01. What? Where? How many?
Everyone who decides to start a renovation tries to turn his house into a place that suits his personal needs. Customers, as a rule, who do not have experience in electrical work, have more questions than answers: what elements are needed (sockets, connectors, switches, etc.)? In what room are they required? Where and in what quantity should they be installed? Often, customers expect to receive advice directly from the contractor (electrician). But giving such advice is extremely difficult. After all, what “works” for one person may be absolutely inconvenient for another. And sometimes it is simply impossible to advise something intelligible, because it happens that neither the arrangement of furniture nor the list of household appliances (washing machine, dishwasher, microwave, etc.) is known. So how do you plan for convenient electrics?02. Looking for a solution.
At one time, I really hoped that regulatory documents would help to get closer to solving an urgent issue, namely SP 31-110-2003 “Design and installation of electrical installations of residential and public buildings”. But he did not give anything concrete, except for “at least one outlet for every full and incomplete 4 m 2 of the perimeter of the room”, “at least one outlet for every full and incomplete 10 m 2 in the corridor of the apartment” and “at least four outlets in the kitchen ". In other documents, I also could not find a ready-made solution.But one day, sitting under the sacred ficus and leafing through the catalog of one well-known manufacturer, I came across recommendations in the field of residential electrical installations from RAL "German Institute for Certification and Quality Support" for German developers and was not too lazy to translate it.
And this is what I got after translating the original recommendations, adapting them to Russian realities and my practical experience.
03. The truth is out there.
Room equipment describes the presence and number of elements in the room: sockets, switches, TV connectors, RJ45, etc. Basic room configurations: ★ Minimal , ★★ Standard and ★★★ Comfort.So what does this table suggest?
Firstly, it will help determine the number of electrical and communication sockets (FM/TV/SAT and RJ-45), lighting outlets in each type of room.
Secondly, the table indicates the minimum number of power lines for sockets and lighting. Indicated just the minimum number of group lines for each room with mixed power supply! But, as a rule, a separate power supply that has already become a “standard” should be used: sockets separately, lighting separately.
SP 31-110-2003, clause 9.2: “In municipal apartments of residential buildings, it is recommended to provide separate lines for powering socket outlets in living rooms, lighting, socket outlets for electrical receivers in the kitchen and corridor.<...>In justified cases, the number of lines can be reduced to two. These group lines are allowed to be carried out taking into account the mixed or separate power supply of the loads. With mixed power, sockets installed in the kitchen and corridor should, as a rule, be connected to one group line, and in living rooms to another.
Thirdly, the information will give food for thought - what stationary equipment is needed in the apartment. It is recommended to provide for the installation of all these devices, i.e. lay cable lines, reserve space in the shield, etc.
Fourth, it will become clear that it is strongly not recommended to use electrical panels smaller than 4 DIN rails with 12 DIN modules each. This size of the shield does not provide for the placement of low-current equipment, in other words, for the installation of network equipment, antenna splitters and adders, it is necessary to provide a separate telecommunications shield.
And finally, in the footnotes you will find more information about the placement of elements, for example:
a) In rooms with corners provided for eating, the number of lamps and sockets should be increased by 1, respectively.
g) Switching on/off (lighting) must be arranged from at least two places, for example, at the beginning and at the end of the corridor.
etc.
04. Even your grandmother can do it.
In my opinion, everything is simple, logical and effective. So, the procedure is:- Determine the purpose of the premises: nursery, living room, office, etc. If you have a large area at your disposal and zoning is planned, then I recommend that the formed zones be considered separate rooms.
- Think about the organization of space in the premises, think about the arrangement of furniture.
- Select the package ★ Minimal , ★★ Standard and ★★★ Comfort (see table). It is possible to choose a complete set both for the apartment as a whole, and for each room separately.
- Define convenient places arrangement of elements (switches, sockets, etc.) in the volume and quantity corresponding to the configuration.
- Pay attention to additional information. For example, if it turned out that in bedroom b) you have one socket near the bed, then feel free to add a second one nearby!
b) Socket outlets at bedside, above work tables and surfaces must be at least two-gang. The above two-gang sockets in the table are indicated as single.
- The description of each configuration contains stationary household appliances: a refrigerator, a washing machine, an electric stove, a dishwasher ... As a rule, such appliances are located in the kitchen. To accurately determine the installation location of sockets (cable output) for this technique, it is necessary to make a decision about kitchen furniture, prepare a drawing of a kitchen set.
05. Conclusion.
I hope that for you, as for me, this simple and effective tool planning will be a good help.I will be glad to any comments and additions!
I work for a trading company. Our office loves reports. Today, the boss, in all seriousness, sent a document regulating the writing of a weekly report. as a "theoretical part" he attributed the following:
How to prepare a problem for solution?
