Why does Russia borrow money with huge reserves?

December 17 2020 37

The Russian budget has become scarce amid falling hydrocarbon prices and coronavirus restrictions. According to some estimates, the "hole" will amount to 3,2 trillion rubles by the end of the year, according to others - 5,5 trillion. According to the agency "National Credit Ratings" (NKR), the deficit will be a record for the last 20 years, at all amounting to 9 trillion rubles. The government is faced with a choice: to use the huge reserves accumulated earlier or to borrow. Apparently, the cabinet of ministers decided to go the second way, increasing the debt burden.

Last October, federal budget revenues amounted to 1,9 trillion rubles, in November - already less than 1,4 trillion. At the same time, costs increased sharply. If the average monthly expenses in the first 10 months of the year amounted to 1,7 trillion, then last month they reached 2,2 trillion rubles. The reasons are clear: the country has to overcome the consequences of the unsuccessful "oil war" with Saudi Arabia, the COVID-19 pandemic, and also try to implement the "May decrees." Since we do not expect any special miracles for 2021 yet, the trend may continue further.

The first thing that comes to mind is to use the funds of the National Wealth Fund. Despite the general negative background, the size of the NWF is only increasing. If at the beginning of the year it amounted to 7,8 trillion rubles, today it is already a solid 13,5 trillion. The liquid part, estimated at 8,8 trillion, is in the accounts of the Bank of Russia. The amount is very decent, which can fill many budget holes. However, the government chose to leave this "Kudrin's stash" alone, starting to increase loans. Deputy Prime Minister Yuri Borisov stated the following in this regard:

I think that we should take risks and go for a deficit budget, go for borrowing.

This decision is not entirely unambiguous. On the one hand, the systemic liberals are right that the size of our national debt is very low when compared with other developed countries. “We can afford it,” says the head of the Central Bank Elvira Nabiullina. Deputy Minister of Finance of the Russian Federation Alexei Moiseev also spoke about the forthcoming "large-scale increase" of the domestic national debt, stressing that this is "no pyramid." In practice, this means an increase in borrowing through federal loan bonds (OFZ). With the metered use of this financial instrument, the funds raised are returned to the economyincreasing consumer demand and business activity.

On the other hand, the cost of these loans, due to the need to service the state debt at a higher interest rate of 4,5%, exceeds the profitability from the placement of funds of the NWF. Recall that the Fund uses an "extremely conservative strategy" of investments in securities, of which it selects only the most low-risk ones. Where risk is low, interest and income are low, respectively. This applies both to the placement of funds in the accounts of the Bank of Russia in our country and abroad in foreign securities, where they work for the economy of our competitors.

The result is an unhealthy situation in which huge sums have been withdrawn from the national economy, in fact serving as a "safety cushion" for anyone except Russia itself. At the same time, we are forced to get into new debts to financial speculators.

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

The comment was deleted.
1. Bakht
  
  +4
  
  17 December 2020 13: 11
  
  Actually, my opinion is that journalists are needed. Like any other profession. A mere mortal cannot master the entire layer of information today. The fact that we are given information and guided in the news is a definite plus. The selection of information is another matter. And the level of journalism itself. If just a copy of the article is given, it would be nice to indicate the source. But a journalist himself cannot be a professional even in one area. He must be a professional journalist. Honest journalism and versatile selection of material.
  Not being specialists, all of us here are, nevertheless, give our comments. Based on their knowledge and understanding of the situation. And about the profession, L. Zhukhovitsky wrote well back in the 70s
  
  Yes, we are dilettantes, half-know, we are only about other people's affairs, extremely important for mankind, just scribblers, confusing an ammeter with an anti-world, writing about everything, not understanding anything. What can you take from us - amateurs ... Well, you, professional doctors, - if I’m not mistaken, you have not figured out a hundred diseases for three millennia, but you have perfectly learned to call them in Latin, so now a patient with liver cancer has finally a real choice between death and lethal outcome?
  1. Nick
    
    +1
    
    24 December 2020 00: 31
    
    Quote: Bakht
    Actually, my opinion is that journalists are needed. Like any other profession.
    
