6. DU property.
affirm all range of relations of private property - a complicated and lengthy process, which by their sense of a much wider liberalization and privatization. Property relations not limited to the relationship of appropriation. They combine elements of possession and use of material and spiritual values.
understanding Russian mentality, Nobel laureate V. Leontiev noted that Russia will need at least 70 years to play a complete system of institutions private property. We came out of a "communal", and do not think that these estimates do not concern us.
ongoing transformation of our country in this area and are correlated with the relevant principles. It is about the processes associated with private ownership pluralism, democratization, creation On this basis the broadest segments of the owners of that work, strengthening the multilateral intellectual property, its sound public protection, consolidation mechanisms for constructive cooperation between labor and capital.
Accordingly, the policy of improving relations of the property has not come out with the principle of "rollback back "- socialist in content revisions made, nationalization and a new" fair "privatization, and vice versa - to strengthen the foundations already ensured privacy, its modernization.
correlation logic of property relations associated with democratization and development of the Comprehensive corporatisation. In western countries, corporate ownership of firms in total sales is 80-90%. In general, in countries West every three adults is a shareholder. According to the magazine Economist, half of American households now own shares, while in 50 years - only 5%.
the matter not only in quantitative parameters. Stock ownership makes significant adjustments in how the interaction of labor with the means of production. Overcome the alienation of workers from the means and results of work, from production control. After all, goes the process of converting an employee to co-owner production facilities, functional capital.
particular interest in this regard is the development of specific corporate property-related to transfer some of the capital stock of employed workers in enterprises where they work. In fact, it is a process, a similar to those that occurred in our country by trying to privatization of state enterprises privileged labor groups. But this did not happen. Everyone knows which introduced power model, Ilyich Mariupol Metallurgical Plant, where it became the major owner of labor team. Now all this is questionable. In the West - it's fairly common practice.
Start converting the specified set passed by Congress U.S. back in 1974. development plan for property, content is reduced to a broad system of measures to attract workers to the shareholding. In the following years was taken more than 20 legislative acts that contributed to the spread of these processes.
essence of the measures in question is this. By credit corporations are buying up some of their actions and create on this basis, the so-called equity fund personnel, funds which are formed shares of this company. According to the decision of Congress, companies that perform this type of socialization of property, provided tax preferences and other privileges. According to U.S. statistics, every year an increasing number of national companies - companies that went completely in the hands of labor collectives. If 1975 they numbered 1601, then in late 1990 - more than 10 thousand, respectively - from 248 thousand to 10,5 million. increased and the number of people working on them. That - more than 8% of all employees.
noteworthy that the U.S. is not on this exception. In England in the years 1982-1988, ie, "M. Thatcher era, around 1900 companies have been fully redeemed staff. According to current laws in Japan about 25% of the shares of each company passed on a preferential basis and at par to employees of the same Companies ...
reasons for this evolution is associated with a significant increase in productivity and efficiency of these enterprises, accompanied by increased social integration of migrant groups, provision of psychological balance, and the fuller integration of those working in functional capital structure, its governance and expanded reproduction.
What are we? Corporate sector of economy of Ukraine is the most powerful for its parameters. He brings almost 18 million individual shareholders, including more than 14 million minority that the result of mass privatization. The share of this sector accounts for almost 65% of GDP. The problem lies elsewhere. During the years of reforms in Ukraine did not create the necessary institutional conditions that contributed to the establishment of modern corporate governance mechanisms, creating in this field of high professional culture, the transition to international standards.
low level of corporate governance correlates with the respective state of national stock market. Remains low transparency stock companies, many of them do not report their activities. Only 6% of securities outstanding on the regulated market.
process of democratization property is sold and on the basis of the functioning mechanism for transformation of state ownership, which in some Western countries still retains enough significant share of public capital. And in this issue that is widely debated in our state should investigate thoroughly.
