Privatization 2.0 or why should the Ministry of Finance transfer state property into private hands

28 2023 June 32

For several months now, disputes have not subsided in Russia: is it necessary to sell state assets, and why the leadership of the Ministry of Finance and the Central Bank are actively pushing the country towards a new large-scale privatization. A chance for development or another "scam"? Let's try to figure it out.

Andrey Kostin, head of VTB, was the first to announce the possibility of a new round of privatization in Russia. The essence of Kostin's thought is simple: the country needs additional sources of income. To pour into the economy the necessary funds, it is necessary to carry out privatization, increase the public debt and distribute budget expenditures in accordance with the country's primary needs.

According to Kostin, the priority areas for spending the money coming from privatization should be the development of new transport corridors with infrastructure, the launch of new industries using import-substituting of technologies, as well as the development of the military industry. The most likely targets for privatization were immediately identified: shares in Transneft, Russian Railways, Russian Post, non-core assets of Rostec and Rosatom, and at the same time cognac factories.

Will it be like in the 90s?

Naturally, the privatization proposal became a trigger for the irritation of the people, who remember vouchers, loans-for-shares auctions and other attributes of the squandering of state property in the 90s.

The idea was received with hostility by many economists. For example, analyst Mikhail Khazin in his interview outlined the circle of interests of the new privatization: “2-3 million people in our country who know for sure that this is the only way to make money. They do not know how to work, they do not know how to deal with the economy of the state, they do not know how to be responsible for state problems. The only thing they know how to do is to privatize and receive
kickbacks for this."

Even among experts, this opinion is not unique, but among ordinary people, the term "privatization" is firmly rooted next to "theft".

At the recent St. Petersburg Economic Forum, supporters of the new privatization concept did their best to convince the audience, and sometimes, perhaps even themselves, that the transfer of state property into the hands of business is good for the country.

The head of the Central Bank, Elvira Nabiullina, and presidential aide Maxim Oreshkin, as expected, supported Kostin's idea. According to Nabiullina, there is property in the country that can be privatized without prejudice to strategic interests, and Maxim Oreshkin specified that he was in favor of that. To transfer only that part of state assets that are used inefficiently and not just like that, but for the benefit of the budget.

At first glance, such a proposal looks logical, but questions remain: who will evaluate the effective use of this or that state property, or not? What is considered a good deal for the state? After all, if there is unprofitable production, even a free return to private hands can be justified by “benefit for the budget”.

Other experts, for example, Andrei Loboda, director of communications at the Russian mining company BitRiver, note that Russian assets are now undervalued due to the situation in which the country finds itself, and therefore the effect of the sale will not be so significant. The haste with which these ideas are being promoted to the masses only causes more mistrust towards Privatization 2.0.

Or maybe it's not so bad?

It is difficult to argue with the logic of privatization supporters. Indeed, public enterprises should, in theory, be less efficient than private companies that respond faster to market changes, adjust to the needs of the client, and their owners are personally interested and motivated to develop their business.

On the other hand, by selling a 20% stake in the same Transneft, the state will not lose control over the asset, but will be able to attract the funds needed now into the enterprise's economy. Even taking into account the wary attitude of investors and, perhaps, not the highest price for assets, revenues to the budget will clearly be more than from the privatization of state property over the past 10 years.

There is another motive why the authorities decided to talk about the sale of assets right now. After the Russian economy came under numerous sanctions, it became much more difficult to withdraw funds abroad. This is not about a couple of thousand dollars, but about much more significant amounts that used to settle with European and American developers or shipbuilding companies involved in the creation of superyachts.

Russian business has money, but nowhere to invest it. Large Russian companies' IPOs could give impetus to wealthy potential investors. According to some reports, in recent years, about 20 million private investors have appeared in Russia, trading shares on the Moscow Exchange. At the same time, the share of the state in the sectors that are promising for privatization exceeds 60%. An ideal alignment in order to inject funds into the economy sufficient for a qualitative leap forward.

Smooth on paper

So what can ordinary Russians expect from new privatization plans? Greetings from the not-so-distant 90s or the boom of the economy? The truth is most likely always somewhere in the middle. Of course, some enterprises, having received an additional influx of money, will be able to upgrade equipment, launch new production, expand, or at least continue to work without slowing down, which is sometimes an achievement in itself. Most likely, such a fate awaits companies where the controlling stake will remain with the state, and investors will closely monitor the effectiveness of management.