    Yes, journalists are needed. But the author presents himself not in the role of a journalist, but in the role of an expert, to which he, to put it mildly, does not reach.
    The NWF manages funds according to certain rules. The government is unable to spend funds for any purpose. The main task of the NWF is to ensure the balance of the country's Pension Fund. You can not waste on the left and on the right NWF funds intended for other purposes.
    The government borrows money from state-controlled banks, which sell government debt securities to the Bank of Russia. In fact, the state credits itself. In fact, the money is transferred from one state. pocket in another, but at the same time they do useful work, carrying out financing of the state. programs, development of infrastructure and the economy as a whole. In short, everything is perfectly thought out and worked out. Yes, the state is growing. debt, but it is the state's debt to itself. which, if necessary, you can always write off yourself. Something like that.
    1. Bakht
      
      +2
      
      24 December 2020 11: 16
      
      It's an interesting story about the NWF. I would not say that everything is "well thought out and worked out". But this is too specific a topic in which it is difficult for a layman to understand. But as an ordinary citizen, I do not think that the NWF acts for the good of the state.
      This is a completely dark story about the pension fund. During the Cyprus financial crisis
      
      Dmitry Medvedev said that the volume of the so-called "gray deposits" of Russians in Cypriot banks is exaggerated, and that "a large number of state structures" of the Russian Federation operate through Cyprus, "because it is a convenient jurisdiction for transactions."
      
      https://www.newsru.com/finance/21mar2013/cyprusmedvedev.html
      
      Now I cannot find the list, but the Pesion Fund of Russia also appeared in it.
      1. Nick
        
        0
        
        25 December 2020 18: 55
        
        Quote: Bakht
        It's an interesting story about the NWF. I would not say that everything is "well thought out and worked out".
        
        The fact is clear:
        
        Quote: Bakht
        This is a completely dark story about the pension fund. During the Cyprus financial crisis
        
        Dmitry Medvedev said that the volumes of so-called "gray deposits" of Russians in Cypriot banks are exaggerated, and that "a large number of state structures" of the Russian Federation work through Cyprus, "since this is a convenient jurisdiction for transactions."
        
        Eco remembered! Well so what?
        
        Bakht
        
        +2
        
        25 December 2020 20: 17
        
        The National Wealth Fund was originally created as a Reserve Fund. Quote from Wikipedia
        
        NWF is a "safety cushion" that allows the state to compensate for the loss of oil and gas revenues in the event of a sharp drop in oil prices and fulfill all social obligations assumed.
        
        During the 2008 crisis, I remember writing that the reserves would last for one and a half to two years. It is good that the crisis did not last so long and oil prices won back a little. And now, with the fall in oil prices, for some reason they did not remember about the NWF, but decided to drop the ruble exchange rate from 35 to 70 rubles per dollar and lower the standard of living of its citizens. So what's "well thought out" in there?
        So, of course, I can go to the optometrist. But if you think about it, wouldn't it have been better to spend money on production in order to be less dependent on the oil market.
        As of December 1, 2020, the NWF has accumulated $ 177 billion. Or 11,8% of GDP
        If you are so well informed, could you tell us how much of this 177 billion evergreens is deposited in foreign currency and debt obligations of non-residents?
        
        Yes, I remembered the Cyprus crisis. Something has changed? As the saying goes "who remembers the old - the eye is out. And who forgets - that both" This is about the ophthalmologist.
        
        Nick
        
        +1
        
        25 December 2020 20: 25
        
        Quote: Bakht
        Now, with the fall in oil prices, for some reason they did not remember about the NWF, but decided to drop the ruble exchange rate from 35 to 70 rubles per dollar and lower the standard of living of its citizens. So what's "well thought out" in there?
        
        The government has done everything that is possible in the context of the global crisis. Compare the drop in GDP in Germany, the United States and Russia. In the twentieth year, Russia's GDP surpassed that of Germany. So everything is Lux. But in Kazakhstan, not everything is clear. So you have emigrated to a Russian site.
        
        Bakht
        
        +1
        
        25 December 2020 20: 30
        
        I am not from Kazakhstan.
        I am glad that everything is luxury in Russia. I'm afraid that not everyone will agree with you.
        About GDP. I have always considered GDP to be a non-economic unit. And I would not compare. But if you want, then for 2019 the GDP of Germany is 3,9 trillion, the GDP of Russia is 1,8 trillion For 2020 there is no data yet.
        
