record of 12 May 2013
(Erast Galumov, politologist, professor)
Hello! Today we will talk about world economic crisis.
(Mikhail Hazin, economist, president of company "Neocon")
- Hello Mikhail! -Hello. Today everyone speak about crisis.
People speak that this is 1st wave or 2nd wave - a lot of theories.
Of course everyone wants to understand what will happen to him:
will salary and taxes grow or drop, gasolin price etc.
May be we will start conversation about such simple things towards world and Russia?
(Mikhail Hazin, economist, president of company "Neocon")
If you want to talk about theory, there are no theory.
There are descriptive generalizations. This is main problem of modern economic mainstream.
I am not telling "problem of economic science", because mainstream has weak relation to science and
still remain few peoples who are trying to research ecomomics as science.
We have to remember that economic science split in 20 century.
I remind that in 18 century Adam Smith created "political economy".
Aftewards it was developing as "political economy" by Ricardo and Karl Marx.
Karl Marx was outstanding economist, so "political economy" have strong Marxism component.
- But Karl Marx is coming back. - I will tell about this, it's very interesting.
Karl Marx was outstanding economist, so his contribution was huge.
Because of strong Karl Marx influence, in the West was created alternative economics which was named "Economics".
As a result we have two economic science.
After socialism break down "political economy" was fogotten.
"Political economy" was almost exterminated in Russia.
Did you notice that in every bookstore you can see few duplicating each other economic courses from different universities?
In 1990's all big universities which taught "political economy" got quite big grants to create "economics" courses.
- This is in our country? - Yes, in Russia.
This funds were used and those universities start teach "economics" instead of "political economy".
There is fundamental difference. We will talk about it, because this difference is cause of crisis.
The point is that Adam Smith proposed a very interesting thesis.
Before Adam Smith, in 17 century. I remind you that 17 century is time of  d'Artagnan, The Three Musketeers, Cardinal Richelieu.
While The Three Musketeers had fun, some peoples noticed some thing.
There are two towns. You can easily understand which town is richer if you compare amount of occupations in towns.
The more professions, the richer peoples. In modern terminology: "The more division of labor, the more surplus produce."
It was quite deliberate teaching.
Adam Smith at the end of 18 century was the next level.
Adam Smith start to explain that not only division of labor is important,
if you have closed loop system, division of labor can not grow more than some fixed level.
The highest possible level of division of labor depends of size of closed system.
- This is like lecture. - This is very important, because without this knowledge we can't understand mechanism of crisis.
When we talk about crisis we have to understand what is reason and does reason exhausted.
If reasons are exhausted, crisis is over. Consequences of crisis can continue, but crisis itself is gone.
If reasons are not exhausted, we have to wait until they will exhauste or think what we can do with...
- Ok, let's return to basics. - Yes.
This thesis of Adam Smith is very easy. For example you have village with 100 houses,
it is impossible to produce bicycles there, because you need complex mechanical production.
You have to produce bicycle chains, frames, rubber. Blacksmith can't do this.
But you can repair bicycles using old spare parts.
In the town with 3000-5000 peoples you can produce simple bicycles.
Because you can have light press and so on.
But this bicycles will be very primitive. If you want to produce bicycles with gears you have to modernize manufacture.
We can do some logical conclusion. Economists of Marx times understood this well.
Conclusion is: sooner or later scientific-technical progress will stop, because of limited Earth size,
and capitalism will be over, because capitalism is growing system, based on production expanding.
- Will be overproduction? More bicycles than peoples need? - Will be problem of payback.
How modern capitalism works? You invest money in some innovations, then money return to you by selling this innovations.
If your markets does not grow, innovations are not profitable. Crisis starts, efficiency of capital fall.
You invest money, but can not get them back.
So banks which invest money are becoming bankrupt, banks who are not investing does not get any profit and owners are closing them.
- And peoples are getting fired. - Yes, this is what we have now.
This happens in all world. Nowadays markets are global, expanding is impossible.
Now we have situation wich was descibed by Adam Smith and Karl Marx.
But Karl Marx start thinking what we can do after end of capitalism.
Karl Marx writes about communism. In USSR socialism was biult. What is socialism?
Socialism totally different social superstructure (social add-on) on same mechanism of economic development.
Sovet Union and USA had same model of mechanism of economic development.
We can see it how USSR and USA ran nose to nose: space, atomic bomb etc.
