Economic reforms in the early 1930s During the years of the first five-year plans in the USSR, the formation of a new economic mechanism was completed. From the five-year plan to the five-year plan, the tendency to create a specific economy of power, the essence of which is the dominance of politics over the economy and the extraordinary role of the state with its power-coercive methods, becomes more and more irresistible.
The fulfillment of the tasks of the first five-year plan was accompanied by significant difficulties - the plan for the development of industry in 1929 was not fulfilled; the construction of numerous facilities was delayed; the funds invested in them did not give a return, since the scale of investments did not correspond to the possibilities construction organizations, nor the state of transport and energy. Under these conditions, in order to solve the problem of savings, the authorities were forced to widely use even those measures that had previously been categorically rejected. And first of all, turn to the help of a money machine.
If the issue of money in 1928 was insignificant, then in 1929 the growth of the money supply amounted to 800 million rubles, in 1930 and 1931. approximately 1.5 billion rubles each, in 1932 2.7 billion rubles. Following the issue, free market prices rise. In the same year, 1932, their level was eight times higher than the level of 1928. The growth of the money supply, which was not secured by goods, decreased only by the mid-1930s. Compulsory "industrialization loans" are becoming an important source of additional state resources, and the sale of vodka is expanding sharply.
In 1929–1932 credit, tax and tariff reforms were carried out, which as a result seriously limited the sphere of commodity-money relations.
Reforms in the early 1930s lead to the restriction of economic incentives for the activities of enterprises and the strengthening of administrative and coercive measures. Due to the general orientation of the economy towards the priority development of heavy industry at the expense of savings in the industry itself and limiting the consumption of the population, “glaucism” is returning. At the same time, cost accounting is becoming more and more formal: practically all the profits of enterprises are deducted to the state budget, and only then funds from the budget are centrally allocated to enterprises. At the same time, the amounts contributed to the budget and payments from it are in no way connected with each other.
In the early 30s. credit to enterprises is replaced by their centralized financing. A few private enterprises remain virtually without credit and cease to be competitive.
In order to solve the growing problem of staff turnover and secure workers in enterprises, in the summer of 1931 Stalin called for an end to wage equalization. As a result, skilled workers began to receive 4–8 times more than unskilled ones. The salaries of the administrative staff have increased even more. As for non-priority sectors, such as light industry, trade, and the service sector, here low wages were frozen for a long time. The rapid increase of the fund wages in industries that do not create consumer goods, increase the hunger for goods and generate a huge wave of inflation. In turn, the acute shortage of consumer goods and the rationing system, which was in effect until 1935, seriously weaken the role of wages as the most important stimulus for the growth of labor productivity. To create social guarantees for the working class, the authorities are increasingly using administrative methods of regulating wages.
In the early 30s. private capital is almost completely squeezed out of various sectors of the economy. In 1933, the share of private enterprises in industry is reduced to 0.5%, in agriculture - to 20%, and in retail they are not left at all. By this time, foreign concessions are also liquidated. As the market collapses, they are exposed weak sides state socialism and, above all, the lack of personal incentives to work. Wages, due to their rigid decree by the state, as well as interest, profit, land rent, cease to play the role of incentives for the efficient distribution of resources.
"Planned Fetishism". In search of an adequate replacement of market instruments with administrative ones, the authorities attach great importance to the indoctrination of citizens and the formation of patriotic enthusiasm. As a result, the most important element of the new economic system during the years of the first five-year plans is the high labor activity of workers. In the first five-year plan, it was expressed in reciprocal planning, socialist emulation, in the form of a movement of shock brigades.
During the years of the first five-year plan, 1,500 new industrial enterprises were put into operation; in the east of the country, a new coal and metallurgical base appeared - Uralo-Kuzbass; tractor and automobile factories. However, the first five-year plan was thwarted. Contrary to the official version, which claimed that the plan was overfulfilled, it was overfulfilled only in terms of capital investments and the production of heavy industry products.
The practice of managing that developed during the years of the first five-year plan was generally consolidated in the second five-year plan (1933-1937). He continued to orient the economy towards quantitative growth. His main feature- slowdown in industrialization. At the January Plenum of 1933, Stalin, arguing that there was now no need to "whip up and urge the country on," proposed to reduce the pace of industrial construction. In the new plan, the growth rate decreased to 16.5% against 30% in the first five-year period. The plan also provided for higher average annual growth rates in the production of consumer goods compared with the growth rates in the production of means of production. To this end, investment in light industry increased several times. The main task of the new five-year plan is to complete the technical reconstruction of the national economy. For this reason, emphasis was placed on the development of previously built enterprises.
The second five-year plan is becoming a major milestone on the path of general state planning.
The construction of administrative coercion into a system contributes to "planned fetishism", the transformation of the plan into a universal means of resolving all political and economic problems in the country. Planning is becoming total: from the State Planning Commission to the individual worker. Enterprises are given not only the main production tasks, but also measures for the development of equipment, the use of reserves, etc. At the same time, a steady expansion of planning objects is taking place.
In the same years, agriculture was also intensively involved in the sphere of planning. From the spring of 1930, the state sowing plans included tasks for the time of the sowing campaign, and a decade later, the agricultural work plan already covered all the main agrotechnical measures. At the same time, planning was carried out from what had been achieved, plans were approved with a great delay. On the eve of the war, scientific activity becomes the object of planned work: in 1941, for the first time, a detailed plan was drawn up to accelerate technical progress in the leading branches of industry.
"Cadres decide everything!" The slogan "Technology decides everything!" did not justify itself. during the years of the second five-year plan is replaced by a new one: "Cadres decide everything!" During the years of the first five-year plans, material incentives for hard work were significantly expanded, in addition, a system of moral encouragement was introduced (diplomas, benefits, medals, honorary titles and positions).
In the last months of 1935, following the record of Alexei Stakhanov (1905–1977), a miner at the Central Irmino mine, who produced (with two assistants) on September 1 for a 6-hour shift 102 tons of coal, which was 1/10 of the daily coal production of the entire mines, the Stakhanov movement is being developed throughout the country with the approval of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks. A few months later, each enterprise had its own Stakhanovite. The weavers of the Vichug textile factory in the Ivanovo region, Evdokia and Maria Vinogradova, were the first in the world to switch to servicing 100 looms.
During the years of the second five-year plan, the process of strict administration also intensifies. They began to apply repressions to truant, late, negligent workers. In 1933, political departments were created in the MTS, transport, and fisheries - emergency party and state bodies.
Features of the third five-year plan. In general, the second five-year plan, like the first, was not fulfilled in most respects, although it differed from the first in a higher percentage of fulfillment of plan targets. Labor productivity doubled (according to official data), gross industrial output increased 2.2 times, Agriculture. In 1937, more than 80% of industrial output was obtained from new or completely modernized enterprises. However, the outstripping development of the industries of group "B" did not happen, although the growth rates of the two divisions converged.
