Russian liberals again propose to pull the Russian economy out of stagnation by freezing the money supply as a tool for inflation targeting under the precepts of the Washington Consensus. However, the practice of overcoming the past crisis situations shows us a different lesson. The policy of money pumping through the efforts of reasonable practitioners. E.M. Primakov and V.V. Gerashchenko allowed quickly to overcome the 1998 default, but from the crisis of 2008 Russia was coming out much heavier and with huge economic losses, as the country leaders consistently adhered to liberal dogmas. In Russia, when the money supply grew significantly, inflation contracted, and vice versa, when the growth rate of the money supply fell sharply, inflation grew. The money growth always precedes the growth of GDP, and vice versa, when the money supply shrinks, GDP decreases. And there is a theoretical justification for this, but it does not coinside with the fundamental liberalism dogmas.
Author page: Vladimir Belikov
Lately politicians are talking a lot and political scientists are writing about “tectonic shifts” in the modern world, but they have rather vague ideas about the nature of these shifts. Matrix is an attempt to identify the main factors of the processes, taking place in the world economy, to systematize them, to show the main interconnections and, on this basis — to reveal the causes of “tectonic shifts” and their mechanism. The matrix is based on generalized results of many years of research by the world’s largest scientists who are supporting the idea of cyclical nature of evolutionary development. Conducted by N.D. Kondratiev, J. Schumpeter, J. Arrighi, I. Wallerstein, G. Menshem, S.Y. Glazyev, K. Peres and other authoritative scientists, analysis of the world economic development over the past 250 years makes it possible to predict accurately the future development of the world for the next 30-40 years and to outline the main directions of development until the end of the present century. In their forecasts of the future, many domestic and Western political scientists demonstrate linear thinking, because they do not understand the cyclical nature of any, primarily social, development, defining the “future” from today, rather than exploring century-old trends.