You invest money and get profit. Moreover, investment efficiency of USSR model was higher than USA,
because of plan-based economy and less income difference between peoples.
Consumer efficiency in USSR was lower, because opinion of consumer was not so important.
I will not talk about causes of win of West, in 1970's USSR was winning.
USSR rejected forcing win. In 1973-75 everyone understood that USSR win.
If you will read articles of politologist of 1970's, you will see that they are very pessimistic.
It was a famous question in the West: what to do with slow develompent?
American politologists and politicians told: "If USSR will declare war, we will throw atomic bombs",
"but if they will move forward small step by small step, we can't do anything."
- They feared us. - They undersood that they were systemic defeated.
Before they lost, they understood that they have to create new ideology.
What was a charm of Marx-Lenin theory? This theory described all world.
There was Marxist-Leninist history, Marxist-Leninist economics, Marxist-Leninist philosophy - everything.
Alternative, liberal concept was created in the West:
Weber sociology, they own concept of history, which we can see now and
our veterans drop jaw from such history.
Our TV was going to show on 9 May movie how soviet tankman were raping german ladies.
- This is ideological provocation.
- This is not  ideological provocation, this is normal Western point of view.
Peoples in the West were taught that nothing pleases soviet tankmans so much as rape.
This movie was "based on real story", but peoples found out the truth. It was a pack of lies. Even place where it "happened"...
- This is another topic. - Yes.
There is one very important thing. In "political economy" capitalism is finite, it has end a priori.
In western economy capitalism is infinite, endless.
There are no terms or words which can describe end of capitalism in the modern Western language.
We undestand that Adam Smith was right, current develompent model is over: we can see crisis.
So West can not understand this crisis, can not create concept.
But we have such concept. That is funny, because we described crisis theory with all calculations in at the beginning of 2000's.
This theory was published in our book in 2003.
- You talk about your book? - Yes, "The Sunset of the Dollar Empire and the End of Pax Americana".
- There are a lot of such books. - No, we described theory and mechanism.
How West overcame a crisis in 1981?
Not overcame a crisis, just postpone it, but destoyed USSR.
Since 1981 West started credit pumping of consumption. They started crediting not only producers, but consumers as well.
Consumption grew up because of consumer credits.
Thanks to high consumption level they started new technological wave, stage which we call now information technology - IT.
USSR did not have money for this. By the way, in 1960's USSR outstripped USA in IT as well.
Then USSR was destroyed. Theoretically West could redeem debts using occupyed soviet assets.
But kleptocratic regime of Clinton came to power which had main income from dollar emission.
And now consumption level of households in the world exceed their income.
- That is mean that crediting have to be suspended. - It's suspending already.
For example in Europe in Greece crediting was stopped and they got economic disaster.
- Peoples can not to buy goods. - Yes and producers can not produce.
Production is stopping, banks are going bankrupt. US have same....
- Can we continue crediting? - US had done it in autumn of 2008.
US started print money, but they had to stop otherwise everything will collapse. - All world started print money.
Yes, all world was printing money except Russia. - This is good or bad? - Bad.
Everyone was defending from crisis, but we did not.
This was result of economic policy of crazy liberals, which are in power.
- There is very popular idea that they are traitors.
No, they are not traitor. We just have to undestand how Putin came to power.
Putin could not remove liberals, this was a condition of contract.
Today there are no contract, but what he will do if he remove liberals. Let's talk about this later.
Let us return to the economics. How this credit system functioned?
Credit system existed at the expense of loan refinancing.
In other words you have to pay a debt: 100$. You don't have 100$, so you borrow 200$, repay 100$ and use other 100$.
- That can be ad infinitum. - No, because this will destabilize financial system.
It is very scary to do it. For that reason it was tried to save system stability by decreasing cost of credit.
So peoples will pay roughly same money every year.
So your dept is growing, but you pay same money every year.
Thus in 1981 cost of credit, rate of Federal Reserve System in US was 19%,
by the end of the 2008, in December cost of credit was 0%.
So central bank of US give a credit to american banks with 0% interest.
Notice that Russian central bank can't finance Russian banking system by law.
- This is good or bad? - That is bad.
So this system is starting collapse. The financial cycle is: raw material, product, consumer.
If we do not have consumer, we do not have cycle.
If consumer is not buying, all system is stopping.
If we stop consumption and balance income and expenses,
we will have recession 30-35% in Russia and other counries, 50% in Europe and 55-65% in US.