The situation is more complicated with illiquid state property, which the authorities will almost certainly try to transfer into reliable hands. Big business is not interested in such assets, and private investors and small companies are overwhelmingly unable to breathe life into such dead enterprises. They are likely to be "cut into metal."

One way or another, the process of preparation for Privatization 2.0 has started. It is definitely not worth expecting a large-scale sale of state property this year. Preparing assets is a long process. To form a list of objects, to evaluate them is a task that can be heroically coped with for a year or two. Most likely, the government plans to leave large tidbits like a cherry on a cake. In the meantime, the state is ready to part with small illiquid objects. The Ministry of Finance intends to launch a marketplace for the sale of such property before the end of the year. They promise that everyone can become an investor. It remains only to answer the question: Is it possible to make money on this?

Information

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

Mikhail L.

+18

28 June 2023 19: 54

The quintessence of this campaign is: "Russian business has money, but there is nowhere to invest it."
And to create new enterprises, does Russian business "more flexible than the state" lack the mind?
Financial resources for expanded reproduction are created by the process of accumulation, and not by the endless sale (wasting!) of what has already been created by previous generations!
Bmp1-47152

+8

28 June 2023 20: 09

when selling, who will buy Ivanov Petrov Sidorov is not correct because these comrades have only enough money to buy food and pay a communal apartment...
Subsoil, oil industry, metallurgy, heavy engineering (if left), defense, agriculture and agricultural processing for the state and there will be development of everything, and divide all bureaucrats into 1000+ ...
1. Just a cat
  
  -11
  
  28 June 2023 20: 53
  
  and this Ivanov's mind is enough to develop the enterprise? why is he not satisfied with the position of executive director under the owner? refugees from new regions get ... no mind, but a rough tongue leads to power. the truth is that the company is languishing from them.
  1. Vladimir Tuzakov
    
    +3
    
    1 July 2023 22: 13
    
    It doesn't tell you anything: Vekselbergs, Avens, Friedmans. Rotenbergs, Abramovichs. - Why are the billionaires, Ivanovs and Sidorovs, not on the lists, because the privatization of the Russian Federation is purely Jewish. So, those who distribute the possibilities of privatization, the same, in the main positions of power, (we have a clear crypto-Jewish dominance in state administration)) started from Chubais and Gydar. as a hostage of the new Khazars in Rus' ..
Cucumbers

+6

28 June 2023 21: 23

Left turn or privatization 2.0? It will soon become known in which direction Russia will move. Wagner's campaign against Moscow put an end to this issue. Financial tycoons receive privatization 2.0 in exchange for loyalty. Donut Hole Recipient...
Alexey Lan

+4

28 June 2023 22: 16

As Vysotsky sang:

where is the money..

So, how many entrepreneurs have serious money? Ay-ay! Everyone is crying that high interest rates on loans, no money. Maybe sell to the Chinese, Saudis or Indians? Will ours take a bank loan? Why can't the government issue war bonds at the rate: the discount rate of the Central Bank + 5%? And for the time being, bad enterprises can be leased to the same entrepreneurs for specific projects, with an audit of the Accounts Chamber, with the right to buy if everything worked out.
twice-born

+8

28 June 2023 22: 27

Yes, after the collapse of the Union, what was necessary and good done by the authorities for the state and the people?! From what suddenly change? As they sold, they will continue to sell Russia and the Russian bourgeoisie, but now openly!
steelmaker

+5

28 June 2023 22: 41

The revenue of Russian companies last year for the first time in the history of the country exceeded a quadrillion rubles and doubled compared to 2021. This was reported in the Federal Tax Service (FTS) of Russia.
According to the Federal Tax Service, Russian organizations for 2022 declared before tax revenue in the amount of 1268 trillion rubles, or 1,27 quadrillion (a number with 15 zeros). Compared to 2021 (655 trillion rubles), revenue has almost doubled.

https://rg.ru/2023/06/20/astronomicheskaia-pribyl-otkuda-u-rossijskih-kompanij-kvadrillion-rublej-vyruchki-i-chto-eto-dast.html

The State Duma adopted the law "On the federal budget for 2023 and for the planning period of 2024 and 2025." The document provides for Russian budget revenues for 2023 of 26,13 trillion rubles (17,4% of GDP), expenses - 29,056 trillion

http://duma.gov.ru›news/55836/
Well, you can see for yourself. Exceeded a quadrillion, and the budget is only 26 trillion. You put up at least ten Grudinins for elections, Putin will still have 70%! The Internet is filled with videos of how Rostov saw off Wagner. We understand everything.
1. strange guest
  