QUESTIONS FOR UNDERSTANDING THE TASK:
1. Did I understand the task?
2. Do I understand all the words and terms as the tasker?
3. Can I repeat the task in my own words? (It is advisable not to use special terms).
4. What does the task giver really need?
5. Is the task of setting MORAL?
QUESTIONS FOR THE ANALYSIS OF THE PROBLEM.
1. Does this problem have a solution in principle? Do the conditions of the problem contradict the laws of nature?
2. Type of task: logical or creative? How many correct solutions can this problem have? (Logical and mathematical problems, as a rule, have one or a limited number of correct solutions, while creative ones have many correct solutions, but each for its own boundary conditions).
3. What is the main thing in the task? What are the main parts (elements) included in the task? The important parts of the task should include only those that are involved in the conflict and without which the task "crumbles". (See section "Modeling"). It is desirable to indicate how the main parts of the problem are related to each other. This will allow you to better understand the CAUSES of the conflict, which is very important!
4. Is there enough data? What information is missing? Where can you get it? Is the data correct? What assumptions are made?
5. Is it possible to write the conditions of the problem in numbers? What drawings can be made? Am I presenting the problem figuratively?
6. Isn't the task multiple, that is, won't it fall apart into a number of separate tasks? What are these tasks? In what order should they be resolved?
7. What should the answer be: an idea, a number, a process, a construction, a new property...?
QUESTIONS TO Clarify the situation.
1. Why solve this problem? What main (supersystemic, global) problem should the task giver solve? Why did he have this particular task? Who is the tasker?
2. Who will benefit from solving the problem, and who will feel bad?
3. Under what conditions should the problem be solved?
4. Did I solve a similar problem? What do I know about this problem? Who can solve this problem better than me?
5. What or who is the root cause of the problem? Which element generates the most undesirable phenomenon? G. I. Ivanov believes that "the farther away from the consequences you go towards the root cause, the easier, more reliable and at lower cost the problem in your system will be solved."
6. How long is the decision time? How long does it take to make a decision? Is there time to let the task "rest" and I "cool down"? Perhaps it would be expedient now to "fight off a nearby enemy", "bring up reserves", and then, choosing an opportune moment, launch a decisive offensive?
7. What happens if I do not solve this problem or solve it incorrectly?
after reading, we laughed for a long time and discussed with the whole room that the afftor was smoking.
then they sent offers to answer him:
burn
afftor, write ischo!
check!
hellish satan
in memory
yabvdul
in bobruisk animal
or write him a treatise called "a little practice", where to talk about penalties for delaying wages (we have problems with this).
Financial assistance to a country looking for gold Polubotka
For more than twenty years of independence, Ukrainians have not been able to succeed in the economy, shine in the arena of international politics, give the world new technologies or become famous as a victorious people. But on the other hand, they learned to dream - about better power, about a better life and about big money literally falling from the sky…
"Give me money!"
When people never had their own money, fantasies are born in their heads that they could have been - but were hidden, lost or stolen. about gold Polubotka. Innumerable treasures of interest on the hetman's deposit in the name of Ukraine allegedly bided their time in the vaults of British banks and are about to be transferred to their rightful owners. The people divided it into 52 million (once there were so many of us) and dreamily rejoiced: everyone had enough for a Zhiguli and a house in the village, and even left for a VCR and jeans.
In 1998, the Ukrainians, who had not received salaries and pensions for months, the authorities hung noodles on their ears about the billions stolen by Pavel Lazarenko. And they promised: as soon as the stealing prime minister was handed over to Ukrainian justice, the money would be returned to the state, and then paid to the people. And in 2014, the new government made up a similar tale about the billions of dollars Yanukovych took to Russia in KamAZ trucks. At first, these billions were only 12, then it became 20, now they are talking about 40 and even 60 ... Not only will they write off everything that was stolen in the country over the past 15 years on the overthrown president, but they will also multiply this amount several times, and then they will say: that's how rich we were until this rogue robbed us!
At the beginning of the new century, politicians launched into the masses promises to pay people indexed Soviet deposits. True, there was still no money in the Ukrainian treasury for this, so another idea soon appeared: let Russia pay the contributions - as the assignee of the USSR! There were rumors that for one Soviet rupee they would give one American dollar. And the Ukrainians, encouraged by these rumors, carefully took out old passbooks from under the piles of sheets, opened them, examined them dreamily, and hid them back again.
With the beginning of the era of the “way to Europe”, the dream of returning one’s own was replaced by the idea of begging someone else’s. As a matter of fact, the very concept of European integration in the Ukrainian understanding meant unlimited access to the colossal financial resources of the European Union. For the state - in the form of subsidies and tranches "for development", for the population - in the form of salaries, allowances, scholarships, grants, insurance, etc. For the sake of this, they jumped around the Maidan scene, yelling “Yu-shchen-ko!!”.