In March 1939, the Third Five-Year Plan (1938–1942) was approved at the 18th Congress of the CPSU(b). The plan again provided for the priority development of heavy industry, mechanical engineering, energy, metallurgy, and the chemical industry. In the third five-year plan, the line on the militarization of the country was continued. It was planned to accelerate the development of the defense industry, the creation of large state reserves for fuel, electricity, the construction of backup enterprises in the Urals, the Volga region, and Siberia. During the years of the Third Five-Year Plan, changes in the economic mechanism proceed in several directions. Repressions 1937–1938 had a negative impact on the fulfillment of planned targets. Therefore, an attempt was made to use measures of material and moral incentives for workers.
On December 28, 1938, allowances for continuous service were introduced to pensions and temporary disability benefits. At the same time, mandatory work books were introduced for all workers and employees, in which data were entered on the length of service and place of work, on incentives and penalties.
These measures proved insufficient to speed up the defense program. For this reason, there is a proliferation of administrative-coercive methods. The decree of June 26, 1940, which prohibited, under the threat of criminal punishment, voluntary dismissal and transfer from one enterprise to another without the permission of the administration, began an open, official attachment of workers and employees to their jobs. By the same decree, the working day was increased from 7 to 8 hours, and the 6-day working week was replaced by a 7-day one (seventh day - Sunday - day off). Absenteeism and being late for work were punished criminally. The decree of July 10, 1940 equated the production of low-quality or even incomplete industrial products with "anti-state crimes, tantamount to wrecking."
Thus, from the second half of the 1930s the command style in the management of industry is finally approved, and the one-man command and the intervention of higher bodies in the work of enterprises take hypertrophied forms. By the end of the 30s. command system management, or the economy of power, is finally taking shape. Unlike the market economy of consumption, it was aimed not at meeting the needs of people, but at maintaining a totalitarian political system. Its main feature is non-market character, non-economic coercion to work, ignoring the law of value, subordination business processes political interests of the ruling elite, the orientation of the national economy to achieve political, and not economic results, emphasis on extensive economic growth.
The management of the country's national economy in the 1930s was built on the basis of a command-and-distribution economy model. Its construction was largely based on the principles of the economic mechanism of war communism, but the goals and methods were somewhat different. New was a detailed and detailed state plan and the use of financial and credit means of control over the economic activities of enterprises.
It must be said that the mechanism of the command-and-distribution economy (MCRE) was not built according to plan, but was formed, as they say, on the go. Its foundations were prepared during the NEP, so the basic institutions of the ICRE developed quickly - 1929-1932. The institutional foundations of the new economic mechanism included state ownership, state planning of production and distribution of products and general administration. Main elements The economic mechanism was the state plan, the system of planning and financial indicators, the system of public supply and fixed prices, information and management communications of a vertical nature, and public finance.
The economic mechanism was oriented toward the development of industrialization on the basis of domestic accumulations in industry, the transfer of resources from agriculture to industry, and limiting the consumption of workers.
Consider the elements of the economic mechanism of the command and distribution system.
The state plan is the central link of the IRS. The mechanism for mobilizing and using resources was based on the state plan. The state plan was based on a system of balances of resources and products in physical and monetary terms. These balances made it possible to determine how much and what resources are needed to produce a certain volume of output. Then the received volumes of products and resources were distributed among the industries, which were led by the People's Commissariats, and further - among the enterprises of the industries. The balance method of constructing a plan developed and became more complicated by including more and more new industries and products. Ultimately, the system of balances became more and more cumbersome and boundless, in which inconsistencies inevitably arose over time.
It is impossible not to note such an important part of the state plan as the capital construction plan, which served the investment process. The sources of investment resources were a significant part of the net income (surplus and part of the necessary product of society). They were sent to the most important industrial and non-industrial facilities from the point of view of the center.
Another important element of the ICRE was system of planning and financial indicators, covering all aspects of the enterprise's activities: the range of manufactured products, quality parameters, resource consumption standards, the amount of costs per unit of each type of product, limits on capital investments from the state budget for planned investment projects, and much more. It turned out that the enterprise received a kind of analogue of a business plan from its people's commissariat, and then reported on its implementation on the basis of the industrial technical financial plan (a type of planning and analytical reporting document of the enterprise).
Prices are also an economic indicator. But, being established centrally, they served mainly accounting needs, did not oblige enterprises to anything, did not stimulate or restrict anything.
The third component of the ICRE was the resource allocation system, formalized in logistics system(SMTS or simply MTS). It is known that production requires resources that belong to the state. The rule was that each enterprise made an application in advance for the resources necessary for production, justifying their range and volume. The application was considered by the MTS bodies and approved in full or truncated form. After that, the application was included in the state plan of MTS. Such a system, however, did not always guarantee both the timeliness and completeness of deliveries, despite the high planning discipline of those years.
The fourth element of the economic mechanism was information and management solutions of a vertical nature: from top to bottom, the tasks of the plan, other management decisions “descended”, control was carried out, from below - flows of reporting information.
And finally, the last element was public finances. They performed accounting and control functions, were used to redistribute financial resources between industries and sectors of the economy, and financed the social sphere. These functions are performed the state budget and in a market economy. The difference is that, firstly, 70% of the USSR state budget funds were directed to finance the development of state property in material production, and secondly, such financial system does not stimulate anything, but mechanically mobilizes the profits of state enterprises and then redistributes resources in accordance with the country's financial plan. Therefore, in such a system there are no taxes on producers.
Schematically, the main structural elements of the economic mechanism that took shape in the 1930s on the basis of universal nationalization are shown in Scheme 12.2.
Scheme 12.2. The main elements of the economic mechanism of the 1930s.
How does this economic mechanism work?
1. The general plan, as a universal means of solving all economic issues, accounting and control by the center of all reproductive processes and executors of the plan, performed an organizing function by deploying tasks for production and their resource provision between sectors.
2. The logistics system provides producers with resources (funds) under planned targets and marketing of products according to the instructions (orders) of the center.
3. The continuity of the economic cycle is ensured by the financial system. Thanks to it, the money goes to the accounts of enterprises in the branches of the state bank, which control the implementation of the financial plan by the enterprise, the efficiency of the use of public financial resources.
4. Centralized withdrawal of cash income of enterprises with subsequent budget financing ensured the growth in the production of goods and services.
5. The launch of this entire mechanism is carried out by the party and economic bureaucracy, organized into the ruling political party. It determines the goals, objectives of the country's development, the means to achieve them, which the State Planning Commission transforms into indicators and tasks of the state plan and then into a system of indicators and tasks for industries and sectors of the economy. Embedded political party in the economic mechanism as the main regulator economic relations led to the politicization and ideologization of economic decisions, which ultimately resulted in the substitution of economic criteria for making economic decisions with political ones. The politicization and ideologization of the economy are the costs of general nationalization, the low level of development of the economy and society, and the poverty of its population.
On this basis, it is possible to characterize the economic mechanism that took shape in the 1930s. how command-distributive or command-political.