  +4
  
  29 June 2023 00: 01
  
  Twice as much revenue - twice as much deductions. And pensioners still do not have enough money. Wonderful are your works, Lord.
  1. Just a cat
    
    -3
    
    29 June 2023 07: 33
    
    pension tax fixed... so big and so stupid
    1. strange guest
      
      +3
      
      29 June 2023 08: 23
      
      Either the pension fund receives transfers from the budget all the time and sits on subsidies) more profits - more taxes - more money in the budget - more PF can be allocated. And from pension contributions all the time, the pension will be small - the pension tax from the wage bill is considered, and there are no fools to raise wages) So big, but so stupid)
calligrapher Lev_Nikolaevich

+11

28 June 2023 22: 43

It is difficult to argue with the logic of privatization supporters. Indeed, public enterprises should, in theory, be less efficient than private companies that respond faster to market changes, adjust to the needs of the client, and their owners are personally interested and motivated to develop their business.

This passage has already become a commonplace, and usually is not even subjected to critical reflection.
According to what theory "state enterprises should be less efficient"?
This theory is based on the belief that the state is, in principle, an inefficient manager. The legs of this belief grow out of a long-standing ideologeme that there is no need to regulate the economy, that the spontaneous laws of the market will put everything in its place. They will arrange. Is it just the right places? And are they really that spontaneous? The reverse process is already going on all over the world - quite conscious and purposeful regulation of the economy in the interests of certain groups of actors, and for this they do not hesitate to unleash wars and color revolutions. How much can you blindly swallow appeals to such "logic"?
It seems that there are already enough examples in Russia - both the inflexibility of private traders, and their lack of motivation for development, if income is already dripping ..
This entry into privatization 2.0 is more like another rejection of the complexities of management, an attempt to absolve oneself of responsibility for the inability to combine the state form of ownership with the mentality and school of its managers, brought up as private traders. We obviously have few others, not many will pass the HSE test.
1. Vladimir1155
  
  0
  
  2 July 2023 08: 51
  
  Quote: calligrapher Lev_Nikolaevich
  an attempt to relieve oneself of responsibility for the inability to combine the state form of ownership with the mentality and school of its managers, brought up as private traders.
  
  well, you yourself answered your own question, the thieves who manage state property only think how to steal something, where is the efficiency, but the most effective owner is the one who prints money, that is, the US Federal Reserve only its representatives through gaskets and can buy everything, just why? to develop in our unfriendly business conditions, or to ruin everything to please importers? they threw a bone to the people about privatization, let the people discuss, the main thing is that the people do not think about the dangers of extortionate officials of all kinds of supervision, for example, think that the Ministry of Transport has COMPLETELY banned the business in the field of passenger transportation, in order to open a bus route you need to roll back and pay so much that it makes no sense ... All passenger carriers are humiliated applications to an official from the Komtrans, because only he is able to push through the creation or at least the existence of a public transport route, what market and business are you talking about here? they don’t exist, there are extortionists like the mayor and the humiliated merchant Abdullin who owes the mayor a saber for his birthday, nothing has been named since the time of Gogol ... the shushary tram = Slav, despite lobbying by the governor, they agreed for five years !!! when our officials talk about the development of industry, import substitution, this is arrogant hypocrisy, and idle talk ..... why do we need the permission of an extortionist for everything? why nothing can be done in this country? everything is forbidden, the presumption of guilt is everywhere, scoundrel bureaucrats are everywhere, .. firstly there are ministries (and why? why does the ministry get into private affairs at all), or why does guardianship get into family affairs?
  , State regulatory and supervisory authorities
  In addition, the powers for state control and inspection of the activities of economic entities are also granted to such state bodies as:
  
  Pension Fund of the Russian Federation
  Social insurance fund
  Compulsory Medical Insurance Fund
  State Employment Fund
  Executive authorities of the subjects of the Russian Federation
  Federal Treasury of the Russian Federation
  Central Bank of the Russian Federation
  Control and Audit Department of the Ministry of Finance of Russia
  According to available estimates, by the middle of 2001 in each of the regions there were, on average, more than 50 federal, regional and local authorities that controlled entrepreneurship, including small business. Moreover, in different regions, the bodies of state control and inspection of economic activity differed among themselves in terms of specific composition and names.
  
