into the real sector; for this it is necessary to launch a lending mechanism and clear the bond and debt markets. The state is pumping liquidity into the banking system and rightly expects changes in the market situation. But this does not happen, because banks are solving their own issues: restoring capital after losses, monitoring the sharp decrease in the value of collateral, and creating an excess liquidity cushion in case the situation worsens.

To resolve the issue, a social contract between the state and banks is necessary: ​​the state provides assistance and forcibly increases lending limits for life-supporting industries and the population, and banks take a voluntary obligation to be an instrument of state policy, consciously bearing risks during periods of turbulence.

If necessary, the state introduces special treasurers into such banks - representatives of the headquarters to monitor compliance with the “agreement”, the violation of which in the current conditions means immediate bankruptcy of the bank.

Restoring a full-fledged lending process is impossible without clearing the bond and debt markets, which can be done either through the direct purchase by the state of accumulated debts from money allocated to support the stock market, or through an additional target through the banking system.

As for the real sector, it has already begun to fully feel the impact of the crisis and is shrinking under the influence of decreased demand and limited access even to working capital; Mutual non-payments and inventories in warehouses sharply increased, transitions to partial load conditions began en masse, up to the shutdown of production with a reduction in the number of workers.

It becomes fundamentally important to implement measures to stimulate demand for the products of real sector enterprises through:

government procurement (implementation of large infrastructure projects and purchase of goods to the state reserve);

export;

industrial orders;

development of consumer lending to the population.

When choosing an industry or a specific company, you must

government agencies to draw up a strategic roadmap that will help save public funds and achieve the desired target result.

We should not forget now about the problems of the regions, since the measures taken by the government are aimed at supporting the largest public and private corporations and banks, however, a significant part of the subjects’ GDP is made up of the products of medium-sized life-supporting enterprises, which provide a significant part of regional tax revenues and do not fall into the selected stabilization scheme. Proposed technological model " road map“can be cloned at the regional level through the provision of federal budget subsidies to the subjects of the Federation for further refinancing of the most significant regional enterprises.

However, a sharp change in conditions creates not only problems, but also great opportunities to increase competitive advantages, capture and create new markets - both in Russia and abroad. Our country has large gold and foreign exchange reserves and a powerful raw materials economy, which gives it a chance to compete for the maximum share of the global financial market by creating a global financial center in Moscow and turning the ruble into one of the reserve currencies. In this regard, it seems necessary to implement a number of measures, namely:

introduction of a state guarantee mechanism for exchange transactions in rubles and storage of securities; improving laws;

creation of our own class of investors (investment banks, investment funds and non-state pension funds, population and state);

introduction of payments in rubles for oil, gas, precious metals, that is, where there is strong market influence of Russia;

expansion of Russian capital into the markets of developing countries with the hiring of the best investment personnel released as a result of the financial crisis. This is necessary to strengthen Russia’s influence in the global financial market and increase the competitiveness and stability of the national financial system. The compression of the old, inefficient economy releases significant, cheaper labor and material resources, which must be directed to the accelerated development of the following areas of the economy:

construction of modern infrastructure (roads, housing, new cities);

creating new markets for the innovative economy, such as advanced processing of energy resources, alternative energy, materials science and nanotechnology, ecology and catalysis;

involving land in active economic turnover and creating a transparent circulation market;

a targeted defense order for the modernization of the army within the framework of military doctrine;

development Agriculture and processes of modern processing of agricultural products to solve the problem of food independence of the country.

To overcome the crisis situation, the authorities are offered the following solutions:

The federal authorities will restore order in the banking sector, contributing to the improvement of credit policy. Providing tax benefits, including a tax credit to enterprises pursuing an active investment and innovation policy.

In the current situation, to support industrial enterprises, it is necessary to adopt more flexible conditions for the possible provision of government loans, subsidies, subventions, tax credits and benefits.

Public funds must flow directly into the real economy, and not through the speculative chain of commercial banks.

The authorities should refrain from increasing the tax burden in the real sector of the economy for the next 2-3 years.

In the current situation, the most effective mechanism for supporting an organization can be exemption from the obligation to pay certain taxes and fees for a certain period.

In the current conditions, many prominent economists consider it necessary:

easing the credit policy of banks to provide borrowed funds;

maintaining interest rates on previously issued and on loans issued at the level of last year;

reduction of discount on collateral;

increasing the validity period of loan agreements;

for an enterprise whose main production activity is processing, a positive decision is necessary

government to reduce the VAT rate and pay it in installments, which will allow each enterprise to replenish working capital.

allocation of funds from the taxable profit base aimed at technical re-equipment;

government lending with a rate of less than 8%, which is unlikely.

We can also recommend that business managers pay attention to various opportunities for obtaining cheaper loans. These, in particular, include collateral loans (for shares, real estate), which even now allow you to receive resources at 12-16% per annum. In addition, the main risk, which some large domestic business groups have already fully felt, is the requirement for additional collateral against depreciating collateral (securities, depreciating real estate, etc.). Managers should look to non-traditional forms of collateral, such as export earnings. With long-term contracts, the risk of additional collateral requirements becomes more predictable and less likely.

Thus, the above set of measures will allow us to normalize the credit relationships that have developed between the banking and real sectors of the economy, which will reduce the consequences of the global financial crisis.

3.3 Main directions in the budget policy of the Russian Federation during the crisis

The instability of financial systems, worsening social problems and slowing economic growth are forcing the governments of many countries to take various measures to stabilize the situation and stimulate the economy, including fiscal policy measures. As the historical experience of implementing stimulating economic policies during periods of crisis shows, in most cases the main role was played by monetary policy measures due to their greater efficiency and comparatively higher efficiency. However, discretionary fiscal policy can also be used, but with some restrictions, especially in developing countries.

It should be noted that built-in, automatic stabilizers of fiscal policy are considered relatively effective and, importantly, work adequately both in conditions of recession and in the event of “overheating” of the economy. In Russia, they are quite sensitive to changes in economic conditions, including outside the country’s borders - for example, during a period of slowdown in economic growth in the world, the tax burden on the oil sector is significantly reduced, since energy prices, to which the main fees in the oil sector are tied, are reduced.

In emerging economies, expansionary fiscal policies lead to higher deficits and therefore higher public debt. Moreover, usually during periods of “overheating”, contractionary fiscal policy is not implemented so actively, that is, it turns out to be asymmetrical, biased towards stimulation, which also leads to a constant increase in debt. The growth of government debt in emerging market countries is an unfavorable factor and increases risks for the country in the future. In particular, this may lead to the fact that foreign borrowing rates for such countries are too high, further aggravating the situation. Another major challenge is ensuring that expansionary fiscal policy is “temporary.” If, during a crisis period, taxes were reduced or the state assumed new spending obligations, then even during the transition to the recovery stage, it is often politically difficult to reverse such changes. Therefore, if a decision is made on certain stimulating fiscal policy measures, the government needs to carefully analyze the possibilities of curtailing them in the future. One of the most important factors the effectiveness of anti-crisis fiscal policy - the targeting of measures taken, whether measures of social support or stimulation of enterprises in the real sector.