        Nick
        
        0
        
        25 December 2020 21: 15
        
        Quote: Bakht
        I am not from Kazakhstan.
        I am glad that everything is luxury in Russia. I'm afraid that not everyone will agree with you.
        
        But not from Russia either. And everyone will not agree with you.
        
        Quote: Bakht
        I have always considered GDP to be a non-economic unit
        
        And economists consider it an Economic Indicator.
        
        Quote: Bakht
        2019 German GDP 3,9 trillion, Russian GDP 1,8 trillion
        
        You are not an economist and you are forgivable. Let me explain.
        It is pointless to compare at face value. There is a disparity in prices. Consideration of purchasing power parity is required. Here is a table for year 19.
        1 China 22 526
        2 US 20 574
        3 India 9
        4 Japan 5 231
        5 Germany 4 473
        6 Russia 3
        7 Indonesia 3 196
        True, the level of the gray economy of the countries is not taken into account here. According to the IMF, the level of the gray economy in Germany in 2019 was 9% in Russia - 38%.
        Thus, if we take into account the entire volume of production of goods and services produced in the Russian Federation and the Federal Republic of Germany, then Russia with its $ 54761 billion already in 2019 bypassed Germany with its $ 4872 billion.
        
        Bakht
        
        +2
        
        25 December 2020 23: 26
        
        not everyone will agree with you
        And everyone will not agree with you.
        
        Do you feel the difference in approach? Your opinion is too blunt.
        Of course, there are different counting methods. But you wrote about GDP, and you give data on GDP PPP. These are slightly different things. According to this indicator, the first economy in the world is the Chinese one. But for some reason everyone considers the first American. If one indicator can be interpreted in different ways, then it is not an economic indicator. this is a propaganda slogan.
        Let's say Russia exports gas to Germany (conditionally), and receives a Mercedes (conditionally). Which economy is more developed?
        
        This is just an article. But you can see how and whom Russia is catching up with.
        https://www.banki.ru/news/daytheme/?id=10929684
        
        The ultimate goal of any economic policy should be the growth of the well-being of citizens or the development of the economy. But the size of this or that indicator in itself does not mean either one or the other. Indeed, for example, countries with the same GDP size may have different economic structures: one will trade in oil and sable pelts, the other - in high-tech products.
        
        Yes, I am not an economist. But I can read, compare and have my own opinion. And if I do not live in Russia, then this argument does not matter at all. This is irrelevant for the discussion.
        You think the SWF is being used correctly. Will not agree with you, for example, S. Glazyev
        
        It's time to stop accumulating money in the National Wealth Fund. It is urgent to direct them to stimulate economic growth, invest in technologies in order to keep up with developed countries, Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Adviser to the President of the Russian Federation on Regional Economics Sergei Glazyev said in an exclusive commentary to Gazeta.Ru. Other experts did not have any objections.
        
        As you can see, NOT ALL AGREE WITH YOU. Argue with an academician. He is an economist and lives in Russia.
        
        Nick
        
        +1
        
        26 December 2020 00: 00
        
        Quote: Bakht
        Do you feel the difference in approach? Your opinion is too blunt.
        
        This is not an opinion, this is knowledge.
        
        Quote: Bakht
        Of course, there are different counting methods. But you wrote about GDP, and you give data on GDP PPP.
        
        As not an economist, I am explaining to you. I give a kind of brief educational program with specific examples.
        Russia has produced MiG-35 fighters worth $ 40 million apiece. The USA produced F-16s at a cost of $ 200 million apiece. Both fighters belong to the light class and conditionally have one set of consumer properties. But the price is different. It turns out that one produced F-16 will add $ 200 million to the US GDP and the MiG-35 only $ 40 million to the RF GDP. But the volume of production in pieces is the same. Or, for example, dental treatment in Russia will cost you 50 green, and in the USA 500, but the teeth were cured in both cases only one at a time. It turns out that the production of goods and services can be the same, but the nominal volume of GDP is different. Therefore, Nominal GDP speaks more about the cost of production, and not about the real quantitative and qualitative capabilities of the economy. To compare real economic strengths and capabilities, countries use PPP GDP.
        