The development of the economic mechanism followed the path of strengthening centralism. The following fragments testify to the deepening of administration, explain the way it affects the standard of living of the population, and also give some idea of the relationship between the state and agricultural enterprises.
Since 1929, the state has introduced wage fund planning at its enterprises, since 1932 - average wage planning, since 1934 - the number and structure of employees in enterprises (states of enterprises). And if we take into account that the prices were also set by the state, then the mechanism for withdrawing part of the necessary product from the working population becomes transparent.
In agriculture, the dependence of collective farms on the state had many reasons, in particular, due to the concentration of machinery in state machine and tractor stations. In-kind payment for the use of technology was, as a rule, non-equivalent. And the payment in kind for agricultural labor was extremely low (they said that the collective farmers worked "for sticks" - marks for the hours worked).
With the help of the plan of obligatory deliveries of agricultural products, the state withdrew all the surplus and part of the necessary product produced by the rural population.
Since the spring of 1930, tasks for preparing for the sowing campaign have been included in the practice, since 1938 plans for spring and autumn sowing, agricultural activities have been developed, then plans for agricultural and tractor work. Thus, the peasants were determined when, what types of crops to sow and harvest. And the weather conditions that make their own adjustments were not taken into account. Thus, the increase in administration occurred gradually.
In the agrarian sector, the use of methods of non-economic coercion in the form of attaching peasants to the land is most pronounced. The mechanism of consolidation was the passport system: after all, passports were not issued to peasants. And without a passport, a person was outlawed.
Elements of feudal relations were also manifested in the regulation of the movement of labor resources outside the village. We are talking about the state system of recruiting students to vocational schools (secondary, secondary technical and higher) and the subsequent centralized direction of graduates to work (a form of job security) after graduation. If necessary, there was a mandatory redistribution of skilled workers from enterprise to enterprise in order to assist or promote some undertakings.
The stories presented show that With the help of the economic mechanism, the administrative system covered the entire space of the life of society, and not just the economy.
The organizational structure of the economic mechanism is shown in Scheme 12.3. (The arrows show the direction of management decisions and control).
| ONE HUNDRED |
| SNK |
| Service station on site |
| GOSPLAN |
| People's Commissariats |
| STATE BANK |
| CHAPTERS |
| ENTERPRISES |
Scheme 12.3. Organizational structure of the implementation of the economic mechanism of the command economy.
Enterprises became the main economic link, and trusts were abolished. In their current activities, they were subordinate to the central administrations and people's commissariats. Glavkas arose from the sectoral departments of Tsugprom, and the people's commissariats - people's commissariats according to the sectoral and functional principle - began to form in 1930. Some enterprises were subordinate to the main offices, others to the people's commissariats, some to both.
The State Planning Commission developed a plan, which was approved by the party congress and became a directive plan, that is, mandatory for execution. The Council of Labor and Defense directed the organs of Soviet power in the localities, the economic life through its local organizations, being an integral part of the Council of People's Commissars. As the organs of Soviet power are subordinated to the Party leadership, the functions of the STO are transferred to Party bodies, and this organizational structure becomes redundant.
The People's Commissariat of Finance in the aggregate of People's Commissariats was engaged in the preparation of the financial reflection of five-year and annual plans. The State Bank was engaged in the distribution Money under government programs. The position of market regulators in the managerial hierarchy now appears to have changed.
The CRC mechanism has given rise to two interrelated trends that have shaped the characteristics of the ruled and the managers.
This mechanism was based on the executive functions of the employee and did not encourage unauthorized initiative. The uninitiated and irresponsible performer has become a symbol of this system. After all, responsibility and initiative are the essence of the master's functions.
However, the question of the implementation of the master's functions remained open. Any large-scale production requires unity of command and discipline. However, the hypertrophy of unity of command degenerates into irresponsibility and chaos. Since the exaggeration of unity of command leads to an increase in the intervention of higher levels of leadership in economic life, which, nevertheless, are not responsible for the results of their instructions. Thus, the tendency towards centralism transformed the classical principle of production - unity of command - into irresponsibility.
Despite the fact that the economic mechanism was formed relatively quickly, using the methods of political repression, the economy resisted its formation. She resisted the deterioration of the economic activity of the enterprise: low quality products in the pursuit of quantity, an increase in stocks of materials in warehouses due to incompleteness and untimely deliveries, irresponsibility in the use of equipment, etc.
The deterioration of the economy towards the end of the 1930s, the tradition of discussions in the 1920s. and now contributed to a public discussion of the reasons for the slowdown in industrial growth. In the late 1930s the discussion resulted in proposals for expanding the economic independence of enterprises. At the 18th Party Conference (1941) it was about the need to reduce planned indicators, about the rejection of detailed regulation of the activities of enterprises, the right of the director to dispose of excess savings, the right to determine the contingent of employees within the established wage fund, to acquire non-deficient resources on the market, about reducing reporting to the people's commissariats, etc. This very modest set of measures seemed quite revolutionary in an atmosphere of universal regulation and control, comparable to the atmosphere of feudal restrictions. But then there was the war.
It is generally accepted that the main drawback of the command-and-distribution economic mechanism is inefficient management. This is true. But a more serious drawback is the lack of prerequisites for the self-development of such a system. Therefore, such a system is internally limited. Or rather, it is viable for a fairly short historical period of time. Its degradation is inevitable due to the lack of feedback (reaction to management actions) and economic incentives for change and improvement, which predetermines both a decrease in the efficiency of the economy and the subsequent destruction of the command and distribution economic mechanism. Indeed, economic incentives to work have been replaced by administrative ones, which have little to do with the replication of technological innovations, which the laws of the market constantly force. The absence of feedback from the consumer to the producer (this function in a market economy is performed by prices) excludes the development of production in the interests of the consumer, causing a shortage and waste of resources.
Thus, already on the eve of the war, the need to change the economic mechanism became obvious, and in the post-war period it increases.
CONCLUSIONS
1. The economic mechanism of the 1930s was aimed at accelerated industrialization and relied on state property in industry.
2. The tasks of the economic mechanism included the creation of a system and management methods, appropriate institutions for organizing a non-commodity economy.
3. The peculiarity of the economic mechanism was determined by the built-in political leadership in the organization, management and methods of economic life, the significant role of the repressive apparatus.
4. Institutional changes reflected the rollback of the country's governance to the pre-market stage.
5. The economic mechanism of the 1930s, as a command-political and distributive mechanism, contributed to the stateization of all aspects of the life of society, including culture, science, education, medicine, etc., which became the basis for the formation of a totalitarian regime.
6. The political command mechanism was vulnerable in the long run. This was due to the blocking of those paths and directions of development that were not indicated from the center, blocking the opportunities for self-development of economic entities, and the lack of incentives for such development. At the same time, the mechanism of the command economy relied on and used the enthusiasm of the working population to strengthen command methods in the economy.