Our country faces the following fiscal policy challenges that require fairly quick solutions:

Using monetary and fiscal policy measures to stabilize the situation in the country’s financial market. As already noted, the solution to this problem is mainly ensured by monetary policy measures, however, fiscal measures can also be used, especially if there are significant reserves (including oil and gas funds). However, the key question here is: how to determine the optimal measures and the amount of budgetary funds that would have a positive impact on the financial sector, but would not lead to unfavorable medium- and long-term consequences - inflation, a sharp increase in the budget deficit, etc.

Using fiscal policy measures to solve pressing social problems. In the context of the global financial crisis, economic instability and slowdown in economic growth with a simultaneous fairly high level of inflation, Russia, like other countries, may face various social problems. On the one hand, this is a decrease in the standard of living of citizens, an increase in unemployment, and on the other hand, a slowdown in the development of sectors of the social sphere. What is important here is the choice of incentive policy measures so that assistance is received exactly by those who really need it, and budget expenses did not lead to an additional increase in inflation.

Support for the real sector of the economy in conditions of a possible recession. In order to avoid a sharp decline in the real sector of the economy (due to unfavorable external conditions and internal instability) and the associated economic and social consequences, incentive measures from the state are necessary.

Table 3 - Fiscal policy measures aimed at overcoming the consequences of the global financial crisis

Table 5 presents a set of fiscal policy measures aimed at overcoming the consequences of the global financial crisis in our country. The total cost of tax policy measures is estimated at 900 - 1000 billion rubles. (2.3-2.5% of GDP), budgetary policy measures (without placing funds from sovereign funds) - 1145 billion rubles. (2.9% of GDP). Thus, the total volume of anti-crisis measures is 2045-2145 billion rubles. (5.2-5.4% of GDP).

In addition, in 2008, 50 billion rubles were allocated from the Housing and Communal Sector Reform Assistance Fund. for the purchase of apartments in buildings with a high degree of readiness, from the federal budget - 32 billion rubles. for the purchase of apartments for military personnel and socially vulnerable categories of citizens. A decision was made to provide state guarantees to enterprises in the real sector of the economy in the amount of 300 billion rubles in 2009.

Fiscal policy measures aimed at overcoming the consequences of the global financial crisis are expected to be implemented in the amount of 175 billion rubles. at the expense of budget balances at the beginning of 2009, the rest - through the redistribution of expenses within the established budget parameters.

On initial stage To support bank liquidity, the Russian Ministry of Finance placed available funds from the federal budget on deposits of commercial banks (see Fig. 10). In addition, in 2008, funds from the State Corporation Housing and Communal Services Fund (180 billion rubles), the State Corporation Rusnano (130 billion rubles), and the National Welfare Fund (175 billion rubles) were placed on the domestic financial market. ).

An important place among the urgent measures to maintain banking liquidity was occupied by the Bank of Russia's provision of unsecured loans to commercial banks. These operations cover a wide range of banks that have credit ratings from international and/or Russian rating agencies. As of January 19, 2009, their volume is estimated at 1.7 trillion. rub.

Figure 10 - Balance of federal budget funds placed on deposits with credit institutions (billion rubles)

In 2008, 200 billion rubles were allocated from the federal budget. in the form of a property contribution to the State Corporation “Deposit Insurance Agency” (DIA) for the capitalization of problem banks, and a credit line without a limit was opened by the Bank of Russia DIA to support banks that are experiencing problems. As of January 14, 2009, 114.3 billion rubles were used. due to the credit line of the Bank of Russia and 32.2 billion rubles. at the expense of DIA funds.

As an anti-crisis measure, the volume of insurance of household deposits was increased from 400 thousand to 700 thousand rubles, and the Bank of Russia was given the authority to insure interbank loans at its own expense. The Russian government has reduced the rate of increase in tariffs for gas and railway transport services.

Taking into account the new macroeconomic forecast, the government will make adjustments to the budget. In 2009, not only will a budget deficit appear, but its magnitude will be significant given the need for anti-crisis measures. 2010-2011 should be the years to reach a more acceptable deficit from the point of view of long-term macroeconomic sustainability. In 2010, the deficit should not exceed 5% of GDP, and in 2011 - 3% of GDP.

To develop strategic principles of budget policy, the Russian Ministry of Finance adopted a long-term oil price of $50 in 2007 prices, which can be either noticeably lower during a period of economic recession or higher during a period of recovery. Oil prices have increased significantly in recent years. In 2008, the average annual price of Urals oil reached a record value of $94.4 per barrel. (see Fig. 5). This maximum value for the period since 1970. Taking into account the forecast of changes in world oil demand in the future, we cannot expect this value to be exceeded.

When developing anti-crisis programs, it is necessary to take into account the accumulated global experience in dealing with crises. It indicates that assistance should be provided only to those companies and banks that are experiencing temporary difficulties, but remain solvent. Practice proves that indiscriminate provision of government support to enterprises and banks, regardless of the state of their balance sheets, does not speed up the recovery from the crisis or mitigate its consequences. On the contrary, such a policy increases losses from the current crisis and increases the likelihood of a new crisis in the future, since it undermines the incentives of economic agents to pursue responsible policies with a real assessment of all risks. In addition, the cost of the support provided must be shared between the state and the owners of the companies being rescued. If the state takes over all support entirely, it actually unjustifiably transfers taxpayer funds to company owners.

The issue of increasing the share of state ownership in the financial sector on a global scale deserves separate discussion. As part of anti-crisis programs, a significant part of it passed from private owners to state control. By the end of 2008, in most developed countries, governments became the largest owners of financial institutions: approximately 100% of this sector was under their control. A natural question arises: if the excessive risk-taking of private banks ultimately led to a crisis and required emergency measures on the part of the state, should it not take a course to increase its role as a financial intermediary.

The experience of a number of countries allows us to give a substantiated answer to this question. Numerous cross-country studies8 convincingly show that private banks are significantly more efficient than public banks in distributing financial resources in the economy, have lower margins (the difference between the cost of attracted and provided credit resources) and, moreover, reduce the degree of financial instability (including the likelihood of bank crisis). This is why many countries are looking to privatize their banks. The analysis confirms that after privatization, banks' performance indicators improve significantly.