This will happen and it is practically impossible to avoid this recession.
- But this is huge. - I will explain.
US had same kind of crisis and Russia had it in 1990's.
We had about 40% recession.
We are almost recovered. - You mean 1998?
I mean 1990's, we fell by 40-45%, but officially our GDP (gross domestic product) almost recovered. In reality of course we did not.
Governments always correct statistics.
Structure of our economics changed a lot. Theoretically speaking financial sector in 1980's was 5%, now it is 30%.
US had worse situation. By the enf of 1920's the real sector (of the economy?) was about 80%,
industrial sector was about 70%.
Nowadays real sector a little more than 20%,  industrial sector less 20%.
The major portion of economy is financial sector: about 50%. Financial sector will shorten a lot.
Industry will shorten by 30-35%.
In fact as result of permanent crediting, economic system got huge cancer tumour.
This cancer tumour is considered as normal economy.
- Normal economy is planned economy of socialist system?
- No, normal economy is economy whith balanced income and demand.
By the way economy of socialist system also was not balanced.
At the end of 1980's we had similar crisis.
We had tumour made from .... not sellable branches of production. - Not marketable. - Yes.
There are two kinds of final demand.
Household (human) demand and government demand.
In out country government demand was much bigger than household demand.
Government demand dropped, than production dropped and salaries dropped.
So mechanism of crisis is clear.
I remind you that it is impossible to understand crisis in "economics",
because you have to explain key role of demand.
When you explain key role of demand and potential limitation of demand,
this is end of capitalism and ideological taboo.
- This is culturological taboo, because all Western world is based on it.
At the end of 1990's we created conception of Global Projects.
20 century was a struggle between Red and Western Global Projects. - We can say White Project.
Ideology of Global Project is very strict and it does not allow existence of theories which contradict Project ideology.
End of capitalism can not be within a Western Global Project ideology, that is why this subject is tabooed.
Concept of finiteness of scientific and technical advance was in Marxism.
It was discovered at the beginning of 20 century by Rosa Luxemburg.
Rosa Luxemburg quarreled with Lenin. Lenin was a quarrelsome man.
Lenin called her a "yellow earthworm".
It was not related to economics.
As a result this subject was closed in Marxist "political economy".
I think, if this subject would not be closed, relevant theory would be created and we would not have 1970's, USSR would win.
But nothing came out of it. - Personality factor. - Yes, as always.
From the civilization point of view this is good.
Because if USSR would win, US almost certainly would start nuclear war.
Western Project does not have any humanistic principles.
The principle difference between Projects:
Red Project was based on Bible principles (moral code of communism builders). - Zyuganov speaks about it.
Does not matter what he talk, because this (Bible principles) is obvious.
I remember Patriarch of Moscow and all Rus told that only in Russia peoples can
base communist ideas upon the Ten Commandments and the Sermon on the Mount.
Red Project was based on Bible principles.
Western Project based on freedom, on principled denial of the Ten Commandments.
The main principle is freedom. - So freedom is not "recognition of necessity" as Marx said?
In the West "freedom" is right of everybody to choose system of values and change them.
But this is not related to economy.
- But this is very important, that explains many things. - Yes, yes.
This explain disagreement.
If we will look at human history, we will see that
Europe for the last 2000 years changed twice the model of economical development.
First time it was a transition from Late Antiquity model to Feudal model.
There was interesting situation. By the way Marx did not know history well.
Working efficiency level of late Roman Empire's manufactories in Europe was reached in 18 century only.
Europe only in 19 century reached living standards of Roman Empire cities.
When I was a school teacher I always asked my pupils: when sewerage system appeared in Paris?
Paris got sewerage system in 1860's. Baron Haussmann made it, during Napoleon III.
In St. Petersburg sewerage system was completed during Soviet power.
Why Roman Empire collapsed?
- Roman Empire had water supply system. - Of course, and sewerage system existed.
So, why? Answer is very simple.
Because...Roman Empire is very similar to modern USA and Western world.
They had permanent demant promoting (sale promotion). This concept calls "Bread and circuses".
They were not given bread or tickets. They were given money.
Then everyone could buy what he want. Somebody could buy slippers or bread, somebody else could go watch Gladiatorial Games.
What was the source of money?
Son and father Scipio, who defeated Hannibal, instead of fighting with Hannibal on the territory of Italy
where Hannibal will defeat them, because he was a great commander,
instead of it they took away the biggest in Europe silver mines from Hasdrubal who was brother of Hannibal.