        Bakht
        
        +1
        
        26 December 2020 11: 25
        
        Thanks for the educational program. I knew all this before. But according to your manual it turns out that it makes no sense to compare GDP. The GDP began to include the cost of services. And this is not production in my understanding. US GDP is 80% service sector. Dentists, lawyers and other NON-PRODUCTION jobs. In Russia, this sector is about 50%.
        But you did not answer the most important remark - is it correct to accumulate funds in the NWF? A number of prominent ECONOMISTS consider this to be incorrect.
        So sorry, but your opinion is not indisputable knowledge. It's just your opinion.
        
        The ark was built by an amateur. The professionals built the Titanic
        
        Nick
        
        +1
        
        26 December 2020 00: 12
        
        Quote: Bakht
        Let's say Russia exports gas to Germany (conditionally), and receives a Mercedes (conditionally). Which economy is more developed?
        
        Of course, Germany is leading in the production of Mercedes, and the oil and gas industry is more developed in Russia. But in general, today the Russian economy is perhaps the most developed in the world. She can produce anything. And advanced nuclear power plants, and first-class weapons, and the world's best spaceships, and food and cars and modern aircraft, both military and civil. The Russian economy is self-sufficient and, in critical industries, independent of foreign supplies. Hardly anyone can boast of such a level of self-sufficiency.
The comment was deleted.
Igor Berg

0

17 December 2020 12: 42

Actually, our government always lies. Even if these numbers are leaked from the Internet, here you can draw 2 conclusions - either everything is not as bad as the author writes, or everything is much worse .. something like this
1. Nick
  
  -1
  
  23 December 2020 23: 55
  
  Quote: Igor Berg
  Actually, our government always lies.
  
  Demagoguery not supported by facts.
Sapsan136

+5

17 December 2020 13: 22

Borrowing at interest when you have money is, to put it mildly, stupid, this is not justified expenses for servicing this debt. It's time to kick the US sixes out of the Russian government and out of the country too!
1. Uneven
  
  -1
  
  26 December 2020 18: 59
  
  And appoint new "sixes"? But what about those who appoint them?
Bulanov

+5

17 December 2020 13: 26

If the West began to print trillions of junk dollars and euros to fight the crisis, then all Russian nest egg in these currencies would risk becoming junk. Maybe it's better to establish your own production? It turns out that the government does not give the people a fishing rod, and the prices for the "fish" are too high. The Russian man in the street cannot afford it.
1. Alexndr p
  
  +4
  
  17 December 2020 13: 28
  
  The regime destroyed 70 thousand factories (this seems to be the sound of this mantra)
  therefore we have no work in our country.
  
  PS wrote everything correctly?
  
  that the government does not give a bait to the people
  
  should the government build a factory and provide the population with jobs? After 30 years of life under capitalism such thoughts come to mind?
  
  Maybe it's better to establish your own production?
  
  I will now give you a bitter pill about open production and I will understand why you will not watch this video. Breaking the pattern has consequences. You have to destroy your picture of the world. Not everyone is capable of this.
  
  If the West began to print trillions of junk dollars and euros to fight the crisis, then all Russian nest egg in these currencies also risk becoming trash.
  
  If the eurozone and the United States (the two largest and richest markets) start doing this, then the whole world will remain with the pumpkin. Russia is not in front or behind here.
  1. Vladimir Tuzakov
    
    +2
    
    17 December 2020 14: 55
    
    You dear assent to all collaborators, including the Russian Federation. The whole world has been sitting with the "pumpkin" for decades (and under the pressure of the "US Army"), and soon this "pumpkin" will crush the pumpkin holders who have shown that the pumpkin is rotten, so the pumpkin spreader will remain in the winners, because the "pumpkin" is inflatable. and you can inflate without effort, just by pressing a few keys ...
  2. The comment was deleted.
  3. Uneven
    
    0
    
    17 December 2020 22: 57
    
    1) The government does not owe anything to anyone except the president who approves it. That is why it acts as it acts.
    2) Are you saying that organizing the production of equipment that has worn out decades ago, the repair and reconstruction of facilities belonging to non-residents and the construction of separate sheds and chicken coops are equivalent to the enterprises destroyed in the Putin years?
    3) Will it be easier for you if a couple of dozen more equally "developed" countries are bent for a company with Russia?
    1. Nick
      
      +1
      
      24 December 2020 00: 54
      
      Quote: Uneven
      Are you saying that organizing the production of equipment that has worn out decades ago, the repair and reconstruction of facilities belonging to non-residents and the construction of separate sheds and chicken coops are equivalent to the enterprises destroyed in the Putin years?
      