The global financial crisis has revealed the need for joint coordinated actions on the part of the governments of developed and developing countries to overcome it and reform international financial institutions. This, in particular, is stated in the Declaration of the G20 summit on financial markets and the global economy, held on November 15 in Washington. The Declaration contains an instruction to the governments of the G20 countries and the expert community to prepare proposals for joint actions aimed at overcoming the global crisis.

Among the measures that need to be implemented in the medium term, the following should be highlighted:

Development of new rules for regulating financial markets, as well as requirements for macroeconomic parameters of the development of countries following the example of the Maastricht Agreements;

Expanding the financial capabilities of the IMF, which are currently insufficient to solve problems in a crisis situation;

Increasing the role of the G20 and strengthening its status; G7/G8 and G20 should complement each other;

Creation of a unified system for regulating the activities of rating agencies;

The creation of a new international organization in the financial sphere (or the transformation of one of the existing ones), whose members would adhere to uniform rules in the implementation of regulatory, financial, and possibly fiscal policies. Currently, states are uniting around the Financial Stability Forum. However, it does not include developing countries, including the BRIC countries. Today we need an international authority whose recommendations would be mandatory.

Thus, although the state is forced to actively intervene in the activities of the financial sector when the threat of a systemic crisis arises, already at this stage it must not only think about repelling immediate threats, but also have a long-term plan for returning the leading role to the private sector.

Conclusion

The modern global financial crisis is a link in a chain of crises, the description of which is devoted to extensive economic literature.

This paper analyzes the phenomenon of crisis itself using the example of the 2008 crisis in the United States. It was also studied how this crisis affected the economy of our country. It shook the entire financial structure of Russia. But the most vulnerable link turned out to be the real sector of the Russian economy. Entire industries turned out to be unprofitable. Having begun in the financial sector, the current crisis is destroying not financial capital, but real production, the profitability of which is lower than the profitability in the sphere of financial speculation.

Economists have different opinions, forecasts, and advice on how to overcome the crisis. Having studied the opinions of various specialists and experts, we can conclude that the financial crisis was triggered by the mortgage crisis in the United States; it will last at least 2-3 years, with the main blow falling in the spring-summer of 2009. The crisis is characterized by a significant drop in workers' wages, massive layoffs, employment problems, and a lack of demand for certified specialists.

The instability of financial systems, worsening social problems and slowing economic growth are forcing the government to take various measures to stabilize the situation and stimulate the economy, including fiscal policy measures.

The state also intends to support the real sector of the economy. To achieve this, measures are being taken to increase benefits to the population, inject money into various types of production, reduce income taxes, etc.

List of sources used

1. the federal law RF “On Currency Regulation and Currency Control” dated 10.12. 2003 No. 173-FZ.

2. Federal Law “On the Central Bank of the Russian Federation (Bank of Russia)” dated July 10, 2002, No. 86-FZ, Art. 27.

3. Federal Law No. 86-FZ of July 10, 2002 (as amended on July 19, 2009, as amended on September 22, 2009) “On the Central Bank of the Russian Federation (Bank of Russia).”

4. Federal Law of December 2, 1990 No. 395-1 (as amended on April 28, 2009) “On Banks and Banking Activities.”

5. Gerasimenko V.V. Main trends in the development of the modern financial system // Economics. - 2009. - No. 6. – p. 3 - 15.

6. Money. Credit. Banks: textbook / G.E. Alpatov, Yu.V. Bazulin et al.; Under. ed. V.V. Ivanova, B.I. Sokolova. – M.: TK Welby, Prospekt Publishing House, 2008. – 573 p.

7. International monetary, credit and financial relations: Textbook / pod. ed. L.N. Krasavina. – M.: “Finance and Statistics”, 3rd ed., revised. and additional – 2008– 461 p.

8. Finance: Textbook /pod. ed. Babich A.M., Pavlova L.N. – M.: 2009 – 591 p.

9. Economic theory: textbook for universities / S.S. Nosova ed. VLADOS Center, 2007 – 472 p.

10. Tedeev A.A., Parygina V.A., Melnikov S.I. Budget law of the Russian Federation. – M.: Prior, 2010. – 192 p.

11. Financial foundations of local self-government in the Russian Federation / Ed. V.M. Zuev, S.S. Kuznetsov: legal aspect. – M., 2008. – 176 p.

13. " Russian economy. Forecasts and trends" No. 2, 2010 - 5-7 p.

14.IMF; Development Center calculations.

15. www.cbr.ru – Official website of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation.

16. www.bankirsha.com – Website of Bankirsha.