TEST QUESTIONS
1. List the basic institutions of the command economy mechanism and their main functions.
2. What are the trends in the development of the economic mechanism of the 30s? What are the consequences of these trends for the social life of the country?
3. What is the ratio of the functions of the total worker and the subject structure of these Functions?
4. Describe the interaction of the bodies of economic and administrative management.
5. What are the strengths and weaknesses of the command-political (distributive) management mechanism?
LITERATURE
1. Essays economic reforms. M. -Science. -1993. Ch. 6.
2. Story socialist economy of the USSR M. - Nauka. - 1977. T. 3. Ch. 5.8. T. 4. Ch. 2-4.
The most important directions for the development of the economic mechanism in the education system
Questions for revision and discussion
1. Define the concept of "education".
2. Determine the strategic goal of the state policy in the field of education.
3. List the priority tasks, the implementation of which will allow achieving the strategic goal of the state policy in the field of education.
4. What are the directions of reforming the education system in our country? What target reference points stand out in this case?
5. How is the concept of "education system" revealed in the Law of the Russian Federation "On Education"?
6. Why among the components of the education system, a special place is given to state educational standards and educational programs?
7. What is the difference between general education and professional programs?
8. Define work activity.
9. Define the concept of "profession".
10. Describe the levels of vocational education in Russia.
11. What does the multi-stage system of professional training mean?
12. What features define education as a branch of the national economy?
Chapter 2. Economic mechanism of the education system
The main problem covered in this chapter is to understand the nature and characteristics of the economic mechanism in the field of education, as well as to identify the main directions of its development.
The economy of any country, as you know, is a complex economic organism, consisting of many enterprises and industries, in connection with this, a mechanism is needed that can organize the functioning of the economic life of both the country as a whole and an individual economic entity.
In general, the economic mechanism can be defined as a way of managing, represented by a set of forms, methods and tools for managing the economy.
In its composition, the economic mechanism is complex and forms a unity of such interconnected elements (subsystems) as economic, legal and organizational. So, as part of its economic subsystem, such forms as planning, forecasting, financing, pricing, taxation, etc., as well as such tools as plan, price, credit, salary, etc., are distinguished. The legal subsystem includes legislative acts of the state on labor and economic activity, taxation and others. regulations and government and local government regulations. The organizational subsystem, which plays a significant role in management, includes the organizational structure of management, the management apparatus, control over economic activity in all parts of the country's economy. The scheme of control at the state and municipal levels and the bodies exercising it in the public sector and, in particular, in education, can be represented as follows (Fig. 2.3).
Historically, two polar types of economic management of the economy have developed: administrative-command and market. At the same time, as is known, none of these types was presented in its pure form in any country. In different countries there is an unequal ratio of market and planned methods of management. Οʜᴎ were used both in the centrally planned and in the market economy, but their ratio was different. So, in a market economy, a decisive role is assigned to economic methods, while in a planned-centralized economy - to command methods of management.
World experience in the development of countries confirms that the mechanism market regulation social production is universal if it is supplemented by state regulation of the economy.
Figure 2.3 - Structure of the bodies exercising budgetary and financial control in the Russian Federation
In this case, the balance of interests of producers and consumers is ensured. Thanks to competition and prices, the market is able to quickly change the structure and volume of supply, balance them with demand, quickly respond to the need for new goods and services, which leads to an increase in the efficiency of the economy.
At the same time, for all positive moments market mechanism is not able to ensure the development of education and healthcare, solving the problems of employment, the country's defense capability, space exploration, the development of fundamental science, the creation of an environmental protection system, and much more. For this reason, it is extremely important to apply state regulation various areas activities in which the listed problems would be solved in the interests of society as a whole.
For this reason, the driving force behind the development of society can be a rationally organized economic mechanism that would correspond to state of the art developed countries. In the absence of such a correspondence, the economic mechanism hinders, slows down the development of the education system, and there is a need to reform it.
The program for reforming the economic mechanism of the education system in our country was developed in connection with the transition to market relations. This program took into account the specific historical features of Russia, as well as the objective patterns and trends in the functioning of education in developed countries peace. It includes the following goals:
Ø strengthening and development of the material and technical base of education;
Ø improving the quality of student education and professional training of specialists;
Ø securing highly qualified personnel in educational institutions;
Ø attracting specialists from other sectors of the national economy;
Ø Improving the efficiency of using the creative potential of highly qualified specialists.
The implementation of these goals contributes to the formation of the basic directions of the economic mechanism in educational institutions.
These areas are based on a number of basic principles: legal regulation of economic relations in the education system; development of independence of educational institutions in solving a wide range of production, financial and social issues; regulation of education at the sectoral and regional levels on the basis of targeted programs.
In the new economic conditions that are taking shape in Russia, the economic mechanism of the education system provides for a number of areas:
1) the transition from the allocation of funds to educational institutions from the budget for individual items of expenditure to financing according to standards that comprehensively reflect the target orientation of the activities of these institutions;
2) a combination of budgetary or sectoral financing of the activities of educational institutions with the development of various kinds of paid educational services provided on the basis of contracts with individuals and legal entities. At the same time, there should not be a reduction in budget allocations for the financing of educational institutions by replacing unpaid services by the population with paid ones;
3) redistribution and delimitation of managerial functions between educational institutions and higher authorities, the use of predominantly economic methods of managing the financial and economic activities of educational institutions, strengthening in connection with this planned, economic and financial independence these institutions;
4) improvement organizational structures management of education and the creation in connection with this of sectoral and intersectoral, regional and interregional educational, scientific and industrial associations, firms, associations, etc.;
5) development of independence of labor collectives of educational institutions in solving basic issues of their production and economic activities and social development;
6) establishing a close dependence of material and moral incentives for the labor collectives of educational institutions and remuneration of employees on the results, quality and efficiency of their work.
In these areas, the development of the economic mechanism in education is currently taking place, ĸᴏᴛᴏᴩᴏᴇ corresponds to modern economic conditions.
This economic mechanism made it possible to radically change the economic and organizational activities of educational institutions.
The activities of state and municipal educational institutions are based on multi-level and multi-channel financing.
In the field of education, a non-state sector has been created and is being further developed, represented by non-state educational organizations.
Today, the organizational structures of education management are being improved, which is manifested in the development of the integration of educational and scientific institutions, as well as industrial enterprises into educational, scientific and industrial complexes. Such complexes can be formed in the form of a single legal entity, when the educational institution includes universities, scientific departments, colleges, schools and other educational institutions, as well as in the form of an association of legal entities in the form of a union, association. When merging educational institutions on a territorial basis, regional educational associations are formed.
The successful functioning of these complexes allows us to solve the problems of improving the efficiency and quality of the educational process, continuity educational programs different levels, strengthening the connection between education, science and production, mastering modern technologies training of personnel, as well as more complete and efficient use of available material, human and information resources.