True, Ukraine was never admitted to Europe. Then Ukrainian politicians declared it a "country with a unique investment climate", without explaining what this uniqueness is, but investors were in no hurry to invest in a "young democracy". In Kiev, they became discouraged, but not for long, having made the main bet on begging for loans: all over the world, from whomever they can. Depending on the current situation, they were asked either to develop or to save the economy.
So, gradually, the thought “the axis yak bi gave us pennies” became the true national idea of Ukraine, and its symbol foreign policy there was a hand outstretched for help ...
Marshall's Secret
It has already become a tradition that each new Ukrainian government begins its work by begging for foreign loans. And in February 2014, the barricades on Hrushevsky had not yet gone out, the ink of Turchynov's signature had not yet dried on the decision of the Rada to remove President Yanukovych from office, and the Ukrainian media had already raised the topic of the "Marshall Plan for Ukraine", the meaning of which was all the same : give us money! However, now they asked for a lot of money. Not only to cover the very impressive debts on loans already taken, not only to cover the upcoming budget deficit, but also for “development”. What exactly it was supposed to be, no one really explained, but simply said that they would give us money - and immediately everything would go smoothly. And as an example, they put the same “Marshall Plan”, which allegedly raised Europe from post-war ruins to the prosperity of developed capitalism. Like, we can do it too! Over the past year, we managed to borrow not so much: only 9 billion, which all went back to pay off old debts (11 billion). However, in the coming 2015, the Ukrainian authorities were again filled with optimism. First, Ukraine seems to have managed to agree with the IMF on a package of new loans totaling $40 billion. Secondly, in April in Kiev they are going to convene a certain “ international conference investors”, where, in the best traditions of the Union of the Sword and Plowshare, they plan to collect another 15 billion. Finally, there are plans to milk the EU budget by about $30 billion.
Well, before answering the questions whether this money will bring happiness and benefit to Ukraine, and whether it will be given at all, it is necessary to clarify - what was the notorious "Marshall Plan"? After all, 99.9% of Ukrainians know about him only in the most in general terms: they say, America gave Europe money for restoration. In fact, the "Marshall Plan" was a kind of virtuous scam. The fact is that this truly historic project solved three problems at once.
The first was the post-war crisis of the American economy. Although World War II allowed America to finally defeat the Great Depression by deploying mass military production, this led to the accumulation of working and well-earned Americans with a cash surplus that they had nowhere to spend - the whole world lay in ruins, and their own economy could not cope with all consumer demands.
The free American market reacted to this by inflation of the dollar, which in 1946-48 amounted to. almost 20%. This was very bad for the dollar, which only recently, after the signing of the Bretton Woods agreement in 1944, became the currency of international payments. US economic hegemony is under threat.
The second problem was the destruction of the economies of Europe and East Asia - the main world markets with which the United States worked. American exports fell significantly, there was almost nothing to import either. Of course, there was a temptation to remain the only economically developed country in the world, turning all others into miserable impoverished colonies, but such a return to the models of the 18th and 19th centuries was rejected by American financiers. It was more profitable for them to collect large dividends from rich countries than to squeeze pennies out of the poor.
The third problem was the very threat to the capitalist model of the economy from the existing alternative. And it was not only a socialist Soviet Union. Socialism as a theory arose in Europe and was gradually put into practice there. Practically in all European countries there were left-wing parliamentary factions, socialists and social democrats formed ruling cabinets and carried out social and economic reforms.
The left proposed their projects post-war reconstruction, often contrary to the interests of the free market and private capital. In addition, many European leftists were under the strong influence of Moscow, which had already gradually “socialized” the countries under its control. Central Europe creating its own global economic system.
Therefore, Washington decided to offer Western Europe a very peculiar aid program totaling $17 billion (about 170 billion today's "bucks"). But it mainly consisted of deliveries of strategic goods (70% were fuel, fertilizers and food, 17% - industrial equipment), and for the most part they were given on credit, in debt.
Only a small part of the "Marshall Plan" consisted of targeted financial loans directed exclusively to the reconstruction of large private manufacturing enterprises. This almost real money (checks of accounts lying in American banks) was used to purchase machines, technologies and raw materials from the so-called. "third parties", that is, non-US companies. It was forbidden to use this money for other purposes. The general condition of the "Marshall Plan" was the abandonment of attempts to "socialize" the economy and the exclusion from the governments of the recipient countries of communists and other pro-Soviet politicians.