"Finance", 2009, N 1
GLOBAL FINANCIAL CRISIS: CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES
A feature of the current difficult situation in the global economy is the overlap of two crises at once: the crisis in international monetary relations and the crisis in the US financial sector. Both of these crises are interconnected, and although their coincidence in time is an accident, the development and aggravation of each of them is quite natural and even inevitable. The reasons underlying each of these crises are quite obvious and do not pose any mystery to an impartial observer.
The first crisis “ripened” on two subversive charges embedded in the current mechanism of international monetary relations.
The first charge is the elevation to the status of “international currency reserves” of the monetary unit of one state (issued not even by the state, but simply by the community of private banks - shareholders of the US Federal Reserve). The second is the refusal of the American state to in any way provide the commodity basis of this monetary unit (through the abolition of the guaranteed gold content of the dollar).
As a result, the desire of every state to accumulate its foreign exchange reserves required additional issue of American dollars.
There is nothing terrible in this phenomenon itself; so any two persons (or states - for example, the USA and the European Union, which mutually supply each other and all other countries with currency “reserves” in dollars and euros) can issue a bill in favor of each other in the amount of, for example, $1 billion ., and then both of them can put these bills into free commercial circulation (in payment for their purchases, as collateral for the acquisition of property assets, etc.). Cash and commodity turnover will not suffer in any way from these two extra billions of dollars, provided that no one has any doubts about: a) the willingness and ability of the issuers to repay these bills on time; b) the invariability of the value of each of these bills.
But the United States did just that - it relieved itself and its banks of all obligations for the dollars they issued. As a result, all countries - owners of dollar "currency" reserves were forced to have in their circulation and pay off their debts with non-monetary (and non-commodity) debt obligations of some indefinite group of persons (money, as is known, represents a commodity - a universal equivalent (measurer) of value, and Wall Street bankers who control the Fed do not identify themselves as a single community). This is the second disruptive charge laid by the United States under the world monetary and credit system, this time only at its own discretion, even without formal consultations with other countries.
However, there would still be nothing wrong with this if all countries kept their “reserves” in the form of dollar paper bills in their safes (as citizens of different countries do now, who hold approximately 460 billion US dollars in cash). In fact, it turned out that these countries undertook to place their dollars in accounts in the same American banks that issued these dollars (however, it is difficult to blame them, since they sought to somehow minimize their losses from the decrease in the commodity “filling” of the American dollar). In this case, American banks were faced with the problem of placing these extra dollars (initially not in demand by the American market). These banks went to great lengths: financing “bubbles” in the stock market, preferential lending to dictatorial regimes around the world, distributing cheap mortgage loans with virtually no control over borrowers, etc.
But - what is most negative - it was precisely through these funds that American banks and other financial institutions began to form international “hot money”, which began to roam the stock and currency markets of different countries, rocking and plunging them into constant booms and crises. And by the way, these same “hot money”, as monetary funds uncontrolled by any state, were both a source and a means of financing the illegal trade in weapons, drugs, and the activities of terrorist organizations (the international press has already written a lot about certain anonymous organizations and funds that carry out incredibly successful stock exchange transactions in relation to the dates of particularly high-profile terrorist acts).
It should be emphasized that throughout the development of capitalism, such a situation never arose - and could not even arise, since countries always paid for mutual debts (either in commodity deliveries or in a universal monetary commodity - gold, silver, etc.), and neither one country has never been allowed to finance its needs by the uncontrolled and unlimited accumulation of its debts.
Further, over time, the extra dollar “currency reserves” really became redundant - as soon as the countries that owned these “reserves” realized that there was simply no one to present these “reserves” to them and that the very commodity value of these “reserves” depended on themselves: as soon as they try to get rid of them by one means or another, their exchange value (the exchange rate of the US dollar) will progressively fall. Major US creditors are now seeking to exchange their perpetual dollar assets for US government debt (Treasuries), which have a short duration and on which the US must pay interest (although the US has already talked about the possibility of "extending" the maturity of such obligations as much as possible; called the term even 100 years, but the question is whether US creditors will agree to such a period).
In any case, China has already declared its reluctance to continue to support the pyramid of American debt. It has just become known about the creation of the Chinese Investment Company, which is responsible for managing the foreign exchange reserves of this country (the total amount is more than 1.9 trillion US dollars, of which up to 75% are assets in US dollars). At the same time, the Chinese leadership decided to reduce the share of American dollars in its reserves, but to increase the share of gold - from the current 600 tons to 3 - 4 thousand tons. In addition, China will also no longer increase its surplus in trade with the United States (thus, The United States is losing the opportunity to purchase Chinese goods in exchange for paper dollars), and will focus on increasing domestic consumption in the country.
Following China, other countries are beginning to transfer part of their reserves into other currencies (euro, pounds sterling). However, these are only temporary measures; then the problem of transforming these reserves into real values ​​in the context of their accelerated depreciation again arises. Thus, international financial relations quite naturally found themselves in a crisis situation: the market, like any other social or technical mechanism, cannot exist without a solid and reliable measuring equivalent (just try to imagine building a house using a meter ruler, the number of centimeters in which is constant decreases). Indeed, both in science and among practical economists, the opinion has long been widespread that the fate of the world financial system cannot be left in the hands of the government of one state (any government, even if not as irresponsible as the US government). A number of proposals worthy of consideration have been developed, including the "privatization" of money (the removal of money from the control of the government, proposed by economists of the Austrian school), a return to the gold standard, the introduction of regional currencies, etc.
In particular, the most important idea seems to be a return to real world money. Among all the options discussed, in our opinion, the national interests of Russia as a country rich in natural resources are most consistent with the proposal to switch to a world currency based on oil.
In this case, any country can create its foreign exchange reserves in oil reserves provided by the common pool of oil-producing countries. At the same time, it is proposed to create a system of a world central bank, which will control these oil reserves at their location (in reserved fields or in artificially created reservoirs; this idea is now already being implemented by market speculators who purchase oil for storage directly in tankers), which guarantees the owner such foreign exchange oil reserve has unlimited rights to use it (sale, transfer as collateral, etc.).
Such a reserve in oil assets is definitely better than a dollar reserve (over the past 20 years, with all the recent price fluctuations, oil has grown against the dollar by at least 10 times), provides the country - the owner of such a reserve with a certain level of energy security and - most importantly - completely eliminates the possibility of manipulating the value of oil currency in the interests of any one country (if speculation with the same dollar has a negative impact on the oil market, then the country that owns such a reserve can simply use it as a production resource). And besides, since money will be returned to its original commodity form, any state (and even any private person) will be able to independently “make” money on an absolutely legal basis - i.e. explore, produce, buy and then accumulate oil as a legal monetary asset (by the way, the United States has been doing just that for a long time: buying Arab oil and pumping it into underground storage facilities).
Another option would be to create an artificial monetary unit based on a basket of basic strategic products (oil, gas, gold, some other non-ferrous metals that make up a set with certain fixed “weights” for each of these components). For such a currency, the same advantages remain: solid marketable content and independence from the arbitrary intervention of any one state or international organization.
As for the longer term, in our opinion, the transition to a single global energy currency (through which the energy value of oil, gas, coal, peat, etc. will be expressed according to a fixed formula) is ripe. This option is most consistent with the current economic situation, when the actual limiter and measure of the cost of many goods are the energy costs for their production. Another advantage of this option is that it automatically turns the problem of saving energy into the category of saving money, which will dramatically increase the attractiveness of all current and future energy saving programs.
Another serious problem, as noted above, is the uncontrolled accumulation of government (sovereign) debts - despite the fact that a significant part of them is formed as “world currency reserves”, without even a formal obligation of the debtor countries (USA and EU) to repay them.
To solve this problem, we can suggest the following:
a) establish a procedure for regular mutual repayment and resolution of public debts, assigning the obligation to hold such periodic sessions to one of the existing (IMF, IFRD, WTO) or newly created international organizations - every five years, with the preparation and signing of relevant bilateral or multilateral agreements;
b) develop and approve, at the international level, a procedure for converting sovereign debt into “capital” (financial assets, production facilities, natural resources, etc.), which will be used to force the issue of non-payment of debt in relation to countries that are unable provide other ways to regulate your debt on a contractual (mutually agreed upon) basis;
c) introduce a procedure for personal international responsibility of state leaders for excessive accumulation of external sovereign debt, for example, by requiring confirmation of the increase in debt by a unanimous decision of parliament (in non-parliamentary regimes of power - in a nationwide referendum held under international control, or in another similar way).
Ultimately, all these measures are designed to significantly reduce the possibility of abuse by the leaders of individual states of their rights - in the sense of converting the increase in their country's debt into an increase in their personal wealth.
The second crisis - the crisis of the US financial sector (which is now beginning to affect other countries and is already really threatening a global economic recession, as it already happened in the 30s of the last century) has reasons that are also quite obvious and long known. This is a situation of “conflict of interest” among leading operators of financial markets and the absence of an effective mechanism for their personal responsibility for their actions.
The “conflict of interest” lies in the fact that intermediaries operating in financial markets, along with executing clients’ orders for the purchase and sale of currencies, stock values, concluding speculative transactions on the stock exchange, etc., can simultaneously perform the same operations for their own account and in your favor. This situation gives them the opportunity to manipulate clients’ orders and even their funds in order to extract increased speculative income for themselves. And with such high incomes, they place all transaction risks entirely on their clients.
If we keep in mind that currency and stock exchanges in their current situation are platforms where people play for money, then only in this only version of gambling are intermediaries allowed to participate on an equal basis with their clients. In all other types of gambling, croupiers, bankers, etc. It is strictly prohibited, directly or indirectly, to take part in this game (and even more so to play directly against clients). And for exchanges, for example, playing against a client or using insider information is a common thing. Laws or intra-exchange restrictions adopted against the latest abuses, as a rule, turn out to be ineffective.