  In accordance with the current legislation - the Code of the Russian Federation "On Administrative Offenses" - the powers of state control and inspection of the activities of economic entities, as well as the consideration of cases of administrative offenses are vested in:
  
  State fire service - art. 23.34 Administrative Code
  State architectural and construction supervision - art. 23.56 Administrative Code
  State Energy Supervision (Rostekhnadzor) - art. 23.30 Administrative Code
  Internal affairs bodies (police) - Art. 23.3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses
  Bodies of state statistical accounting - art. 23.53 Administrative Code
  Bodies of state inspection for trade, quality of goods and protection of consumer rights - Art. 23.49 Administrative Code
  Bodies of the Russian transport inspection - Art. 23.36 Administrative Code
  Bodies of standardization, metrology and certification - art. 23.52 Administrative Code
  Bodies authorized in the field of the securities market - art. 23.47 Administrative Code
  The Federal Antimonopoly Body, its territorial bodies - Art. 23.48 Administrative Code
  Tax authorities - Art. 23.5 of the Code of Administrative Offenses
  Customs authorities - Art. 23.8 of the Code of Administrative Offenses
  Export control authorities - art. 23.9 of the Code of Administrative Offenses
  State veterinary supervision - art. 23.14 Administrative Code
  Bodies of hydrometeorology and environmental monitoring - art. 23.28 Administrative Code
  Bodies of the state sanitary and epidemiological service - art. 23.13 Administrative Code
  Bodies exercising state quarantine phytosanitary control (Rosselkhoznadzor) - art. 23.15 Administrative Code
  Bodies exercising state control over the use and protection of land - Art. 23.21 Administrative Code
  Bodies exercising state control and supervision in the field of plant protection - art. 23.16 Administrative Code
  Bodies exercising state supervision over chemicalization and use of chemicals in agriculture - art. 23.17 Administrative Code
  Bodies exercising state supervision and control over the quality and safety of grain and products of its processing - Art. 23.18 Administrative Code
  Bodies exercising state environmental control - art. 23.29 Administrative Code
  The Federal Labor Inspectorate and its subordinate state labor inspectorates - art. 23.12 Administrative Code
  
  This list is not exhaustive. Depending on the type of activity and the specifics of its implementation, representatives of a number of other bodies may come to the entrepreneur for the purpose of conducting an inspection. https://www.smbkras.ru/lib/control
Sergey Latyshev

+4

28 June 2023 23: 02

Imperialism must expand.
Therefore, privatization, in the name of Chubais and "effective managers", despite the howl of the media: Why are all prominent statesmen out loud, and things are like the last liberals ...

The rich must get rich away from the front, and the poor must get poorer and pay taxes for it. The Law of Capitalism is here to stay...
1. strange guest
  
  +6
  
  29 June 2023 00: 14
  
  Not only get poorer, but, unlike the rich, sometimes die at the front. For little money. Sit in the trenches for a year - buy a Chinese car.
Flight

+7

28 June 2023 23: 07

Andrey Kostin, head of VTB, was the first to announce the possibility of a new round of privatization in Russia. The essence of Kostin's thought is simple: the country needs additional sources of income. In order to inject the necessary funds into the economy, it is necessary to carry out privatization, increase public debt and distribute budget expenditures in accordance with the country's primary needs.

The question arises - is he not a bastard?
1. Vladimir1155
  
  +1
  
  2 July 2023 08: 58
  
  the country does not need additional sources of income if its production is growing and bureaucracies extortionists do not interfere with people's work, and if they strangled the entire business, then they slaughtered all the dairy cows, then it really remains to sell the belongings
Jacques sekavar