Thus, the "Marshall Plan" killed several birds with one stone. He dumped a colossal amount of American goods on credit on the European market, reviving exports and supporting his manufacturer. By providing this credit, the American dollar has seriously strengthened both its exchange rate and its status as an international currency. The starving Europeans were fed - and, having rolled up their sleeves, restored their cities and factories. Restored European production restored the European market, which soon coveted American goods and credit. In turn, European goods met the demand of the Americans. And finally Western Europe remained an outpost of capitalism in front of the "Iron Curtain" of the socialist camp.
Ukrainian utopia
As you can see, the real "Marshall Plan" had little in common with what their politicians and "experts" tell Ukrainians. America did not bombard Europe with money, she only gave her food for the poor, fertilizer and fuel for Agriculture, equipment and raw materials for industry, and even then on credit. And the European economy was restored by painstaking work and careful spending of the assistance provided.
In this respect, the "Marshall Plan" is more like the notorious aid to Russia. Notorious, because it was announced, as they say, retroactively. We are talking about repeated statements by Putin and Medvedev that Moscow has been selling gas to Kiev at low prices for many years and thereby, they say, sponsored and supported the Ukrainian economy, “investing” tens of billions of dollars in it. Well, the ungrateful Ukrainians, therefore, only spat into this generous well.
Well, in hindsight everyone is strong. Probably, Putin (and even Yeltsin) should have previously declared that “fraternal discounts” on gas for Ukraine are actually economic assistance provided. Perhaps it was worth not even making discounts, but giving gas on credit. Maybe then it would not have been plundered and re-exported, stuffing the accounts of oligarchs and officials especially close to the throne with dollars. However, it seems that everything will be stolen in Ukraine. Well, what they don’t steal, they will eat it up - and with an innocent expression on their faces they will ask for more.
This is precisely the reason why the "Marshall Plan for Ukraine" is an absolute utopia. Because in Ukraine it is understood only as the payment of multibillion-dollar subsidies, the provision of multibillion-dollar loans and the investment of multibillion-dollar investments. Moreover, in Ukraine it is specifically understood as follows: subsidies are money that does not need to be returned; investments are other people's money that does not have to be returned; and loans are money that you have to pay back in order to borrow more.
Over the twenty years of independence, Ukraine has received more than 50 billion foreign injections (excluding Russian "discounts"), which, in terms of post-war dollars, will be many times more than the United Kingdom or Germany received under the Marshall Plan. Nevertheless, the Ukrainian economy was in no hurry to recover - on the contrary, every year it eked out an increasingly miserable existence and lagged behind world technologies more and more. Entire industries were lost, the country was filled with imports and lived off the export of raw materials and the labor of migrant workers.
It would be vain to hope that an additional 40 or 50 billion loans will save the "young democracy" and help it stand on a par with the European economies. Obviously, the point here is not at all in the amount of money, but in how they are used.
In this regard, very good example is Greece. Saving its economy, the European Union has poured tens of billions of euros. But this almost did not work, but the conditions for the provision of financial assistance rebelled the Greeks, who are now demanding the country's exit from the EU. What is the reason? The reason is that Greece is in a financial and budgetary crisis, that it is mired in debt on loans and urgently needs new ones to pay off the old ones. And the money of the European Union, in essence, is poured into a sieve, from which it immediately flows away, and what remains is eaten up by the Greek social system. The situation is very similar to ours, with the difference that in Greece money is not stolen and “sawed” as brazenly and on a large scale as in Ukraine.
Therefore, the intention to save the economy of Ukraine with financial injections into its banks and budget is a completely empty idea, which will only lead to an increase in external debt and the need for even more loans. Although, no doubt, this option suits both borrowers and lenders the most. Western banks, by giving Ukraine money to pay off old debts, will save their assets already invested in it, and Ukrainian politicians, officials and oligarchs will be able to get their hands on foreign billions. That is, they can give money to Ukraine, yes, but they will not bring any benefit.
The British and Germans in the 40s did not plunder American aid and did not transfer dollars to offshore accounts, but conscientiously restored Farbenindustrie and weaving factories. And they also had one very big advantage over the Ukrainians: by restoring their production and their economy, they at the same time restored the European market, having received it at their full disposal along with the American and Asian ones. Alas, the Ukrainian manufacturer is not expected in foreign markets. Maybe that's why they are in no hurry to help him with the real "Marshall Plan" ...
The Great Patriotic War. Bid
Supreme Commander. Zhukov comes out of Stalin's office and, putting on his cap, says with feeling:
- Well, ass with a mustache ...
Leaves.
Stalin's secretary, Poskrebyshev, immediately goes into the office:
- Comrade Stalin, Marshal Zhukov, going out to the reception room, said: "ass with a mustache" ...
- Nu-ka, virnite him.
And, already returned, Zhukov:
- Comrade Zhyukov, when you left my office, what did you say?
- Ass with a mustache...
- Whom did you mean?