An example of such activity is the educational, scientific and pedagogical complex of the Volgograd State Pedagogical University, which was created more than 15 years ago on a voluntary basis. It includes a men's pedagogical lyceum (the only educational institution in Russia that provides pre-professional pedagogical training for future male teachers), a city gymnasium, three pedagogical colleges, an advanced training institute for educators, and its structural elements are the Mikhailovsky branch of the university. Institute of Problems of Personally-Oriented Education, Institute of Pedagogical Informatics and information technologies, Center for Pedagogical Innovations.
Mikhailovskoye Higher Pedagogical School (college) is another educational institution, on the basis of which an educational-scientific-pedagogical complex (UNPK) was created. Today it consists of institutions of additional education (children's youth sports school, the Center for Culture and Arts), an elementary school / kindergarten, two secondary schools, a pedagogical college, a branch of the VSPU, a center for advanced training. It has a training and production department, a research center, a technical center, an information and analytical center, a trade union center, a sports club "Start", a united methodological room, a socio-psychological service, a corporate information library network, a hotel complex "Druzhba ”, its centralized accounting department.
In the new economic conditions, educational institutions have received a fairly large degree of independence in decision-making when planning their development directions, for example, in choosing specialties for which specialists will be trained in the future. Independence is also manifested in the possibility of developing and approving new curricula, programs of educational work, as well as plans for the socio-economic development of an educational institution.
The first government document in which this term is used is the order of the State Committee for Public Education of the USSR dated January 17, 1990. "On the economic mechanism in public education".
In Russia, the transfer of educational institutions to new principles of management began in accordance with the order of the Ministry of Education of the Russian Federation "On the introduction of the Basic provisions of the economic mechanism in public education" dated April 10, 1990. No. 82 and Russian law about education.
What is the purpose of this mechanism?
Among the fundamental goals of introducing an economic mechanism in educational institutions are the following:
1 strengthening and development of the material and technical base;
2 improving the quality of education, training, professional training of students, pupils, students, listeners, graduate students;
3 consolidation of highly qualified personnel of educators, teachers, masters of industrial training, faculty, attracting specialists from other sectors of the national economy, increasing the efficiency of using their creative potential;
4 development of independence of labor collectives in solving key issues production activities and social development;
5 a combination of budget financing with the performance of paid work under contracts with enterprises, organizations, and the population;
6 transition to financing according to economic standards that comprehensively reflect the target orientation of activities;
7 the establishment of a close dependence of the material and moral incentives of labor collectives on the results, quality and efficiency of labor.
What are the most important changes in the transition from the old to the new economic mechanism in education?
The administrative leadership is being replaced by democratic, state-public management of the education system.
The new economic mechanism is based on the principles of legal regulation of economic relations and the development of the independence of educational institutions in solving a wide range of production, financial and social issues..
A transition to normative budgetary financing of educational institutions at a guaranteed level is planned, along with a wide attraction of extrabudgetary funds..
Planning, programming and forecasting
Education development
The formation of a new economic mechanism in education, the strengthening of economic methods of managing educational institutions, require cardinal changes in sectoral economic planning.
Planning and forecasting
Planning is the process of forming goals and certain activities, means and methods for achieving them.
The result of planning is a plan, a motivated action model, which acts as the final stage of forecasting.
Forecasts usually precede the plan and equip it with scientific advice.
There are two types of planning in nature:
- imperative (imperative), which is more familiar to us under the name "directive";
- and indicative (desirable), bearing an information-orienting character.
Therefore, the industry Education, like other branches of the national economy, are moving from directive planning to development programming.
When planning the development of education, it is necessary to take into account its specificity.
Firstly, a close relationship between pedagogical and economic processes leaves a serious imprint on the nature of planning.
Other The peculiarity of the functioning of education is due to the fact that the object of its reproduction and planning is living people with their individual needs and abilities, which gives planning a character of greater uncertainty than in the branches of material production.
Thirdly, the education system should not only be sensitive to the demands of scientific and technological progress, but also prepare qualified personnel ahead of schedule.
School curricula
Why are we so interested in curricula? How do they relate to governance? economic activity?
But the fact is that the number of hours provided by the curricula for the study of various school disciplines is one of the factors affecting the amount of work of the school team.
When preparing operational and long-term plans for educational institutions, other socio-economic standards play an important role:
The volume of the teaching load of the teacher;
Minimum wage for public sector employees;
Costs per student (pupil).
These and other standards, which will be discussed below, are calculated values that determine various aspects of the necessary provision of educational institutions with financial and material resources.
Planning a contingent of schoolchildren
The determining factor in the magnitude of the volume of educational and planned work is number of students. It depends on it the number of classes and groups of students, the need for the number and composition of teachers, the amount of budgetary funding for schools, etc.
The contingent of students and the number of classes in schools is determined by groups of classes: I - IV, V - IX, X - XI. This information is given for two dates (January 1 and September 1) of the planned year. The average annual number of classes is also calculated.
The number of classes in secondary schools is determined by two methods: the method of shifting and the method of given filling.
Movement- this is the transfer of students to the next grade: 1st - to the 2nd, 2nd - to the 3rd, 5th - to the 6th grade, etc.
A contingent of 5 classes is planned in a special way. This is due to the existence of two programs under which the elementary school operates.
Children who study from the age of 6 complete the primary school course in four years and move on to the fifth grade.
Those who start studying at the age of 7, master elementary school in three years and are transferred to the fifth grade.
When determining the number of students in grades 10 It is taken into account that some of the 9th grade graduates will go to vocational schools or get a job.
Based on the method of given filling the average class size in primary, secondary and secondary schools is taken for each planned year.
The number of students (T) is divided by the number of students that make up the class occupancy rate (N), and the number of classes is determined by the formula:
The average annual number of classes in a school (K cf) is calculated using the following formula:
K cf = (K 1 M 1 + K 2 M 2): 12, where
K 2 - the number of classes at the beginning of the academic year;
M 1 - the number of months of functioning of the school with the number of classes on January 1 of the planned year;
M 2 - the number of months of functioning of the school with the number of classes at the beginning of the new academic year;
12 is the number of months in a year
Theme "Financial Mechanism"
Financial and economic mechanism can be defined as a way of managing, a set of forms. Methods and tools of economic management.
In my own way composition of the financial and economic mechanism complex and forms the unity of such interconnected elements (subsystems) as economic, legal and organizational.
As part of it economic subsystem I mean the following forms and tools: planning, forecasting, pricing, finance, wages, cost accounting, etc.
To legal subsystem include legislative acts of the state on labor and economic activity, property relations, taxation and other normative acts and resolutions of legislative and executive authorities, local governments.
Also an important role organizational subsystem: management structures, management apparatus and control over economic activity in all sectors of the country's economy.
Historically, two polar types of financial and economic mechanism have developed: the administrative-command and the market mechanism for managing the economy. But in its pure form, neither one nor the other type is found in any country. Most countries are characterized by a mixed economy with an unequal ratio of market and planned forms of management.
financial mechanism- this is a set of conditions, forms and methods for the creation, distribution and use of funds by educational institutions and authorities in order to ensure a favorable situation for the development of the education system.