+5

28 June 2023 23: 38

As the first vice president of the Center for Strategic Research Boris Kopeikin said, the share of the public sector in the Russian economy in 2021 amounted to 56,2% and includes companies with state participation, state unitary enterprises, federal state unitary enterprises, and the public administration sector.
The share of state property should be correlated with the share of production of material scientific and other values, and what material and other values does the public administration sector produce?
The strategically important and backbone enterprises are owned or controlled by the state, and those who want to grab them in abundance within the country and abroad. Therefore, the share of the public sector varies greatly over the years as a result of lobbying by interested structures.
The annual budget deficit was “eaten up” in less than ½ of the year, the banknote exchange rate was lowered below the plinth and foreign currency was exchanged for rubles in order to close all obligations. It is quite possible that they will lower it even lower, and in order to fight inflation they will raise the key rate. This leads to an increase in the cost of loans, which, like the sword of Damocles, hangs not only over the manufacturing sector but also the consumer sector. The indebtedness of the population requires tougher requirements for borrowers, but the rise in the cost of loans stifles the places where the forces of these borrowers are applied. What decision does the employer make in such a situation? Reduces the number of employees, reduces or does not increase the salary, increases the working time, sends them on unpaid leave, etc. tricks, and the state pays one minimum wage, which you need to get a lot of contrived and somehow live. As V.I. Lenin said, the aggravation of need leads to the destabilization of the entire internal situation and makes it impossible for the ruling class to govern in the old way. To whom will the ruling class turn for help? Do not go to a fortuneteller, to Western partners. Who will rule the ball? Western partners. What is the purpose of the West? Decolonization of the Russian Federation,
strange guest

+2

29 June 2023 00: 10

It would be better if Avtovaz was sold to a private owner, if it is so efficient - that's where its effectiveness and let it manifest itself. And the transfer of resources abroad - Transneft - can be left in state ownership. But it will be exactly the opposite. Because Russia and there are no fools to invest in production. And all the lamentations that they can’t withdraw money abroad - don’t be ridiculous. They will lose a bit on the double conversion of the ruble-yuan-dollar, so this is not significant for their margin.
1. Dingo
  
  +5
  
  29 June 2023 18: 49
  
  It would be better if Avtovaz was sold to a private owner, if it is so efficient - that's where its effectiveness and let it manifest itself.
  
  Here you are wrong - AvtoVAZ was the most efficient production in its time (before Gorbachev). According to various estimates, one plant gave up to 1,5 percent, and with suppliers - up to 3 percent of gross income. This is to the question of "the effectiveness of public administration", up to these, like them, "effective managers".
  Before selling it to Renault with the manager Bu Andersson (nicknamed the "storyteller" at the plant, apparently not only because of his last name) - the Chemezov guys from Rostec first "worked" there, represented by his deputy Artyakov with his "gop -companies".
  What they did at the plant is a separate issue (or a criminal case).
  When these gopniks realized that nothing was working out for them, the plant was simply "lying" - they began to return the managers and directors of production that they had previously fired. Who returned, who sent them to hell... V.A. returned. Vilchik, previously director of the SKP (assembly and body production). A tough man, but a production worker "from God." And the Chemezov "managers" continued to "have fun" ... They bought Kruzaks (not for their own), including for the "Moscow representative office" ... Fri - the day of departure, Mon - the day of arrival from Kurumoch (airport in Samara ) - three "working" days a week! This could not go on for a long time - they kicked Artyakov and his gopniks from the VAZ ... With "golden parachutes". Where? And the governor in Samara!!! We don’t leave “ours”, right?
  But six months later, Samara "howled" from this "governorship" of his ... They kicked from there too ... Now again at Chemezov (Rostec), in deputies ...
  This is to the question of "effective managers" and the so-called "negative selection" of officials on the example of one, which was successful before them, industrial association. By the way, the RENAULT company, shortly before leaving Russia, received a record profit in its history ... And Chemezovsky Rostec was no longer allowed to enter the plant - that's enough ...
  A. Sokolov is now the general there - an ambitious guy, the plant is slowly getting out of the hole, despite the sanctions.
  Yes, eat. Nabiullina is not a graduate of Yale University, as they say here in the comments - she is his scholarship holder, she did an internship there - roughly speaking, she was "trained" there to be useful to her "owners" ... Yes, all the "liberals" from the economic block were trained there ... And yes, Yale has a long tradition in recruiting "necessary" people, especially since the Central Bank is outside the jurisdiction of Russia.
DO

+2

29 June 2023 00: 15

Against the backdrop of a severe SVO in Ukraine and an extremely high probability of a further escalation of the military conflict with NATO, privatization would be a feast during the plague. For the centralized military mobilization of industry that is necessary today, without which the Russian state will obviously not survive, is the opposite of the privatization discussed in this article.
Valera75

+6

29 June 2023 02: 39

and Maxim Oreshkin clarified that he was for it. To transfer only that part of state assets that are used inefficiently and not just like that, but for the benefit of the budget.