- Hitler, Comrade Stalin!
- And Vee, comrade Poskrebyshev, who did you mean?
Domestic film about the war at school. The teacher asks the children who liked what. Vovochka:
- I liked the drug addict.
- What drug addict? There were no drug addicts there.
Domestic film about the war at school. Teacher
ask the children who liked what. Vovochka:
- I liked the drug addict.
- What drug addict? There weren't any
drug addicts.
- Was! He dragged on his pipe all the time and said: "You have a good plan, Comrade Zhukov."
Grandfather enthusiastically broadcasts to his grandson
About military exploits
They committed in the war.
Oh, it happened, granddaughter,
I fly in an airplane
And go on the attack in a tank,
Walk on the enemy in hand-to-hand combat
And throw grenades from the trench.
By the way, Marshal Zhukov himself
Presented at the Reichstag in Berlin
Title and awards.
Meanwhile in Moscow
Comrade Stalin...
Granddaughter, delighted with the story of his grandfather,
Carefully looks at the country on the map,
Reading numbers and dates under the arrows.
Grandfather, why were they needed in the war
All other soldiers?
One day
I finished my studies at high school at the dawn of perestroika. At that time
the system was still holding on, but it was already giving citizens the first democratic
concessions. Once, when we showed up to the school administration with
proposal to organize a disco, the administration in the light of new
democratic trends agreed. But she made a condition
before the disco we were supposed to have a theme night,
aimed at educating students in the correct communist
consciousness.
The evening prepared by us went off with a bang. Inspection authorities from RONO,
our organizer of extracurricular activities and teachers were satisfied. And when
the inspectors left the school building, the event ended with a disco with
lots of vodka and a few bruises. But RONO about
it is no longer known. In the future, such events became a tradition.
And they were held at our school regularly. Until democracy wins
finally, and there was no longer any need to attach an ideological
facade.
But now, quite recently, in the very school where we studied, to the same
to the most, only slightly aged teachers, with the same request for
The disco organization was approached by representatives of a new generation
students. And the teachers suddenly worked the old reflex. They are like in the past
years, were offered to students who had never known totalitarianism and
administrative-command system, precede the disco with thematic
in the evening. The choice of the theme of the evening was left to the students.
Well, they got down to business. Wrote the script, selected the performers.
They began to rehearse. To help with the technical equipment attracted
parents. Parents did not argue, because the children in this school had to
study for a couple more years. Bought and installed some microphones
amplifiers, speakers, lights. In general, a themed evening and a disco
promised to be up to par.
On the eve of the performance, a dress rehearsal took place with simultaneous
viewing the program by the administration. About artistic merit
I can't say anything about the event. Did not see. What matters is that the prologue
the whole action and its musical leitmotif was the song of the Star Factory -
2 "Vova - the plague." The children played very enthusiastically. And everything seemed to go according to
plan.
But the result of the viewing turned out to be very
unexpected. As unexpected as normal it would seem
in due time to us. The head teacher in charge of extracurricular activities stood up and
indignantly declared that there was no evening and subsequent disco
will. For a reason... What do you think? … anti-state
focus of the theme evening program! anti-state
direction, as it turned out, was in the very words of the very
songs: "Vova - the plague."
One involuntarily recalls an anecdote in which Stalin demanded from Zhukov
take Kiev to the next Soviet holiday. Zhukov did not understand this
adventurism and disregard for the lives of soldiers. But refuse the request
The Generalissimo could not, and very dissatisfied jumped out of the office
Stalin. Following him, Beria quickly entered the office and so ingratiatingly
is talking:
- Iosif Vissarionovich, Marshal Zhukov, leaving your office, said:
"Mustachioed devil"
Stalin quickly calls Zhukov again and asks:
- Comrade Zhukov, who did you call the mustachioed devil?
Zhukov looks threateningly at Beria and replies:
- Of course, Hitler!
Stalin:
- And who did you think about, Comrade Beria?
On Discovery there is a program about Zhukov. They show a recording of Zhukov's speech on
Victory Parade, translation into English with subtitles (to convey the pathos,
apparently). Zhukov greets workers and working women, comes to the phrase "...
collective farmers and collective farmers ... ", and at the bottom at this time a translation appears:
"...people of science and technology..."! How!
Once, Comrade Stalin called the aircraft designer Yakovlev and set the task: to create a new, best fighter in the world. The term is three months. Yakovlev objected that the Americans were spending a year and a half on such development. Stalin was completely sincerely surprised: "Are you an American?" The plane was created in three months.
Stalin persistently invited Churchill to come to Moscow while still in the military.
years. The British surrounded Churchill's visit with a mass of reservations. Stalin
demanded that Molotov fulfill all the wishes of the British. During
negotiations, Stalin noticed that the British were sitting with sour faces, and
Churchill gets up every 15-20 minutes, apologizes and goes out for a while
from the meeting room. Stalin asked Molotov for an explanation.