The problem of liability of financial intermediaries has also been known for many years. At the heart of any currency and stock exchange crisis are the actions of banks and large speculators, who, during periods of inflating “bubbles,” receive incredible profits, and during periods of recession, leave all losses to be borne by their clients. The recent collapse of virtually the entire investment banking industry in the United States showed that their top managers had already transferred into their personal accounts (in the form of salaries, bonuses and bonuses) multimillion-dollar sums of not only profits from speculative operations, but also a significant share of the capital of the shareholders of these banks (now The US government is asked to offset these capital losses using taxpayer funds.) As Henry Waxman, Chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Reform of the US House of Representatives, said, “while the leaders of Lehman Brothers were getting rich, the American economy was moving toward the abyss.”
This situation is already being harshly criticized by the leaders of a number of European countries. Thus, Nicolas Sarkozy directly stated that it is time to create “a capitalism in which finance will be at the service of enterprises and citizens, and not vice versa.” The same position can be seen in the Declaration of the G20 member countries, adopted following their meeting in Washington on November 15, 2008 and which for the first time proclaimed the countries’ joint desire to “increase the transparency of financial markets” and their desire to “ensure that all financial markets, products and market participants were subject to regulations and controls.” And the goal has also been openly set - “reforming international financial organizations.”
What conclusion should Russia draw from these events? Should we continue to adhere to the current course or proceed, following the example of the West, to a hasty “nationalization” of the financial services sector? In our opinion, the time has come to abandon the usual tradition of thoughtlessly “copying” from the West everything that comes to hand (from VAT to wild stock market games). And if you look more closely, even now in the West not everything is falling apart. There are more than 17 thousand banks in the USA, and no more than a dozen of them are in distress (albeit the largest ones); in industry, difficulties are experienced mainly by industries and companies that are most burdened with debt (when loans were taken out on the security of their own shares, which have lost a significant part of their value as a result of the crisis) or special social obligations (for example, in the price of any American car, more than a thousand dollars are made up of company payments to corporate pension funds - in addition to other mandatory social payments and taxes).
The example of the past (the company of Henry Ford, who fundamentally did not use bank loans and did not participate in the stock exchange game, survived the crisis and depression of the 1930s almost painlessly) and modern reality prove that the manufacturing sector can be quite reliably protected from stock market shocks by simple measures of its own prudence and precautionary actions on the part of the authorities (in relation to the latter, a clear example of the opposite is the requirement of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation in the late 1990s to form bank reserves through the acquisition of state bonds as “super-reliable” assets).
If we analyze all these facts and phenomena, it becomes obvious that it is the ignorance of reality in the actions of the authorities of Western countries that leads to such sad consequences. What is needed to build and regulate the financial services sector in our country, based on the modern realities of a market economy?
First of all, it is necessary to introduce licensing and establish strict rules of financial responsibility for any persons performing intermediary functions in financial markets. For these purposes, an Association (guild) of licensed financial intermediaries (AFI) should be created with divisions into groups: bankers, insurers, stock (stock, commodity, etc.) brokers, others. Further, a special law should establish that only persons who are members of this AFP are allowed to conduct personally, independently or in a group, “financial intermediation” activities, occupy any responsible positions in organizations carrying out “financial intermediation” activities, and also control in any way such organizations. In addition, the same law should establish that the AFP bears direct financial (joint and several) responsibility for the actions of its members. This liability must be insured by reliable insurance companies; the insurance premium is paid from the membership fees of AFP members.
With this procedure, the AFP as a whole and all its members will be interested in immediately expelling from their ranks any persons in relation to whom there is even the slightest suspicion of dishonesty, committing abuses, violating laws, etc. (a serious sanction, since with exclusion from the AFP this person is deprived of any opportunity to act in this area). Accordingly, when admitted to membership of the AFP, each candidate will have to provide evidence of his qualifications, integrity and law-abidingness. No favoritism will be possible in this case, since none of the AFP members will want to risk their money in case of abuse of a possible recruit.
Further, the crisis in the banking sector also showed that the adopted schemes for regulating banking activities are outdated and that increasing the capital of commercial banks does not contribute in any way to confidence in them or to protect them from the risk of bankruptcy. It is also obvious that in this area it is necessary to abandon the usual blanket approach: before - “all banks should be private”, now - “all banks should be consolidated” or “all banks should be nationalized”.
In fact, to normalize the activities of the banking sector, both nationalization (with the consolidation of leading banking structures) and liberalization (with the aim of expanding freedom of entrepreneurship for citizens and in this important sector) are necessary simultaneously. The purpose of the first measure is to protect public interests (citizens and enterprises) from the abuses of bankers, the purpose of the second is to create a normal competitive environment in the field of commercial financial intermediation. At the same time, it is necessary to determine exactly what and how should be nationalized and what and where should be liberalized.
It should be established by law that the state bears full responsibility for the state of payments in the country. Such responsibility is ensured by the creation of a unified National Settlement System (NSS), in which every individual or legal entity is guaranteed the opening of his personal giro account. In the lending function, LDCs should be limited to the right to “sell” free monetary resources to other institutions in the banking sector.
In addition, the state exercises special control over the activities of a limited number of banking institutions that are allowed to conduct settlement operations at the national level.
In this regard, a transition to a three-tier banking system must be implemented, in which the first level will consist of LDCs (with a monopoly on nationwide settlements and with the right to unlimited opening of correspondent accounts in foreign banks); universal national banks (no more than 4 - 5, with a state share of at least 25% in their capital and provided that no other shareholder or related group of shareholders can own more than 3% of the capital; with the right to unlimited opening of correspondent accounts in foreign banks and with equity capital of at least $50 billion); specialized banks - operate on a national or international scale, but strictly within the framework of their specialization - a bank for foreign trade, a project finance bank, a bank for guaranteeing and insuring export credits, and others.
The second level will consist of banks operating on the basis of a regional license (universal banks with the right of settlement services within the region and with the right to have a limited number of correspondent accounts in foreign banks (except for countries - offshore centers) and specialized banks with the right to open branches (only in this region )), and the third level - banks operating on the basis of a local license (universal and specialized local single-branch banks, corporate, trade union, etc. mutual banks (mutual assistance funds)).
With such a system, the state will be able to concentrate its efforts on ensuring the overall stability of the banking system, and at the same time, opportunities will open up for the development of entrepreneurial initiative in the banking sector at the local level (for example, nothing will interfere with the creation of local villages, districts, etc. banks that, based on the mobilization of limited local reserves, would provide assistance to local (neighboring) businesses and promote the development of local infrastructure).
And finally, it is necessary to significantly tighten government regulation of exchange activities.
In modern reality, playing on the stock exchange of stock and commodity speculators is no different from any other gambling game - on a betting table, in a casino, through bookmakers, etc., but its possible consequences are far from comparable to losses at the card table. Accordingly, the social, economic, and financial danger from gambling on the stock exchange is much higher than in the field of traditional gambling.
Meanwhile, in the field of gambling, gambling establishments themselves are often owned by the state (Monaco, Finland, etc.), and employees of these establishments are strictly prohibited from directly participating in the game (they are required to take a special subscription with the obligation that they and their relatives will not participate in the game at the place of work). If we turn directly to the sphere of exchange operations, then for developed countries, both in the past and in the present, it is not at all uncommon for exchanges to be government agencies and brokers to be government employees.
Taking all these circumstances into account, the following is proposed:
a) establish that any exchanges (both stock and commodity) can only be established as government institutions;
b) trading operations on exchanges can only be carried out by registered operators (brokers) who are government employees (or are included in a limited list of licensed brokers with the right to work on the exchange and with the obligation not to engage in any other commercial activity) and who are strictly prohibited (as expressly and through intermediaries) conduct transactions on the stock exchange at your own expense and on your own behalf (an alternative option, which is currently being developed, is the introduction of compulsory insurance of clients against dishonest behavior of financial market participants);
c) to limit speculation, introduce a special tax on any transactions that do not result in the delivery of a real product (material product or security); at the same time, establish such a procedure that the tax is withheld from any exchange transaction and then returned - upon confirmation of the real nature of the transaction (another option is also possible - the introduction of compulsory state insurance of all exchange transactions of a speculative nature - as betting transactions within the meaning of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation);
d) introduce a state monopoly on depository activities; to implement this measure - to create a Central Depository for registering shares of the largest issuers and transactions with them and, at the same time, to limit speculation with shares of Russian issuers outside the Russian Federation, introduce a special tax on the registration of transactions made outside the framework of Russian exchanges, and a tax on "anonymity" transactions" - for transactions made on behalf of or in favor of the so-called nominal owners.
Such measures do not in any way affect the “market nature” and “market character” of the exchange activity itself, but only more reliably protect the interests of real investors who invest their capital in transactions on the stock market. Similarly, the presence of the State Traffic Safety Inspectorate on highways as the state regulator of traffic and the very state ownership of these highways do not at all impede the market turnover of goods and passengers on them.
In the situation of the growing global financial crisis, we all, according to the President of the Russian Federation D.A. Medvedev, “must be morally, organizationally, financially and even politically prepared” (to meet its consequences, develop and take actions to overcome them).
Ultimately, all the proposed measures can be reduced to the following:
a) financial markets and the operators operating on them must be returned to general rules market activities and personal financial responsibility operating in other sectors and areas of private enterprise;
b) the state must, by the force of law and the actions of its supervisory authorities, protect the production mechanism of the economy and society as a whole from selfishness and abuse on the part of “virtual”, speculative structures and institutions of the financial sector.
V.A.Kashin
D. e. n.
Signed for seal
16.01.2009