      For an objective assessment, it is necessary to count not open / closed enterprises. They can be large, huge, small, consisting of three people, in a word, different. You need to watch what's in your pocket. And in the federal pocket (budget) in 2000, when Putin was elected president, there were $ 20 billion, half of which were foreign loans. In 2019, the federal budget was about $ 270 billion. The numbers speak for themselves.
      1. Uneven
        
        -3
        
        24 December 2020 13: 29
        
        "When Putin was elected president" there was still a lot of things in the country. For example, the Mir spacecraft flew. Our Armed Forces had bases in Cuba and Vietnam. Far from all weapons-grade uranium under the Gore-Chernomyrdin deal was transferred to the United States at a price of 1/1000 of its real value. In Russia, there was a full-fledged nuclear triad with the 6th "Akula" SRK. "Kursk" has not yet "drowned". Then the military schools had not yet been halved. Civil ships were built in Russia. The huge waters in the north were not handed over to the Norwegians. In 2001, the payment for housing and communal services by the population increased by more than one and a half times, while inflation was 119%. In 2002, payments for housing services increased by more than 1,8 times with inflation at 15% per year, and in the first three months of 2005, the cost of housing and communal services for the population increased by almost 30% with an increase in the consumer price index by only 5 %. If in the USSR the rent did not exceed 5% of the average income, now 10% is an unattainable dream ... It was possible to buy a one-room cooperative apartment in Moscow in the USSR for 6 average monthly salaries. Now the average salary for 200 months is not enough for this. In the Yeltsin years, a one-room apartment in St. Petersburg could be bought for $ 1000 ...
        
        Nick
        
        0
        
        25 December 2020 19: 44
        
        Quote: Uneven
        "When Putin was elected president" there was a lot more in the country. For example, the Mir spacecraft flew.
        
        She flew until she worked out a resource.
        
        Quote: Uneven
        Our Armed Forces had bases in Cuba and Vietnam.
        
        And why did you need them then? The country lived on debt on the money of the IMF, read the USA. The production sharing law was in force, when Russia was left with expenses, and the profit went to Western companies. This law was adopted by the way under Yeltsin, but under Putin it was canceled.
        
        Quote: Uneven
        Far from all weapons-grade uranium under the Gore-Chernomyrdin deal was transferred to the United States at a price of 1/1000 of its real value.
        
        As a result, the American nuclear industry has been bent down, and fuel for American nuclear power plants is bought in Russia at market prices. Now they don't have their own. Yes, and not all weapons-grade uranium was sold, but the accumulated surplus, since the build-up of nuclear warheads ceased by an agreement between the USA and the USSR. And by the way, the agreement on the sale of weapons-grade uranium was signed in February 1993, under Yeltsin. And Putin at that time worked in the administration of the city of St. Petersburg, and there is no way to this deal at all ...
        
        Quote: Uneven
        In Russia, there was a full-fledged nuclear triad with the 6th "Akula" SRK. "Kursk" has not yet "drowned". Then the military schools had not yet been halved.
        
        Russia still has a nuclear triad, only not on the basis of old Soviet developments, but a modern nuclear missile shield. New nuclear submarines are silent, unobtrusive, armed with more advanced weapons systems. The air component of the Strategic Nuclear Forces and the Strategic Missile Forces has also been modernized. The share of the latest weapons in the Strategic Missile Forces in 2000 was only 13%, against 54% in the USSR, and now the level of the latest weapons has reached 86%, and the average for the Army is 70%.
        