- I don't know, Comrade Stalin, why the British are dissatisfied. We did everything for
to make them feel at home. Kitchen, products - everything
English, even salt.
1945 The end of the great patriotic war. The Germans took Moscow. Found
Stalin (S). Hitler arrives (G). They bring Stalin to him.
- (D) Well, Joseph, now we will shoot you
- (C) Nat... Can I just leave
- (D) Are you scared ..?
- (C) Yes
- (D) And rightly so, you are at cruel games ... Molotov framed you
- (C) well, my ... raped like a child.
Then the door opens, Molotov enters the room, begins to hug
Stalin laughing. Everything German soldiers led by Hitler
leave the room. Zhukov approaches Stalin and asks
- And you, Comrade Stalin, do not wake up to take revenge.
- (C) Yes, you are right, Comrade Zhyukov .... Shoot Comrade Molotov.
Calls Stalin to his office Zhukov, Molotov and Khrushchev.
Stalin: Comrades! , saying right away, if we lose the war, then things are with you
will be bad! , for example, if we lose, then we will cut Zhukov
Ass (because the letter Zh is the first, just like Zh_opa), and you, comrade
Molotov what will we cut?
Molotov: I don't know.
Stalin: Finger!!! ,Which one then?
Molotov: little finger.
Stalin: Well, what about Comrade Khrushchev, what are we going to cut? By the way, you've faded.
Party members gathered at Stalin's dacha New Year celebrate. Stalin offers: - Comrades, let's play a game! Everyone naturally agrees, how can you refuse. Stalin continues: - Comrade Beria, what letter does your surname begin with? - The letter "B", Comrade Stalin. - That's right, the thumb also starts with "B", but let's cut off Comrade Beria's thumb. Comrade Molotov, what letter does your last name begin with? - The letter "M", Comrade Stalin. - That's right, the little finger also begins with "M", but let's cut off Comrade Molotov's little finger. Comrades, why did Comrade Nikita Sergeevich Khrushchev turn so pale?
New Year at Comrade Stalin's. Stalin gets up and says: “Something is bad, comrades. Let's play a game. Everyone, knowing Comrade Stalin's character, agrees. And Stalin says: - Let's play like this. Here, comrade Beria, what letter does your surname begin with? - The letter B, Comrade Stalin. - Correct! And the nameless finger also starts with the letter B. Let's reject the comrade's nameless finger! Cut off. - And what letter is your last name, comrade Molotov? - The letter M, Comrade Stalin. - Correct! And the little fingers also start with the letter M. Let's cut off the comrade's little fingers! And what is this comrade Nykita Sergeevich Khrushchev so pale? AleN
Our lecturer's surname is Zhukov.
We come to the lecture, but he's still not there. Then some people come and say (quote verbatim):
- As you already understood, Zhukov will not be here today. Instead, I will lecture. My last name is almost the same: Zhuchkov.
The audience lay
Financial assistance to a country looking for gold Polubotka
For more than twenty years of independence, Ukrainians have not been able to succeed in the economy, shine in the arena of international politics, give the world new technologies or become famous as a victorious people. But on the other hand, they learned to dream - about better power, about a better life and about big money literally falling from the sky ...
"Give me money!"
When people never had their own money, fantasies are born in their heads that they could have been - but were hidden, lost or stolen. about gold Polubotka. Innumerable treasures of interest on the hetman's deposit in the name of Ukraine allegedly bided their time in the vaults of British banks and are about to be transferred to their rightful owners. The people divided it into 52 million (once there were so many of us) and dreamily rejoiced: everyone had enough for a Zhiguli and a house in the village, and even left for a VCR and jeans.
In 1998, the Ukrainians, who had not received salaries and pensions for months, the authorities hung noodles on their ears about the billions stolen by Pavel Lazarenko. And they promised: as soon as the stealing prime minister was handed over to Ukrainian justice, the money would be returned to the state, and then paid to the people. And in 2014, the new government made up a similar tale about the billions of dollars Yanukovych took to Russia in KamAZ trucks. At first, these billions were only 12, then it became 20, now they are talking about 40 and even 60 ... Not only will they write off everything that was stolen in the country over the past 15 years on the overthrown president, but they will also multiply this amount several times, and then they will say: that's how rich we were until this rogue robbed us!
At the beginning of the new century, politicians launched into the masses promises to pay people indexed Soviet deposits. True, there was still no money in the Ukrainian treasury for this, so another idea soon appeared: let Russia pay the contributions - as the assignee of the USSR! There were rumors that for one Soviet rupee they would give one American dollar. And the Ukrainians, encouraged by these rumors, carefully took out old passbooks from under the piles of sheets, opened them, examined them dreamily, and hid them back again.