For our compatriots, the word “crisis” has long become almost familiar. We hear it quite often in the news - after all, the economic crisis in Russia happens even more often than once a decade (if we take the period after the collapse of the Soviet Union).

However, not everyone knows exactly what the causes of the economic crisis in Russia are and how this threatens the ordinary citizen.and when it will end.IQReview I have collected up-to-date information and answers to similar questions in one place.

What is an economic crisis and what are its symptoms?

To summarize: an economic crisis is a complex of events during which a significant and sharp drop in production.

T This situation has a number of signs, including:

Rising unemployment rate.

Significant depreciation of the national currency.

Imbalance of supply and demand in various markets for goods and services.

Decrease in the solvency of citizens.

Decrease in GDP (or cessation of growth - if before this GDP was steadily increasing).

Decrease in the pace and volume of production in various industrial sectors.

Outflow of foreign capital.

Reducing the cost of raw materials.

The listed “symptoms” are only the main ones - in fact, the list of problems in the economy is much longer. They usually manifest themselves sharply, comprehensively (several points at once), and in a significant volume. For example, if the unemployment rate in the country increases by 5% over a year, then this is bad, but far from a crisis. But if in six months the national currency has depreciated by 30%, GDP has fallen, several thousand enterprises have gone bankrupt, and performance in various sectors of the economy has fallen - this is already a crisis.

Classification of crisis situations

Since a crisis is a large-scale phenomenon, it can be divided into various categories based on a number of characteristics:

Partial or sectoral. It is characterized by the fact that it covers a separate sector of the economy without leading to significant problems in other areas.

Cyclical. Characterized by the fact thatoccurs regularly (repeated at approximately equal time intervals). Typically, its causes are the obsolescence of industrial equipment and technologies, which leads to higher prices for products. To overcome such problems, a reorganization of the production structure is required.

Intermediate. It is similar to cyclical, but differs in that problems do not appear so acutely and sharply. Also, the intermediate crisis is not regular - it does not repeat itself at approximately equal time intervals.

Crisis situations can also be divided by localization. They can occur in a single region, in a single country, several countries (neighboring), or in a large number of countries. The global economic crisis is the last option, when an economic decline is observed in several major countries at the same time.

Modern classification of economics

According to the NBER classification (National Bureau of Economic Research, USA), the state of the modern economy consists of only 4 phases:

Economic cycle

Peak (when the economic situation is at its most comfortable level).

Recession (when stability is disrupted and the economy begins to steadily deteriorate).

Bottom (lowest point of decline).

Revival (overcoming a low point, followed by a way out of a crisis situation).

N A little history: when have serious economic crises ever occurred?

To confirm the words that the global economic crisis is a regular phenomenon, here is a list of the largest economic collapses:

1900-1903. The crisis suddenly began in most European countries, and a little later in the United States. This economic crisis in Russia (in those years - still the Russian Empire) began even earlier - in 1899. Moreover, in Russia it developed into a protracted depression, which lasted about a decade - until 1909.