Closer to the approval of the law, there will be a lot of such assets, and those whose hands are growing from the back seat will be brought to a terrible state with their optimizations and other crap .... they put production on 4 bones and the entire economy.
While the Russian peasant is fighting for his homeland, and so that these managers live in peace, these managers are preparing to pull the motherland.
Wooh

+11

29 June 2023 07: 48

Maxim Oreshkin clarified that he was in favor. To transfer only that part of state assets that are used inefficiently and not just like that, but for the benefit of the budget.

What kind of idiocy? Inefficient businesses are run by people. The director cannot manage, let him work at the logging site. If a private trader wants an efficient enterprise, let him build it. Let him create a joint-stock company and let him build it effectively at the expense of the shareholders. And then they seize state-owned factories, destroy them and trade centers appear in place of the factories.
Human_79

+8

29 June 2023 08: 02

Units of enterprises sold will develop.
And the rest - they will squeeze all the juice out of the enterprise, the staff will be reduced
What's left will be sold.
Plus, all those who promote privatization will receive kickbacks
Pro100

+1

29 June 2023 08: 08

In fact, throughout the Western world, there has already been a trend towards deprivatization. Market mechanisms, to put it mildly, are not quite market mechanisms, they are more reminiscent of a bazaar. Troubled banks and corporations are often helped by states, through sanctions and other manipulations and restrictions, prices for raw materials, products, and goods are regulated. Yes, and the Central Bank is actively entering the stock market. It is difficult to say who benefits more from privatization, the state or big business.
Muscool

+5

29 June 2023 08: 11

Nabiulina, who graduated from Yale University in the United States, where she was most likely recruited, will certainly not advise bad things, she has already donated 300 billion to Western partners, and will soon finish off the country along with Siluyanov’s nasty mug
1. smart fellow
  
  +1
  
  30 June 2023 07: 23
  
  There was already a comment above that she did not graduate from Yale.
  
  In late 1999 - early 2000 he returned to public service under the wing of German Gref.
  In 2007, she was appointed Minister of Economic Development and Trade of the Russian Federation, later the Ministry was renamed the Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation.
  It is noteworthy that it was in 2007 that Nabiullina graduated from Yale University. Passed the leadership training program in the USA - IVLP (International Visitor Leadership Program).
  
  Nabiullina could not study there. worked in the civil service. She just completed an internship there and received a document on the completion of the IVLP course. Previously, the State Department had programs under which, at the expense of the United States, businessmen, teachers, and others from Russia could travel to the United States for several days / weeks and there they were given diplomas of course completion.
  And so you might think that she studied there for 4-6 years.
  1. Flight
    
    0
    
    1 July 2023 01: 18
    
    It is noteworthy that it was in 2007 that Nabiullina graduated from Yale University. Passed the leadership training program in the USA - IVLP (International Visitor Leadership Program)
    Nabiullina could not study there. worked in the civil service. She just completed an internship there and received a document on the completion of the IVLP course.
    
    What do you mean by that? That during the internship and having received a certificate of completion of the course, she did not communicate with anyone, did not make acquaintances and did not carry out assignments?
Rhetorical Rita

+4

29 June 2023 09: 21

In the bottomless budget of Russia, the bottom began to be visible and it urgently needs to be filled at the expense of intractable, but greedy oligarchs and businessmen.
Vasya 225

+8

29 June 2023 09: 31

The authorities are unable to rebuild the country's economy on a war footing and are looking for a way to support their pants, and for this they are ready to give everything that the bourgeoisie who have accumulated fat want to take. Well, sell. They will devour, pass through themselves and give out in the form of a secondary product. What's next?
Sapsan136

+2

30 June 2023 12: 20

We have all seen how privatization ends. In the worst case, privatized factories are stupidly cut into scrap metal and cease to exist, at best they balance on the verge of this, such as VASO, where the machine park is not updated, the roofs of production facilities are leaking, and workers in terms of income are not far from the homeless (and this leads to the fact that the bulk of the workers are pensioners who came to earn extra money, who will work for a few more years and EVERYTHING ... there are no young personnel, or there are not enough of them ...)
I am categorically against privatization ... You can leave something not critical in the hands of private traders, for example, the production of hair dryers, but trusting them with something strategically important for the country is stupidity tantamount to a crime ...
Electric welder

0

1 July 2023 19: 00

How to privatize, create the same enterprise from scratch, create competition for a state-owned enterprise, prove that you are more efficient, but do not touch what works without your participation.