With the beginning of the era of the “way to Europe”, the dream of returning one’s own was replaced by the idea of begging someone else’s. As a matter of fact, the very concept of European integration in the Ukrainian understanding meant unlimited access to the colossal financial resources of the European Union. For the state - in the form of subsidies and tranches "for development", for the population - in the form of salaries, allowances, scholarships, grants, insurance, etc. For the sake of this, they jumped around the Maidan scene, yelling “Yu-shchen-ko!!”.
True, Ukraine was never admitted to Europe. Then Ukrainian politicians declared it a "country with a unique investment climate", without explaining what this uniqueness is, but investors were in no hurry to invest in a "young democracy". In Kiev, they became discouraged, but not for long, having made the main bet on begging for loans: all over the world, from whomever they can. Depending on the current situation, they were asked either to develop or to save the economy.
So, gradually, the thought “the axis yak bi gave us pennies” became the true national idea of Ukraine, and the outstretched hand for help became a symbol of its foreign policy...
Marshall's Secret
It has already become a tradition that each new Ukrainian government begins its work by begging for foreign loans. And in February 2014, the barricades on Hrushevsky had not yet gone out, the ink of Turchynov's signature had not yet dried on the decision of the Rada to remove President Yanukovych from office, and the Ukrainian media had already raised the topic of the "Marshall Plan for Ukraine", the meaning of which was all the same : give us money! However, now they asked for a lot of money. Not only to cover the very impressive debts on loans already taken, not only to cover the upcoming budget deficit, but also for “development”. What exactly it was supposed to be, no one really explained, but simply said that they would give us money - and immediately everything would go smoothly. And as an example, they put the same “Marshall Plan”, which allegedly raised Europe from post-war ruins to the prosperity of developed capitalism. Like, we can do it too! Over the past year, we managed to borrow not so much: only 9 billion, which all went back to pay off old debts (11 billion). However, in the coming 2015, the Ukrainian authorities were again filled with optimism. First, Ukraine seems to have managed to agree with the IMF on a package of new loans totaling $40 billion. Secondly, in April in Kiev they are going to convene some kind of "International Conference of Investors", at which, in the best traditions of the "Union of the Sword and Plowshare", they plan to collect another 15 billion. Finally, there are plans to milk the EU budget by about $30 billion.
Well, before answering the questions whether this money will bring happiness and benefit to Ukraine, and whether it will be given at all, it is necessary to clarify - what was the notorious "Marshall Plan"? After all, 99.9% of Ukrainians know about it only in the most general terms: they say America gave Europe money for restoration. In fact, the "Marshall Plan" was a kind of virtuous scam. The fact is that this truly historic project solved three problems at once.
The first was the post-war crisis of the American economy. Although World War II allowed America to finally defeat the Great Depression by deploying mass military production, this led to the accumulation of working and well-earned Americans with a cash surplus that they had nowhere to spend - the whole world lay in ruins, and their own economy could not cope with all consumer demands.
The free American market reacted to this by inflation of the dollar, which in 1946-48 amounted to. almost 20%. This was very bad for the dollar, which only recently, after the signing of the Bretton Woods agreement in 1944, became the currency of international payments. US economic hegemony is under threat.
The second problem was the destruction of the economies of Europe and East Asia - the main world markets with which the United States worked. American exports fell significantly, there was almost nothing to import either. Of course, there was a temptation to remain the only economically developed country in the world, turning all others into miserable impoverished colonies, but such a return to the models of the 18th and 19th centuries was rejected by American financiers. It was more profitable for them to collect large dividends from rich countries than to squeeze pennies out of the poor.
The third problem was the very threat to the capitalist model of the economy from the existing alternative. And it was not only the socialist Soviet Union. Socialism as a theory arose in Europe and was gradually put into practice there. Practically in all European countries there were left-wing parliamentary factions, socialists and social democrats formed ruling cabinets and carried out social and economic reforms.
The left proposed its own post-war reconstruction projects, often contrary to the interests of the free market and private capital. In addition, many European leftists were under the strong influence of Moscow, which had already gradually “socialized” the countries of Central Europe under its control, creating its own world economic system.
Therefore, Washington decided to offer Western Europe a very peculiar aid program totaling $17 billion (about 170 billion today's "bucks"). But basically it consisted of deliveries of strategic goods (70% were fuel, fertilizers and food, 17% - industrial equipment), and for the most part they were given on credit, on credit.