It is not only to "Recover looted. In whose interests will use the return? Under the conditions of totalitarian socialism, as we well know, state property actually functioned as a state-bureaucratic ownership.
State property is subject to national interest only under the existence of effective legal democratic state and civil society. When no such mechanisms, the property must - Directly or indirectly - will be used in the same corporate-bureaucratic purposes. Another can not be. This axiom, which proved the truth of world practice. In this regard, there is a natural question: whose interests are pursuing intensive ongoing supporters of state property in Ukraine? Where guarantees for the prevention of its shadow, evidence that it really serve the public interest? I do not see such guarantees.
one of the most significant miscalculations previous reform strategy - our illusions about what the output of the privatization process will have to complete a modern, civilized on the maintenance of private property relations and that these relationships will form the basis of the whole system of ongoing market reforms, and therefore - and democratization society. Automatically these relationships are not formed. This takes time, intelligent system transformation.
into this it would be nice if the government eventually abandoned the dangerous policy of daily "innovative test" the strength of private property, which only confirms the. It seems that the new "gatekeeper justice" descended on a parachute from the Moon and they do not care about that process of mass privatization main purpose was political goals - and the dismantling of the totalitarian regime of initial capital accumulation, we held in accordance to the chosen logic reforms as soon as possible and also - at no charge (Certificate) basis. He started in practically dismantled power legal vacuum and crazy hyperinflation, the absence of national monetary unit nesformovanosti market infrastructure, market culture of citizens. Do we have the right not to consider this now?
Conclusion
Overcoming total governmentalization inherent administratyvnoplanoviy system carried out mainly through privatization.
During understand privatization sale or donation of state property in the hands of citizens, labor groups and entities.
now recognized not appropriate more time contrasting the spirit of public and private sectors to one another that associated with the change of approach to public enterprises, strengthening the importance of the financial results of its work. A task to promote cooperation both sectors of the mixed economy, not only within individual countries, but also at the European Community. Development of such cooperation contributes to partial privatization, which leads to the creation of mixed companies.
ratio, which lie between the public and private capital is not settled, they vary in search of more effective combination, optimum, getting in each other.
privatization process in no way considered how to defeat the state, as its dismantling as an opportunity or shifting responsibility for solving the national character of private capital. This is a valid assessment of performance in terms of scope of direct state intervention in the economy, preview features and areas that were previously the competence of the state, the more clear division of rights, duties and responsibilities between public and private sectors and, finally, to strengthen forms of state regulation of market regions, industries and economy.
all the world's experience proved that privatization can become popular and effective only with the support of public opinion.
The process itself is not a factor which increases production efficiency and strengthening balanced structure of production, because the transition from monopolies of privatized enterprises are able to improve their financial situation through price increases and transition to production with reduced range of products.
In this regard, the state must be formed priorities and incentives of privatized enterprises.
the rapid privatization causes failure in short-term period to sell the assets at a profit. This conclusion follows from the market economy in which the excess of supply over demand leads to falling prices for items that are being privatized.
analysis theory and practice of denationalization and privatization in Ukraine give grounds to draw conclusions in this regard.
1) The practice of denationalization and creating on its basis of other forms shall not proved its advantages both in economic as well and on social indicators. This is because, firstly, that the privatization takes place against a background of adverse economic conditions, general decline in output inflation, unemployment, etc., and second, serious shortcomings in the implementation of this process: weak methodology and methodological validity of privatization, excessive polityzovanistyu approaches to its implementation, poorly designed legal framework and others.
2) Due to the economic situation that has changed, and deterioration of psychological nastroyenosti population compared with the initial period of privatization policies:
a) economically and socially appropriate to establish a moratorium on the privatization process in the current forms and methods of the present - to move away from formal privatization and carry out further research the effectiveness of enterprises after privatization;
b) after additional verification of data summaries decrease the effectiveness of privatization and deterioration of living standards associated with these processes, give "voucher privatization" who compromised themselves, and distribute a variety of effective forms of management;
c) during the privatization of property should be started with the development of productive forces and the degree of socialization in a particular area of the economy.