        Quote: Uneven
        In 2001, the payment for housing and communal services by the population increased by more than one and a half times, while inflation was 119%. In 2002, payments for housing services increased more than 1,8 times with inflation at 15% per year, and in the first three months of 2005, the cost of housing and communal services for the population increased by almost 30%
        
        Citizens' incomes were also constantly growing. The salary in 2000 was 2240 rubles, in 2001 it was 3240 rubles, and in 2005 it was 8555 rubles.
        
        Quote: Uneven
        In the Yeltsin years, a one-room apartment in St. Petersburg could be bought for $ 1000 ...
        
        In the Yeltsin years, a simple video double, or an old penny (VAZ-2101) of a shaggy year, cost like a one-room apartment in St. Petersburg.
        
        Uneven
        
        0
        
        26 December 2020 18: 55
        
        She flew until she worked out a resource.
        
        This is a lie. Numerous projects have been proposed to save the station. For example, during the visit of Iranian President Khatami to Russia, the Iranian delegation expressed interest in purchasing the Mir station. Iran has offered to fund the station for another two or three years.
        
        Meeting the demands of the US government, on October 17, 2001, President Vladimir Putin announced at a meeting with the Defense Ministry that the military bases in Lourdes and Cam Ranh were being dismantled. “The Pacific Fleet desperately needs this base when sailing to the Indian Ocean as an intermediate stop. There was no need to leave this base in due time. It was a big mistake, - says the former Deputy Chief of the Main Staff of the Navy, Vice Admiral Vladimir Pepeliaev. - It is necessary to return to Cuba. Our submarines could go there. " The capabilities of the center made it possible to intercept data from American communications satellites, terrestrial telecommunication cables, as well as messages from the American NASA mission control center in the nearby US state of Florida.
        Vladimir Putin said that Russia has no plans to reopen the electronic surveillance center in Lourdes.
        
        The production sharing law was in force, when Russia was left with expenses, and the profit went to Western companies. This law was adopted by the way under Yeltsin, but under Putin it was canceled.
        
        Given that more than 80% of the Russian economy belongs to foreigners, this law is not relevant.
        
        Russia still has a nuclear triad, only not on the basis of old Soviet developments, but a modern nuclear missile shield.
        
        And what has now been replaced by "Sharks"?
        
        today Russia is not able to build ships of the destroyer class and above ...
        
        https://topwar.ru/178448-a-nado-li-nam-stolko-igolok.html
        
        Citizens' incomes were also constantly growing
        
        Judging by the cost of housing, it lags several times.
        
        Nick
        
        +1
        
        28 December 2020 00: 56
        
        Quote: Uneven
        She flew until she worked out a resource.
        
        This is a lie. Numerous projects have been proposed to save the station.
        
        Projects were proposed, but Mir station has already exhausted its resource, exceeding it three times. Designed to operate for five years, the Mir station served for 15 years, the electronics were constantly failing, fires repeatedly occurred at the station, and there were damages from unsuccessful connections. Why risk the crews? In addition, by 1999 the Russian module of the ISS Zarya was already in orbit. Keeping two stations in orbit was becoming expensive and unnecessary.
        
        Uneven
        
        -3
        
        28 December 2020 08: 20
        
        The Mir station is a modular design. It was theoretically endless to attach new modules. If the plant could not be physically operated, there would be no reference to the lack of funds to operate. Do you want to say that the very same Iran had absolutely no control over the situation when it offered to finance the flight of the "Mir" for 3 years? The decision to flood the Mir was purely political and was taken by Putin against Russia's interests.
  4. rotkiv04
    
    0
    
    19 December 2020 08: 34
    
    But the guarantor in the family circle, as usual in his own words, will say a toast "to Russia", the poor fellow has already worn out all his palms on his galleys
Igor Pavlovich

-3

17 December 2020 14: 47

having huge reserves

And who said that they are ??? When Yanukovych fled Ukraine, only hanging mice remained in state bins instead of gold reserves. Are there still "patriots" who, given the current situation in Russia, believe in the NWF and other stash ???
1. 123
  
  +1
  
  17 December 2020 16: 51
  
  And who said that they are ??? When Yanukovych fled Ukraine, only hanging mice remained in state bins instead of gold reserves.
  