1914-1922, First World War. The crisis erupted due to military action that stopped or seriously affected the operations of thousands of companies in participating countries. The problems began even before the outbreak of hostilities - when the situation began to heat up and panic began in the financial markets.

“Price Scissors”, 1923. The collapse that affected the economy of the “young” USSR. It arose due to the lack of balance between the prices of industrial and agricultural goods.

"The Great Depression", 1929-1939. It had the strongest impact on the USA and Canada, to a lesser extent on France and Germany, and was also felt in other developed countries. The reasons for this collapse have not been precisely established; there are several versions. It broke out after the stock market crash in the United States, on Wall Street (this is where the expression “Black Monday” came from).

1939-1945, World War II. Naturally, such large-scale military actions led to the decline of the economies of all participating countries and affected other states.

Oil crisis (or oil embargo), 1973. Began due to the refusal of a number of countries (Arab states that are members of OAPEC, Egypt, Syria) to supply oil to Japan, the USA, the Netherlands, Canada, and the UK. The main objective of this action was to put pressure on these countries for supporting Israel in the military conflict against Syria and Egypt. This economic crisis in Russia (USSR at that time) did not bring negative consequences. On the contrary: oil supplies from the Union have increased significantly, and its cost in 1 year has increased from $3 to $12 per barrel.

The collapse of the USSR, the end of the 80s and the beginning of the 90s. The situation that led to the collapse of the Union developed under the pressure of several factors: sanctions from the West, decreased oil prices, lack of sufficient quantities of consumer goods, high unemployment, military operations in Afghanistan, and general dissatisfaction with the ruling elite. The collapse had a strong impact on the countries of the Union, and to a lesser extent on neighboring states (due to the deterioration or complete cessation of cooperation).

Russian crisis, 1994. After the collapse of the Union, the economic situation of the Russian Federation was in a deplorable state, and from 1991 to 1994 the situation steadily worsened. The causes of the problems were errors in the privatization of state property, loss of economic ties, outdated technologies and equipment in production.

Russian default, 1998. Developed due to the inability to pay government debts. The precondition was the crisis in Asia, a sharp drop in oil prices and a sharp rise in the dollar exchange rate against the ruble (from 6 rubles to 21 rubles in just less than a month). The way out of the situation was protracted and difficult, and lasted for several years (it took different periods for different areas of the economy).

Asian financial crisis, 1997-1998 (one of the reasons for the Russian default). To one degree or another, it affected all states of the planet. It developed due to the very rapid growth of the economies of Asian countries, which caused a massive influx of foreign capital into them. As a consequence, this led to “overheating,” sharp fluctuations in the financial and real estate markets, and subsequently to their destabilization and decline.

2008-2011. The scale and consequences of the economic crisis are comparable to the Great Depression. The collapse developed sharply in the United States, starting with the financial crisis. Having spread to the eurozone, it lasted even longer - until 2013. The crisis had little impact on the Russian segment, and its main consequences were overcome back in 2010.

Current crisis (since 2014). It was reflected in many countries by a sharp decline in the cost of oil. Sanctions that have disrupted economic relations between Western countries and the Russian Federation also have an impact.

Economic situation in Russia: a brief history of the current crisis

Since the last one major crisis for Russia has not yet ended, it should be discussed in more detail.

One of the first reasons for its development was the “Ukrainian events”, during which the Crimean peninsula passed from Ukraine to Russia. Also Russian Federation Since the first half of 2014, it has been regularly accused of sending troops into the Donetsk and Lugansk regions of Ukraine. There is still no evidence of these accusations, but they still continue to be voiced.

To put pressure on the “aggressor,” Western countries (the United States and a number of European countries) introduced sanctions against the Russian Federation. Restrictions affected the industrial and financial sectors, which led to a sharp deterioration in the situation due to the fact that a number of companies lost the opportunity to receive “cheap” loans abroad and buy foreign equipment (raw materials, technologies).

At the same time, oil prices began to decline rapidly. From 2012 to mid-2014 they were in the range of $100-115 per barrel, and already in December 2014 they reached $56.5 (the lowest point since 2009). After this, the price of oil did not stabilize, but fluctuated regularly, and when it fell, it reached $27.5 per barrel (for the first time since 2003).

Due to the fact that the Russian economy was largely dependent on oil exports, this quickly led to a deterioration in the economy in all its sectors (in addition to the deterioration that arose due to sanctions).

Now (at the beginning of 2017) the country from the economic crisis gradually comes out. The price of oil has stabilized and has been in the 50-57 range since the fall of 2016$ per barrel. Along with the cost of raw materials, the national currency has also stabilized - about 55-60 rubles per dollar.

How do such problems threaten the average citizen?

The crisis is not only felt by companies in various sectors of the economy. It has no less influence on the ordinary citizen. An unfavorable situation leads to the following consequences:

Wages decrease (or slow down, or their growth stops).

Purchasing power decreases (due to rising prices, decreasing wages, and the desire to save).

We have to give up the usual range of products and entertainment.

Opportunities for receiving medical care, education.

Jobs are being cut (this can both lead to dismissal if a person has a job, and makes it more difficult for those who are looking for one).

The selection of goods in stores is decreasing (not always, not critically, and not in all areas).

Add to this other - intangible - problems. For a population whose standard of living is falling, their mood worsens—for every citizen individually. If the situation drags on, social tension may increase: trust in the government decreases, citizens more actively express their dissatisfaction (online, at rallies).

Causes of the crisis

There are many theories and explanations of the causes of crises, but one of the most common is the Marxist version. Proposed by Karl Marx (1st volume of Capital, 1867), it quite accurately describes the essence of problematic situations in the economy. Karl Marx noted that until the end of the 18th century (before the Industrial Revolution, when production began to rapidly develop in many countries), there were no regular cycles of booms and busts in the economy.

According to this theory, crisis is an integral part of the capitalist economy. No matter how stable, reliable and balanced the economic system of the state is, crisis situations still happened in it, are happening and will continue to happen. They can be “tamed,” their impact can be weakened, and they can be made more rare, but they cannot be completely eliminated.

According to the author, this is explained by the fact that any capitalist (owner of an enterprise) strives to increase profits. To do this, you need to sell as many goods as possible at the lowest cost of production. That is, the volume of production is reached to the maximum.

However, no one controls the balance between the total cost of goods produced and the real wages of the population (which always receives less than it produces - otherwise the capitalist would not make a profit). As a result, over time, this leads to the production owner’s profit falling.

To avoid this, he begins to take active steps that are aimed either at increasing the volume of goods or at further reducing production costs. When this does not help, reductions begin at enterprises until they go bankrupt. As a result, unemployment is growing, and competitors are trying to take over the vacated market space, who will then face the same problems.

To summarize, every new economic crisis arises due to a lack of balance between the production and consumption of goods and services.