3) in Ukraine needs to create a regulated market economy, which will act as a powerful public and private sectors that are subject to a national objectives.
4) Out of Crisis situation of Ukraine relating to the orientation of methodological positions, developing effective scientific methods of management.
5) Preview conclusion does not indicate a negative attitude towards foreign experience at all, but emphasizes the need for its creative application.
6) accentuates the importance of scientific assessments of the value of property relations in the implementation of privatization policy.
7) These studies show that the process of privatization in Ukraine does not go smoothly, privatization leads to the emergence of certain social problems: increasing social polarization, growth, differentiation and other incomes.
important role in overcoming the negative effects caused by the biased estimates of state property to be privatized, which were observed during the stages of privatization carried out, is the formation of qualified personnel, the establishment in the country of training and skills development necessary for implementation of the privatization process, including appraisers.
process in the West primitive accumulation of capital (previous accumulation) was not 10-12 years as we have, and was protracted and lasted from the sixteenth to the nineteenth century. Mr. Smith called his "prehistory capital "period" child of capitalism. " It was the toughest and tragic in its content during the formation of the capitalist mode of production as the bourgeois society.
Prehistory of capital accumulation, Marx noted, "inscribed in the annals of mankind plomeniyuchoyu language of blood and fire. " There was everything: the forcible expropriation of rural people and looting of church property, the seizure of public lands, torture and killing competitors and more. It is necessary to turn the pages of the novel "The Financier" and "An American Tragedy Theodore Dreiser to enjoy all the" charms " this period. Ford is famous slogan: "For capital all things are possible - or not nayrelyefnishe reflects the appropriate situation.
course, the time remaining far behind. But we should not forget that the initial stage of transformational changes that our country is going through - it is the same in substance between primitive accumulation, the same - of course, with its specificity - prehistory of capital.
We must take this time to the maximum deadlines. But consider that this can be avoided distortions and deformations - this is just a utopia.
Literature
Draft Ukraine "On sea ports of Ukraine agreed by the Association ports of Ukraine Ukrport" October 20, 2006 Minutes № 19
Law of Ukraine "On property privatization of state enterprises: from 03.04.1992, the / / BD. -1992. - № 24. -St.348.
Law of Ukraine on privatization of small state enterprises: from 06.03.1992, the / / BD. -1992. - № 24 St.350.
Bashnyanyn GI, Azure PY, Medvedev VS Political Economy. - Kiev: Nika-Tsentr Elg 2000. - With. 474-492.
Golovakha E., V. Dubrovsky, O. Basket, Bilotserkivets O. Ukrainian privatization: the pros and cons. - Kyiv: Alterpres, 2001.
Economic Theory: Political Economy: Handbook / Ed. E Baztlevycha. K.: Knowledge, 2006. - P. 631.
Privatization: Why teach international experience / under. yet. OT Bolotina .- M.: Science, 1995
Analysis processes privatization of state property in the Russian Federation for the period 1993-2003. Vіvodі and recommendations. "The Russian zkonomi-parameter log" № 4, 2005, pp. 6.
Bzhezinsky Z. Virіshalna role of Ukraine the former Soviet Union / Policies and time. - 1997 .- № 9 .- P.24-28.
Kaminsky E. conflict in the world and the problems of stabilization of Ukraine / / Building state. - 1998 .- № 5/6.- S.86-87.
V. Pankov Postsotsyalystycheskye stranyi - chlenyi EC: End of transformation "World of Change" № 2, 2005, sec. 118.
Privatization against "search RENT: expectations and results of Vladimir Dubrovsky Harvard Institute for International Development consultant. National Institute Publications Strategic Studies. 2001.
http://disser.com.ua/abstract/code-08.02.00--c-ua.html
http://www.iweir.org.ua/doclidgenya_ctatti.htm
0 comments:
Post a Comment