Financing- this is the provision of the necessary funds for the costs of carrying out certain activities .
In our case, on implementation of the educational process.
Funding is subject to two conditions:
● intended use funds - spending funds for predetermined purposes;
● irrevocable – the funds provided to educational institutions are not directly returned or reimbursed by them.
The Soviet Model of Modernization: The Conservative Revolution in the Economy and the Formation of a New Economic Mechanism in the 1930s.
By the spring of 1921, the Soviet republic found itself in a severe crisis. The internal political crisis manifested itself in the emergence of contradictions between the rank and file members of the ruling party and its leadership, in the mass management system, in militarization and bureaucratization, the absence of democracy, which led to a heated discussion about trade unions.
The Soviet state was in economic and political isolation. Russia had to rely only on its own forces, on internal resources.
The political crisis was intertwined with the economic one. The country was in
economic ruin. Industrial production fell 7 times, gross agricultural output amounted to 2/3 of the pre-war level. A poor harvest in 1921 exacerbated the situation. Mass famine continued in a number of areas until autumn next year. The fuel crisis paralyzed transport and industry. Inflation has reached alarming proportions.
The peasants were dissatisfied with the surplus appropriation and the whole policy of "war communism". The threat of starvation was becoming imminent.
An attempt to get out of the crisis on the basis of state coercion caused v _ mass peasant uprisings (“Antonovshchina”, an insurrectionary movement in the I*^CH) Ukraine, in the Middle Volga region, on the Don, Kuban, in Turkestan, in Western Siberia), unrest in cities and in the fleet.
On February 28, 1921, the Kronstadt uprising took place under the slogan "All power to the Soviets, not to the parties!" The demands of the Kronstadters were, in essence, only an appeal to observe the rights and freedoms proclaimed during the revolution. ■ They did not demand the overthrow of the government. The Bolshevik leadership hastened to stigmatize the Kronstadt action as a counter-revolutionary conspiracy instigated by the Entente imperialists. A peaceful outcome of the conflict did not happen, although the Kronstadters sought open, transparent negotiations with the authorities. But the position of the latter was unequivocal: the rebels should be severely punished.
The example of Kronstadt clearly demonstrated how mercilessly any protests against the monopoly power of the Bolsheviks were suppressed.
The most acute crisis at the beginning of 1921 forced Lenin to come to an agreement with the peasantry. At the Tenth Congress of the RCP(b) (March 1921), a decision was made to replace the surplus appropriation with a food tax - the first step towards the New Economic Policy (NEP). From now on, it was proposed not to take away from the peasant all the "surplus" of the products grown by him, depriving him of an incentive to work, but to establish a firm tax - a percentage of the crop. The place of bare coercion was occupied by material interest. In August-September 1921, free trade in grain was allowed.
The transition to the NEP meant a radical turn from civil war to civil peace, from violent methods in government to peaceful economic levers in the economy.
In general, the NEP period was assessed by contemporaries as a transitional stage. Some believed that the Bolsheviks, having switched to NET1u, opened the way for the Russian economy to capitalism. Therefore, their next step should be the establishment of a democratic republic. This point of view was expressed most vividly by the "Smenovekhites" - representatives of the ideological trend in the intelligentsia, who received the name from the collection of articles by the authors of the cadet orientation "Change of milestones" (Prague, 1921). Since 1918, the Mensheviks and Socialist-Revolutionaries have been talking about the need for a mixed economy and a certain democratization.
The Bolsheviks (Lenin, Preobrazhensky, Trotsky, and others) adhered to other ideas. They viewed the transition to the NEP as a tactical move, a temporary retreat caused by an unfavorable balance of power. Since the autumn of 1921, the Bolshevik leaders began to lean toward understanding the NEP as one of the possible paths to socialism: after a relatively long period of coexistence of the socialist and non-socialist ways, the gradual displacement of non-socialist economic forms.
Part of the Bolsheviks did not accept the NEP, considering it a capitulation, "Economic Brest".
Unlike his opponents, Lenin believed that socialism could be gradually built, relying on the state of the dictatorship of the proletariat. This plan assumed the strengthening of the regime of the Bolshevik dictatorship * The "immaturity" of the socio-economic and cultural prerequisites of socialism was intended to compensate for terror. Political liberalization was rejected: allowing the activity of socialist parties, a free press, the creation of a peasant union, and so on.
Thus, the model of the NEP organization of society, developed by the Bolshevik leadership, primarily Lenin, in the early 20s. consisted of the following main components:
In the political and ideological field - a tough authoritarian regime
In the economy - an administrative-market system, which included a minimum connection with the world economy (reduced to foreign trade on the basis of a state monopoly), state ownership of a large, significant part of medium-sized industry and trade, and rail transport; cost accounting in state industry, which operated in a limited form not at enterprises, in workshops, but only at the level of trusts; non-equivalent exchange with the countryside (gratuitous alienation of part of its products in the form of a tax in kind);! inhibition of the growth of individual large-scale peasant farming in the countryside.
Already in 1921-1924. reforms are being carried out in the management of industry, trade, cooperation, and the credit and financial sphere. In February 1921, the State General Planning Commission (Gosplan) was created.
As a result of the denationalization of small and, to some extent, medium industry, by the end of 1922, only one-third of the previously nationalized enterprises remained in the hands of the state. The largest and most technically equipped factories and plants were united into state trusts. Yugostal, Khimugol, Donugol, State Trust of Machine-Building Plants (Gomza), Severoles, Sakharotrest, etc. The general management of the trust was carried out by the Supreme Economic Council. He is pe-. redistributed the profits received by the trusts. The management of the trust was assigned only the functions of direct operational management. Equal wages were replaced by tariff wages, taking into account the qualifications of workers, the quality and quantity of products produced. In-kind forms of remuneration (“rations”) were supplanted by cash in the form of wages.
The development of commodity-money relations led to the restoration of the All-Russian domestic market. Major fairs are being recreated; Nizhny Novgorod, Ba-urkinskaya, Irbitskaya, Kyiv, etc. Trade exchanges were opened. It was allowed to create small private enterprises (with no more than 20 workers), concessions, mixed companies. consumer, agricultural, handicraft cooperation were placed in a more advantageous position than private capital.
Specific work on the implementation of the NEP began with the reform of agriculture economic production. The tax in kind was less than the allowance, at the same time it was lowered for the poor peasants and middle peasants and increased for the wealthy. The peasant could sell the surplus left after the tax was paid on the market, which interested agricultural producers in increasing it.
A unified agricultural tax was introduced, cooperation expanded, the village began to receive machines and implements, and land cultivation improved.
Already by 1925, the level of agricultural production of 1913 was reached. success of the new economic policy contributed to the monetary reform. In 1922, a stable currency, the chervonets, was put into circulation. Chervonets, which was equal in J, 0 to pre-revolutionary gold rubles,1 was provided with gold and other easily sold valuables and goods.