So Hannibal lost war because he did not recieve reinforcement, because he did not have money.
Actually Carthage had money, but it was stingy.
So Rome won Punic Wars and got permanent sourse of money.
Roman Empire collapsed when silver mines ran out of silver.
Roman legions did not reach last rich deposits of silver, they were within few dozens kilometers from deposits of silver.
House of Habsburg (?) rised becouse of those deposits of silver in the mountains.
There are question: why Roman Empire did not have inflation if they always produced money?
Roman Empire was a deficit country, they had trade deficit.
They recieved silk and spiceries from China by Silk Road.
- Trade deficit in what sense? - Permanent outflow of money. Silver was transporting to the East.
So this economic system was stable, but time limited. Roman Empire finished when silver mines exhausted.
- But now we can't run out of money, because we are printing them. - Yes, that is why system is about to collapse today.
Feudalism came...How to perceive that barbarians occupied Rome?
From our point of view the most pious army (Christloving host) of Goths. It is known that were Christians.
The most pious army occupied haunt, den of paganism, lechery, slavery.
Feudalism, which was based on Bible principles, was established.
There was very insteresting purpose of those principles: the stability of social system.
This system was 1000 years old, she was developing very slow.
There was a shopfloor production: amount of workers, product range, production methods were limited.
That all was made to keep society stable, to avoid starvation. - To avoid overproduction. - Yes.
- It was a prototype of planned economy. - Yes, precisely.
India under the 150 years sway of Great Britain had several huge starvations.
Tens of millions peoples died.
At end of 18 and at the start of 19 century died all indians weavers, because of british machine-made cloth.
At end of 19 and at the start of 20 century was another starvation.
Supplies of cheap machine-made production destroy traditional lifestyle.
That is why the Ten Commandments appeared.
Then in 16-17 centuries Europe got breakdown of feudal society.
Most likely breakdown was a result of climate change, it became cooler.
So on the North of Europe peoples could not survive using old society model.
To solve this problem loan interest was legalized. It stimulated production and peoples could exchange surplus product to food from the South.
- Production was earning loan interest? - Yes.
By the 18 century it became obvious that this system is unstable.
Then path of development branched out. Red and Western Project appeared.
Western Project cancelled all prohibitions.
Red Project restored prohibition of loan interest, but in very interesting way.
Loan interest speed up development, so they could not prohibit it.
So they prohibited personal acquisition of loan interest.
Loan interest became public. This is essence of Red Project.
- But Red Project collapsed. - Yes, because he could not..
You always have to expand. So two Projects can not exist at the same time.
Red Project collapsed, Western Project is collapsing now.
Vacuum of ideology starting appear.
Ideological vacuum is the key feature of our life.
Somebody liked communist ideology, somebody not, but this ideology provided defined living standards.
In 1990's in Eastern Europe was a huge falling of living standards.
Peoples understood loss, but they were told that everyone's life became better, but your's became worse because you are loosers.
Peoples said: ok, we are living worse. Worsening on the whole is almost imperceptible under idelogical oppression.
- Informational-ideological. - Yes, then European Union started give money, live became a little bit better..
Suddenly against the background of Westren propaganda sharp worsening happens now.
But peoples who lived in Red Project still alive.
Peoples think that they are cheated. In the school we were taught that West is the best, but now we do not have job, future prospect.
In Spain 50% of youth are unemployed.
All Europe will have same situation in 2-3-4 years. - This is collapse.
Parents in Eastern Europe are telling to their children, that they had free schools, hobby groups and universities.
- And medicine was free. -Yes, and conflict is appearing in such situation.
Conflict will happen. Three big ideological complexes are coming to the current ideological vacuum.
Nationalistic comlex: different kinds of fascists.
Religious comlex, I mean Islam, because Christians are weak in this day,
and socialism. This three complexes will fill this vacuum of power.
I don't know who will win.
Formally we can consider socialism as economic model.
Islam and Christianity (Catholicism and Orthodoxy) based on same Bible value system.
Society with Muslim or Orthodox ideology and socialistic economy can be built, because of the same value system.
- You said that we are standing on a threshold of big changes. - We can't stop crisis.
- You are talking about end of capitalism. When it will happen and what will be after capitalism?
How this transition will be going-on? How Russia is ready to this changes?