  Did you go for the golden loaf? Not found? Is it a shame?
Alexzn

-1

17 December 2020 19: 45

Why does Russia borrow money with huge reserves?

False message - huge reserves. Let's just say that the reserves are modest, but it's good that they exist. If there is cheap money in the market, it may well be much more profitable to borrow than spend reserves.
1. Dear sofa expert.
  
  +1
  
  18 December 2020 23: 48
  
  If there is cheap money on the market, it may well be much more profitable to borrow than spend reserves.
  
  Reasonably.
  
  False message - huge reserves. Let's just say that the reserves are modest, but it's good that they exist.
  
  Considering that (very many) other countries have public debt many times higher than Russian reserves (with minimal debt), this is a normal message.
Cucumbers

+2

17 December 2020 22: 14

The vile government and the president gave "Massandra to Putin's cronies for a penny. 5.37 billion rubles. For 5 thousand hectares of land on the southern coast + more than a dozen wineries + a collection of Massandra wines. $ 147 per hundred square meters of the South Coast when there is a price of $ 8-10 thousand, + wineries and a collection of wines for free. And in your face a fair-handed voice for the country.
1. Division
  
  0
  
  18 December 2020 10: 30
  
  Were you banned from buying it? Or someone else? Where does the information come from?
2. Cucumbers
  
  0
  
  18 December 2020 22: 39
  
  5.327 billion for the sale was wrong a little. $ 146 per hundred square meters of land. Type in a search engine and read if interested
3. Nick
  
  0
  
  24 December 2020 01: 01
  
  Quote: Cucumbers
  for 5 thousand hectares of land on the southern coast + more than a dozen wineries + a collection of Massandra wines. $ 147 per hundred square meters of the South Coast when there is a price of $ 8-10 thousand, + wineries and a collection of wines for free.
  
  Do not confuse farmland with land for individual housing construction, in our middle lane they buy agricultural hectares for one hundred Baku, and for the construction of individual housing construction 8 hectares for $ 15000-20000
  1. Cucumbers
    
    0
    
    24 December 2020 20: 23
    
    There is not just land - there are vineyards, infrastructure. If desired, change the purpose. There was such a state farm "Sevastopolsky" and there is none. Building up the territory. This is an example. Of course no one will chop down vineyards. And $ 146 per hundred square meters is calculated for clarity, so that it would be clear that the price was paid disproportionately low
    1. Nick
      
      0
      
      25 December 2020 19: 58
      
      Quote: Cucumbers
      And $ 146 per hundred square meters is calculated for clarity, so that it would be clear that the price was paid disproportionately low
      
      This is as much as $ 14600 per hectare. That is, in rubles there will be about 1 million 80 thousand per 1 hectare. Near Yaroslavl, for comparison, agricultural farm is sold at 5-10 thousand rubles per hectare. For me, so they sold archives, good for the seller. Moreover, the enterprise was unprofitable.
Alf

+2

17 December 2020 22: 26

the country has to overcome the consequences of the unsuccessful “oil war” with Saudi Arabia,

And who started this war? Maybe you shouldn't have slammed the door in front of someone who can easily turn this door into a hole, which is what happened as a result? Maybe you shouldn't nod at the mirror if the face is non-standard?
1. Division
  
  0
  
  18 December 2020 10: 31
  
  Saudi Arabia. Did you know? It was necessary to open the doors wide open, they say, take everything?
2. Nick
  
  0
  
  24 December 2020 01: 07
  
  Quote: Alf
  the country has to overcome the consequences of the unsuccessful “oil war” with Saudi Arabia,
  
  And who started this war? Maybe you shouldn't have slammed the door in front of someone who can easily turn this door into a hole, which is what happened as a result? Maybe you shouldn't nod at the mirror if the face is non-standard?
  
  Well, that war, which the SA arranged, Russia still won, having achieved an expansion of its sales markets and an average price of over $ 40 per barrel.
Division

+1

17 December 2020 23: 26

The author is probably not in the know, he is just studying and does not know that from the outside they are investing in currency, which, whatever one may say, is needed for foreign trade. Or he knows everything and fulfills the order of zombifying people who are not in the subject.
The comment was deleted.