By 1924, the monetary reform was completed: copper and silver coins and treasury bills were issued instead of depreciated Soviet signs. During the reform, the budget deficit was eliminated, and from October 1924, the issue of banknotes to cover the budget deficit was prohibited by law.
(The growth of industrial output in the 1920s was carried out at high rates: 1921 - 42%, 1922 - 30.7%, 1923 - 52.9%, 1924 - 14.6%, 1925 -66.1%, 1926 - 43.2%, in 1927 - 14.2%."
At the same time, heavy industry recovered faster than light industry. By the end of the 1920s, the Soviet economy as a whole reached the pre-war level.
Maintaining the indicators of industrial development achieved in the 1920s was problematic. The high growth rates during the NEP years were largely due to the “restorative effect”: the equipment that was already available, but idle, was loaded, and old arable lands abandoned during the civil war were put into circulation in agriculture. When in the late 1920s these reserves dried up, the country was faced with the need for huge investments in industry in order to reconstruct old factories with worn-out equipment and create new industries.
Faced with a shortage of financial resources for the expansion of industry and having failed to mobilize domestic and foreign private capital for this, the Bolsheviks naturally took the path of ever greater centralization of the available financial resources, ousting private capital from industry and trade with the help of taxes and increasing rent. All this was due to the high degree of nationalization of the NEP economy, since a worker at a private factory produced on average 2 times more products than at a state enterprise.
The rise of industry and the introduction of hard currency stimulated the restoration of agriculture. The sown area began to gradually increase. In 1925, the gross grain harvest exceeded the average annual harvest for the five years 1909-1913 by almost 20.7%.
But in subsequent years, grain production gradually decreased due to the growth in the production of industrial crops. By 1927, the pre-war level was almost reached in animal husbandry.
However, the growth of a large commodity peasant economy was restrained by tax policy / In 1922/23. was exempted from agricultural tax 3%, in 1923/24. -14%, in 1925/26 - 25%, in 1927 - 35% of the poorest farms.3 Prosperous peasants and kulaks, who made up in 1923/24. - 9.6% of peasant households paid 29.2% of the tax amount.4
As a result tax policy the rate of fragmentation of peasant farms was in the 20s. 2 times higher than before the revolution, which had a negative impact on the development of production and its marketability. By separating the farms, the wealthy villagers tried to escape from the tax pressure.
The low marketability of peasant farms led to understated exports of agricultural products and imports necessary for the modernization of the country.;
During the years of NEP, serious disproportions developed between the development of agriculture and industry, which led to economic crises.
The first crisis of 1923 arose as a result of the appearance of "scissors" in the prices of industrial goods, which were prohibitively high, and foodstuffs. The peasants could not buy the necessary goods, although there were many of them. Workers were often delayed in receiving their wages. A wave of strikes swept across the country, and there were armed clashes.
The second crisis of 1925-1926 befell the country due to the failure of the grain procurement campaign and the export-import plan. Incomplete [harvesting of grain reduced the export supply of grain, which means that it reduced the purchase of equipment from abroad, which froze the construction of plants and factories in their own country. Rising prices, unemployment. As a result of the crisis of 1928, the food supply deteriorated so much that a rationing system was introduced in Moscow and Leningrad.
Thus, as the restoration period ended, the contradictions inherent in the NEP intensified. Antagonism between politics and economics grew.
Complete liberalization of market relations in the economy was not offered by any of the influential trends in the leadership of the Bolshevik Party.
In the late 1920s The Soviet economy faced two "real alternatives" for development: either the continuation of the NEP, or an accelerated transition to "state socialism".
1b. The processes taking place in the world at the end of the 1920s and 1930s had a direct impact on the internal development of the CCCPV, being specifically refracted in it. The unity of the world was expressed in a certain synchronization of the main general civilizational processes.
“The backwardness of the USSR from the advanced states could lead to the loss of economic and political independence. In order to defend its independence, the leadership of the USSR, taking into account the processes of modernization in the capitalist countries, began to develop the issue of the pace and methods of further development of the country.
Industrialization meant the creation of a large machine production in industry and other sectors of the national economy, the transformation of the country from an agrarian to an industrial
The main features of the industrialization policy were recorded in 1920 in the GOELRO plan (State Commission for Electrification in Russia).! The XIV Congress of the CPSU (b) in December 1925 officially proclaimed a course towards industrialization.
Initially, the strategy of industrialization based on the NEP was justified. During the years of NEP, the construction of the Dnieper hydroelectric power station named after V.I.
The need to overcome technical and economic backwardness, in the absence of external sources of accumulation, the potential threat of a new world war, as well as the mobilization of internal resources for accelerated industrialization, the creation of a developed military-industrial complex, contributed to a sharp increase in the "transfer of funds" from agriculture to industry, the implementation of policy "belt tightening" social sphere and "crackdown" in politics.
The country received the main foreign exchange investments in construction from the export of bread. However, under the NEP, the economic mechanism could not guarantee sustainable grain exports. The pace of industrialization was directly dependent on the development of peasant farms. In the winter of 1927/28 an acute crisis of grain procurement broke out. Cities and the army were threatened with starvation, and the export-import plan failed.
The crisis in grain procurement forced the government to switch to non-economic coercion of the peasants, the forcible seizure of grain. The grain deficit was eliminated, but the peasants began to reduce production, which is now unprofitable for them. In the winter of 1928/29 again followed by "extraordinary" measures.
An analysis of the causes of the crisis and ways out of it led to the formation of two main points of view in the party. Stalin considered the crisis to be structural: the insufficient rate of development of the industry gives rise to a shortage of goods, which makes it impossible to obtain grain from the peasants in an economic way - through exchange for manufactured goods; in turn, the small-peasant economy is unable to meet the needs of growing industry. The class aspect of the problem was emphasized: the kulak exploiter is sabotaging grain procurements. Stalin proposed concentrating all forces on the main line - in heavy industry (due to the redistribution of funds from other industries), and then, having created their own energy and metallurgical bases, domestic machine tool building, transfer the entire national economy to an industrial basis. In the countryside, it was proposed to rapidly organize large-scale collective farms.
In Bukharin's view, the crisis was caused by subjective causes. absent reserve fund manufactured goods, the growth of money incomes of the village was not balanced by taxes, which exacerbated the shortage of goods, reduced the supply of grain by the peasants in the market; the ratio of purchase prices for bread and raw crops was unfavorable for grain producers.
Bukharin put forward the normalization of the market to the forefront: raising the purchase prices for bread, buying bread abroad, and raising taxes on the village "tops". He advocated a balanced development of heavy and light industry, the industrial and agricultural sectors, provided for the deployment of large collective farms in the grain regions, the industrialization of agriculture, and the creation of small enterprises for processing agricultural products in the countryside. In his opinion, the basis of the agrarian sector for a long time should have been individual peasant farmers.