We do not know what will be afterwards. - But we should try to predict.
I'm trying to analyze and predict future, but this is very difficult and it is hard to find peoples who can do it in free time.
We can't make it our's primary activity because nobody pay for such researches.
There are two possibilities.
Modern crisis will disintegrate world market. World will breakdown into few currency zones.
Level of division of labor will decrease. We will regress technologically to 70's, 50's.
Figuratively speaking every region will have they own blacksmith? Regress to closed economies?
..to the (model of ?) 30's. Titanic was built at the start of 20 century, so we will be able to built Titanics.
We will lose many things. Most likely we will lose jet aviation, because it will become unprofitable.
Technologically we will be able to built jet aircraft, but we will not have money for it.
Peoples think that jet cost some fixed money, but there are should be infrastructure. Russia already almost incapable to built jets.
- This is regress or preparation for the next step? - This is regress.
We can consider denial of Bible value system as deviation from the main path.
So we have two possibilities. We stepped aside from main path and we should return, go back and continue our path right,
or we can go forward to the main path. In this case we have to create new concept of economic development.
To create new concept we should at least to understand what is going on.
- I personally understand everything you explain.
- This theory already 10 years old.
- Certain processes are keep going on, but US said that they stopped crisis. I think this is for a short while.
- They are telling lies. - Europe has crisis now. - This is only beginning.
- Russia said that she is standing aside and will try to avoid this, China as well.
Everyone is waiting for something.
China is not standing aside, China took active stand.
- For some reason China start criticize Russia. - That is not strange, China showes who is main in the world.
There are three forces in the world.
One force can be passive, two others can be active,
or vice-versa: one active and two passive.
If there are two active, then passive force prevails.
USSR and USA were active, but China won.
Nowadays US with Europe is becoming passive, China is becoming active and he wins.
But this is does not change macroeconomic processes.
China will have his own currency zone, may be it will be the biggest and most developed zone.
- So, they are will close and create own currency zone? - Yes.
- You are explain situation very well. What Russia can do?
- Our audience will ask questions on website, let's explain more. What we can do?
- If you are talking about it means somebody in our country understand situation.
- If we want to save country we have to create our strategy.
- This is interesting topic. We completely lost from the point of view of economy and production.
We can't restore previous level of production, we lost a lot of basic technologies.
- We can't restore fo sure, because we don't have human resources and technology.
We as opposed to West are still not tabooed by Western principles.
- But process (of Westernisation) is going on.
- No, it will be very difficult because we have much more universal freedom then West have.
Few generations should pass before we accept Western taboos.
But we already lost Soviet taboos.
In other words we have dozens of peoples who can create theory and think up new world..
- For all humanity? - Yes, for all.
- Russia has the chance to became a founder of new ecomonic theory.
- Founder of economic development concept.
- Let's imagine that we have new theory. I am sure we can hold a few international conferences.
- No. - Print books, broadcast on all TV channels. - No, we can not.
- Just imagine that we are ready to do it. We convinced our government that this is good for Russia.
Do you think West will accept this theory and implement it?
- West can't accept new theory because this is taboo.
But those peoples, elite who determine rules of the game, they called as hidden world government.
We used to think that presidents of countries, parliamentarians, presidents of banks are head, chiefs,
but in fact those peoples rule, who determine rules of the game.
Peoples who determine rules of the game knows that situation came to a dead end. It's a fact, I will not explain why.
Down to lobby interviews. There are phrases like:
"We understand that all political elite have to be removed,
it's not a problem, we have hotel chambermaid for everyone (about Dominique Strauss-Kahn case).
Problem is: who put at the head insted of them."
This is key. Our goal is to create educational centers where new world elite will appear.
Then our positions after 1-2 generations will be strong, inviolable.
- You mean Russia's position? - Yes, because here will be such educational centers.
Today it's in principle impossible to create such centers in the West, because such topic is tabooed. At least 1 generation should pass.
- So this is not only economic education, this is mental-philosophic-economic education, you should change people's mentality. - Yes, yes.
- So you should change way of thinking. For example: ecology is more important than profit.
- It's imposible to describe new model of economic development without changing of philosophical approach.
We should describe world, not isolated, specific economy. - So this is different vision, world view. - Yes.
Then everything is clear, if such educational centers will be in Russia...  For example, what is Vatican?
- This is vision educational center. - Yes, world outlook educational center.