If we evaluate more narrowly, then among the causes of problems we can highlight:

Uncontrolled growth of inflation.

Focus on one sector of the economy and insufficient attention to other areas.

Political instability.

Errors in management.

Obsolescence of production.

The production of uncompetitive products that are inferior to imported goods, and at the same time cost no less (or not much less) than them.

Ways out of the crisis

TO Each crisis situation is individual, and therefore there is no single “recipe” for overcoming it. However, we can summarize several basic steps that the authorities need to take to solve the problem:

Diversification of budget funds: creating the maximum number of ways to generate income. In this case, due to a fall in production in one industry (as in oil prices now in Russia), the economy as a whole will suffer less.

Creation of jobs - to increase employment of the population. This is useful for the budget because more funds will come in in the form of taxes, and, in addition, the population will spend more, stimulating production. To create jobs, it is necessary to maintain a conducive environment for doing business.

Containing inflation.

Financial control: exchange rate, interest rate.

Informing the population and enterprises: about the current situation, forecasts and prospects, recommendations for overcoming problems.

Updating the industrial sector: equipment, technologies.

Support for key sectors of the economy, if necessary - adjustment of budget distribution (reducing costs for less important sectors and increasing costs for more important ones).

On the development and causes of financial crises (video)

Clouds are once again gathering over the global economy. Analysts are already talking about a repeat of the worst-case scenario of 2008. The reason for pessimism in the markets was the results of the next two-day meeting of the Federal Reserve, at which significant stimulating measures were not taken. In its statement, the Fed did not revise its forecast for the US economic recovery and noted “significant risks” for the global economy due to the situation in financial markets.

Russia against the backdrop of a global crisis: schedule for the day after tomorrow

On the eve of the global crisis, Russia found itself on the periphery of the struggle for influence in the new architecture of the world economy. But a strategic approach to modernization will allow it to remain a key player in a number of areas

The danger of China withdrawing from negotiations with the United States has thrown indices down

Already on September 17-18, Donald Trump plans to impose duties on Chinese imports worth $200 billion, which, according to the Wall Street Journal, could cause a sharp reaction from China. Asian stock markets immediately responded with a fall. In the future, the escalation of the trade war could reduce global trade by 10%

'The worst social unrest in the US in 50 years' is coming

2018, 17:32

An ominous anniversary in financial history is approaching, and September 15 will mark 10 years since the collapse of Lehman Brothers. JPMorgan's Marko Kolanovic has released what he calls a "horror scenario" of what the next financial crisis will look like.

Kenneth Rogoff: Bitcoin will cost $100

The author of "The Curse of Cash" believes that the biggest fear markets should have right now is a sharp rise in rates, which "won't be the end of the world" but will cause big problems for countries with slow-growing economies. In Dovos, while observing many people trying to make money from the digital boom, Ken Rogoff gave an interview to Business Insider

TASS

Crisis, crisis is coming soon!

The world will soon have to observe and deal with the consequences of another cyclical crisis in the United States. It will also hit Russia. It is time for citizens to urgently look for ways to protect their savings. The government and the Central Bank should take their own measures

Former US Secretary of Defense showed a nuclear disaster scenario

“In the nightmares of darkness and gloom, / all the dogs of Europe bark everywhere, / and the countries froze in anticipation / And everyone is isolated in fierce hatred,” William Perry, who served 30 years in the Pentagon, began his speech at the Luxembourg Forum on the Prevention of Nuclear Catastrophe with these lines, and in 94-97 he headed the American military department.

DPA/TASS

West Stop

Almost 70% of residents of developed countries have seen their incomes stop growing. The consequences of the financial crisis are felt by more than half a billion people, although in fairness it must be said that every third family has begun to live better compared to 2005. But in general there is no smell of justice here

The economy awaits the fearless

2016, 17:06

The level of cash in investment portfolios has reached high level, indicating investor concerns about a range of risks. What they fear most is the UK leaving the EU. They are also bewildered by negative rates in Europe, which were not predicted by theorists. But the official “fear indicator” is not yet at its maximum, analysts say. True, while some investors will be afraid, the time may come for the fearless

Imago/TASS

Dead negotiations inspire optimism

After a sharp collapse - due to the collapse of negotiations between oil exporting countries in Doha - oil prices are slowing down. But there are reasons for optimism. First, lower prices will derail a wave of attempts to restore shale oil production. Secondly, the Russian economy is showing the first signs of adaptation, although it is too early to talk about a non-resource model. As for forecasts, experts see the price of oil in the range from 30 (not for long) to 55 (unlikely) dollars per barrel next year

Zuma\TASS

Christine Lagarde: we need leaders and money

Structural reforms in the form of tax breaks, support for families, employment and education - for rich and developed countries, diversification of economies - for resource exporters, and for everyone without exception: creating conditions for economic growth and increasing the supply of money as the goal of monetary policy - suggested IMF head Christine Lagarde speaking on April 5 in Germany

TATA Sale

The final decision to sell the entire steel business in the UK was taken at a Tata Steel board meeting in Mumbai on Tuesday. About 40 thousand people were under threat of dismissal: 15 thousand steelworkers and 25 thousand workers of other enterprises associated with the work of Tata Steel metallurgical plants.

All crises were predicted wrong

2016, 10:15

Investors around the world are trying to catch a wave in highly volatile markets. But you shouldn’t rely too much on the help of analysts and professional forecasters - MarketWatch has selected five examples of failed predictions by investment gurus

5 reasons for falling oil prices

Oil prices fell by a total of 12% over several trading sessions, but on the morning of February 10 they regained 2%. The previous steep one was short-lived. Why do they even fall? Fiscal Times tried to figure out the reasons for the fall in oil prices. As a result, a list of five possible purely economic and geopolitical reasons appeared that could contribute to a prolonged drop in prices for “black” gold to a 12-year low

33% of companies in the world are ineffective

Why the world economy is sliding into recession, what its nature is - this question has been the most popular in the business world since the beginning of the year after oil prices, but perhaps it is destined to come to the fore. The planet's companies owe $29 trillion, they say it's too much, but it's not the numbers themselves that matter, it's how the money is used

Interpress/TASS

Goldman will have to fork out again

Looming on the horizon new crisis, and the American authorities are just finishing dealing with the past. Fraud with mortgage bonds on the eve of 2008 will cost the American bank Goldman Sachs a tidy sum

Two major threats to the global economy

Economists at Swiss bank Credit Suisse say the global economy faces many challenges next year, but its biggest fears include a slowdown in investment in China and a return to core inflation in the United States.

Andrey Tkachenko/TASS

Too much oil

Analysts at the International Energy Agency (IEA) predict that the excess of black gold in the oil market will begin to decrease no earlier than the end of the decade. The agency believes that the cost of a barrel of black gold will reach $80 no earlier than 2020