Bukharin believed that one of the most important miscalculations was the establishment of an incorrect ratio of purchase prices in agriculture, unfavorable for grain producers. However, a significant increase in the prices of grain and raw materials was difficult to achieve without raising industrial prices in order to compensate the workers for the increase in the cost of products. And this, in turn, would require a new increase in agricultural purchase prices, and so on.
The essence of the problem was that a large-scale commodity economy is able to function successfully even with falling purchase prices. It can scale up production with intensive methods and earn significant profits by increasing production volumes. But the growth of individual large-scale peasant farms was hampered in every possible way. The state did not have the means to stimulate the voluntary transition of the poor and middle peasant farms to a large-scale collective commodity economy (credits, equipment, etc.).
Small poor-middle peasant households kept afloat, moving from commodity production of less profitable to growing more profitable crops (in response to changes in market conditions).
Disagreements over the choice of a political course ("emergency" Stalin, NEP - Bukharin) led to the formation of the so-called "right deviation" in the Bolshevik Party (1929). The Stalinist concept won, which in fact meant the abandonment of the NEP policy]
The defeat of the Bukharin group was caused not only by Stalin's control over the party apparatus, but also by the great accessibility and attractiveness of his program to the masses. This meant the removal of obstacles to the implementation of the strategy of forced industrialization and the formation of a totalitarian regime.
The transition to an industrial economy was painful. If Western countries were helped to solve the problem of finance by colonial robbery, a massive influx of foreign capital, then the USSR did not have these advantages. Nevertheless, the share of savings in the mid-20s. accounted for 10% of the national income, 29% in 1930, 40% in 1931, 44% in 1932. Later, in the 30s, it was 25-30%.
| In the Soviet model of industrialization, the emphasis was on the priority development of capital-intensive industries: energy, metallurgy, chemical industry, engineering.;
Forced industrialization was accompanied by the breakdown of the economic mechanism, which had been created until the mid-1920s. It was the NEP mechanism. It was built on self-supporting "relations, when most of the large industrial enterprises within the trust were self-sustaining. Specialized associations (syndicates), as well as self-supporting organizations, were engaged in the sale of products. Within the framework of industry, labor productivity grew, the cost of production decreased, and cash savings in the industry itself, which allowed enterprises to carry out repairs, expand production, and conduct new construction.
A certain balance was observed between sectors, between the sphere of industrial construction and industrial production. Particular importance was attached to the use of skilled labor, as product quality was a priority factor. The NEP mechanism was not ideal, having growing monopoly among its main shortcomings. But at the same time, the NEP economy, built on market relations, developed quite successfully.
At the end of the 20s. the created administrative pyramid managed to destroy the NEP undertakings. "Emergency" has become the norm of economic life, a bet was made on unjustified acceleration, orders from above, a complete rejection of democracy.
The course towards "emergency" was clearly manifested during the years of the first five-year plan. The main idea of the first five-year plan for the development of the national economy (for 1928/29-1932/33) was the need for an accelerated but balanced development of the national economy) an optimal combination of accumulation and consumption funds, growth rates of heavy and light industry, industry and agriculture.
However, life violated these idealistic plans.
The scale of the tasks and the extreme limitations of material and financial resources strengthened central planning. Of the 1500 large enterprises - new buildings of the five-year plan, a group of priority (50-60 objects) was singled out. Their value reached half of the total investment in industry. But even among the shock construction projects, the most important 14 were preferred.
From the autumn of 1929, the plan began to be corrected in the direction of "accelerating" the pace of development of the national economy. Those who were against this, I.V. Stalin declared "enemies of socialism" and "agents of capitalism."
Forced industrial growth in the conditions of an acute shortage of capital limited the possibilities of material incentives for labor, led to a drop in living standards, which contributed to the growth of psychological tension in society.
Under these conditions, in late 1929 - early 1930. a course is taken for complete collectivization. The Decree of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks “On the pace of collectivization and state assistance to collective farm construction” of January 5, 1930 aimed at carrying out complete collectivization by violent, command-administrative methods. The role of cooperation in the transformation of agriculture was belittled. The whole country was divided into three regions according to the pace of collectivization.
By the end of 1932, most of the peasant farms began to unite into collective farms and state farms. From limiting and ousting the kulak, they proceeded to liquidate it as a class on the basis of complete collectivization. 15% of households were dispossessed (although there were no more than 3-5% of wealthy peasant households), 25% of peasants were deprived of voting rights. All this caused irreparable damage to agricultural production.
As a result of the forced transfer of funds from the village to the city in 1932/33. famine broke out rural areas North Caucasus, Lower and Middle Volga, Ukraine, Kazakhstan and claimed a huge number of lives (they give numbers from 3-5 to 8 or more million people)."
The way of life of the villagers with the work ethic of individual farming was destroyed. Collective-farm life was replaced by formal democracy, equalization"" in wages, attempts to copy the industrial type of labor organization based on the template introduction of machine technology.
Collectivization created the necessary conditions for the implementation of the industrial leap - this is its main result. The transformation of the agricultural sector has reduced the number of people employed in agriculture in proportion to the demand for labor in industry; supported with a smaller number of employed food production at a level that does not allow long-term famine; ensured the supply of industry with irreplaceable technical raw materials.
In the mid 30s. the situation in the agricultural sector has relatively stabilized. In 1935 the card system was abolished. In the 30s. 15-20 million people were released from agriculture, which made it possible to increase the size of the working class from 9 to 23 million people.
The second five-year plan (1933-1937) set the main economic task: to complete technical reconstruction in the country. In five years, it was necessary to master modern technical achievements, carry out comprehensive electrification, comprehensive mechanization production processes to ensure the broad development of chemistry.
The plan for the second five-year plan was largely fulfilled. In 1928-1941. about 9 thousand large and medium-sized industrial enterprises were built in the USSR,
In a number of areas, the qualitative lag of Soviet industry was overcome. In the 1930s, the USSR became one of three or four countries capable of producing any kind of industrial product. The economic potential created during this period made it possible on the eve and during the war years to deploy a diversified military-industrial complex (military-industrial complex), whose products in many respects surpassed the German one.
But the leap in the development of heavy industry was purchased at the price of lagging behind in light industry, the stagnation of the agrarian sector, the super-centralization of economic life, and the limiting limitation of the sphere of activity of market mechanisms.
Industrial production developed mainly extensively. The increase in the number of employees outpaced the growth in industrial output. The average annual growth rate of national income in 1928-1941. accounted for, according to some estimates, only 1%.
Directive planning has sharply increased. During the period of the first five-year plan, detailed plan targets were determined for approximately 50 branches of large-scale industry, and during the second five-year period, for 120 each. From 1930, state sowing plans began to be developed, from 1935, state plans for the development of animal husbandry, etc.
As a result, the number of administrative and leading staff of the administrative apparatus from 1926 to 1937. increased by 3.2 times and amounted to 1313 thousand people.