Same as Russian Orthodox Church: 20 peoples in the team.
- You said that modern economic concept is replacing by 3 forces: religious, national and socialist economy.
Can Russia made mentality of Russian Orthodox Church as main concept(?) ?
- I think that Patriarchate of Russian Orthodox Church is making a mistake.
Russian Orthodox Church declined to work on this ideological field.
Russian Orthodox Church is engaged in politics and economy, but does nothing within ideological field. This is mistake.
Few years ago I was trying to explain this to peoples is Patriarchate. - Aparently they do not have understanding and peoples who will do it.
- Yes, there are no peoples for it. I was hoping that personal power of current Patriarch will overcome this problems, but still nothing happens.
Lets see, I think Russian Orthodox Church can promote this idea (new educational centers).
- I want to ask some concrete questions. What will happen to salary, taxes, oil price, inflation?
How crisis, which is on the initial stage, will influence economic, oil price? Russia's economy depends of oil price.
What is your forecast for our country?
Every year will be worse than previous. How much worse - it depends of some external factors, for example oil price.
Will US print money or not. If they will print money, oil price will rise. If they will not print money, oil price will drop.
And so on. I will not explain such factors because it will take a lot of time and this is different topic.
Situation will become worse and worse. In theory some peoples can take advantage of it.
- It is redivision of the economy. - Yes and we can see it.
For the last month I answer about 20 times to the question "Why Putin came back?".
He is not a power fan.
If economy fall, elite shrinks.
From the point of view of economy it is normal. There was 4 big banks, now 1 big bank. So what?
From the point of view of concrete peoples it is important to save your bank.
Decision who will remain, who will not can make only president.
We can speak a lot about power of head of Federal Reserve System,
but when it will be question which bank will remain,
our president will go to Oval Office in White House and say: "Mr president, please, choose the bank".
Does not matter who will hold position, even if performing chimpanzee.
- So today we need a leader who will set up parameters..
- It does not matter, any leader which will choose who will remain.
Ordinary people can not influence person which will choose who will remain. Putin is a man who can decide.
The question is that somebody will decide that you are remaining or will not, or you yourself will decide.
Everything is clear now. First time, when Putin became a president, he represented interests of elite.
Putin had certain tasks: to create rules of the game for elite to avoid infighting in the Establishment,
to prevent publicity of infighting in the Establishment, to close elite from society,
and, in the case of defeat of some part of elite to provide bloodless exit from the game.
This problems were solved. Those, who did not want to obey were thrown out, the most popular cases are: Berezovsky, Gusinsky, Khodorkovsky.
There were some small ones, but not much, about 2-3%.
Another 98-97% accepted new rules of the game.
Pay attention that right away various kinds incidents stopped, like blockade of the Trans-Siberian Railway etc.
Now it is clear than money (cherry pie) are shrinking, so elite will shrink.
Putin can't come back to the power under a mandate of elite as it was 12 years ago.
Because you can't fire your boss.
In other words chief executive can not fire shareholders or member of the board of directors.
He can be a member of the board of directors at most.
For that reason on elections Putin got a mandate of people, of society.
Now he can make decisions on behalf of society.
For that reason he changed rhetoric. At the beginning Putin had liberal rhetoric.
Then liberal rhetoric almost dissapear and his speech became national-patriotic,
because he need people's support, otherwise he will became victim of elite's infighting.
For this reason he will need not liberal intellectual centers.
Why is that? Because russian society and elite understand liberalism definitely:
liberalism is a concept which allow to elite ignore society.
This is not general-philosophical concept of liberalism, not Western concept.
This is modern russian interpretation of liberalism, this is already accepted by everyone.
- The way is becoming visible, economic way. We are starting feel our place, role in the world. - Not yet.
- But we are making an attempt. - We donot have centers, which can make it.
We have liberal centers. Operating principle: Washington will tell us what to do.
- What do you think about our economics institute of Russian Academy of Sciences?
- This is not intellectual center. Putin need such  intellectual centers which can define our role in the world, our possibilities, potential etc.
By the way, description of the model of future is our trump card.
There are another potential trump cards. We did not talk about them today, but they exist.
But they have to be developed and implemented.
I think Putin will do it if he wants not only go down in history,
but at least survive until end of his term (in Russia president can be elected for a term of 4 years)
- This was a very interesting conversation. Thank you for visit.
Our guest: Mikhail Hazin, economist, president of consulting company "Neocon".