Only a small part of the "Marshall Plan" consisted of targeted financial loans directed exclusively to the reconstruction of large private manufacturing enterprises. This almost real money (checks of accounts lying in American banks) was used to purchase machines, technologies and raw materials from the so-called. "third parties", that is, non-US companies. It was forbidden to use this money for other purposes. The general condition of the "Marshall Plan" was the abandonment of attempts to "socialize" the economy and the exclusion from the governments of the recipient countries of communists and other pro-Soviet politicians.
Thus, the "Marshall Plan" killed several birds with one stone. He dumped a colossal amount of American goods on credit on the European market, reviving exports and supporting his manufacturer. By providing this credit, the American dollar has seriously strengthened both its exchange rate and its status as an international currency. The starving Europeans were fed - and, having rolled up their sleeves, restored their cities and factories. Restored European production restored the European market, which soon coveted American goods and credit. In turn, European goods met the demand of the Americans. And, finally, Western Europe remained an outpost of capitalism in front of the "Iron Curtain" of the socialist camp.
Ukrainian utopia
As you can see, the real "Marshall Plan" had little in common with what their politicians and "experts" tell Ukrainians. America did not bombard Europe with money, it only gave it food for the poor, fertilizers and fuel for agriculture, equipment and raw materials for industry, and even then on credit. And the European economy was restored by painstaking work and careful spending of the assistance provided.
In this respect, the "Marshall Plan" is more like the notorious aid to Russia. Notorious, because it was announced, as they say, retroactively. We are talking about repeated statements by Putin and Medvedev that Moscow has been selling gas to Kiev at low prices for many years and thereby, they say, sponsored and supported the Ukrainian economy, “investing” tens of billions of dollars in it. Well, the ungrateful Ukrainians, therefore, only spat into this generous well.
Well, in hindsight everyone is strong. Probably, Putin (and even Yeltsin) should have previously declared that “fraternal discounts” on gas for Ukraine are actually economic assistance provided. Perhaps it was worth not even making discounts, but giving gas on credit. Maybe then it would not have been plundered and re-exported, stuffing the accounts of oligarchs and officials especially close to the throne with dollars. However, it seems that everything will be stolen in Ukraine. Well, what they don’t steal, they will eat it up - and with an innocent expression on their faces they will ask for more.
This is precisely the reason why the "Marshall Plan for Ukraine" is an absolute utopia. Because in Ukraine it is understood only as the payment of multibillion-dollar subsidies, the provision of multibillion-dollar loans and the investment of multibillion-dollar investments. Moreover, in Ukraine it is specifically understood as follows: subsidies are money that does not need to be returned; investments are other people's money that does not have to be returned; and loans are money that you have to pay back in order to borrow more.
Over the twenty years of independence, Ukraine has received more than 50 billion foreign injections (excluding Russian "discounts"), which, in terms of post-war dollars, will be many times more than the United Kingdom or Germany received under the Marshall Plan. Nevertheless, the Ukrainian economy was in no hurry to recover - on the contrary, every year it eked out an increasingly miserable existence and lagged behind world technologies more and more. Entire industries were lost, the country was filled with imports and lived off the export of raw materials and the labor of migrant workers.
It would be vain to hope that an additional 40 or 50 billion loans will save the "young democracy" and help it stand on a par with the European economies. Obviously, the point here is not at all in the amount of money, but in how they are used.
Greece is a good example in this respect. Saving its economy, the European Union has poured tens of billions of euros. But this almost did not work, but the conditions for the provision of financial assistance rebelled the Greeks, who are now demanding the country's exit from the EU. What is the reason? The reason is that Greece is in a financial and budgetary crisis, that it is mired in debt on loans and urgently needs new ones to pay off the old ones. And the money of the European Union, in essence, is poured into a sieve, from which it immediately flows away, and what remains is eaten away by the Greek social system. The situation is very similar to ours, with the difference that in Greece money is not stolen and “sawed” as brazenly and on a large scale as in Ukraine.
Therefore, the intention to save the economy of Ukraine with financial injections into its banks and budget is a completely empty idea, which will only lead to an increase in external debt and the need for even more loans. Although, no doubt, this option suits both borrowers and lenders the most. Western banks, by giving Ukraine money to pay off old debts, will save their assets already invested in it, and Ukrainian politicians, officials and oligarchs will be able to get their hands on foreign billions. That is, they can give money to Ukraine, yes, but they will not bring any benefit.
The British and Germans in the 40s did not plunder American aid and did not transfer dollars to offshore accounts, but conscientiously restored Farbenindustrie and weaving factories. And they also had one very big advantage over the Ukrainians: by restoring their production and their economy, they at the same time restored the European market, having received it at their full disposal along with the American and Asian ones. Alas, the Ukrainian manufacturer is not expected in foreign markets. Maybe that's why they are in no hurry to help him with the real "Marshall Plan" ...
Author Viktor Dyachenko, News of Ukraine