The question “why” implies that it was created or invented by someone intelligent for some specific purpose. If we don't mean religious teachings, then the question “why” should not arise in principle, because it is meaningless.
Everything here is quite logical - somehow, 4 billion years ago, life appeared on Earth. If life appears with the ability to procreate, then it will procreate and survive. If not, then it will die out in the first generation and no one will know about it. That is, this is not even a “law of nature,” because someone also comes up with the law. This is the logical result of evolution and the struggle for survival. If you think about it, then all of our ancestors had sex at least once and wanted it (hello, UP), and all those who didn’t want and didn’t do it, didn’t leave it to the gene pool.
The development of organisms does not occur through the purposeful introduction of some characteristics by a certain creator, but through a string of random mutations. If the mutation is positive, the individual receives an evolutionary advantage and is more likely to leave offspring, and those offspring with the mutation are even more likely to leave offspring and displace individuals without this mutation. A negative mutation results in the individual having less chance of survival and less chance of leaving offspring (leaving its mutation in future generations). This also happens during the transitional stages of evolution, if in a population of, for example, raccoons, an individual appears that cannot or does not want to reproduce, then it does not produce offspring and the genes that encoded this asexuality disappear from the gene pool. Therefore, only genes that have the desire and ability to procreate have accumulated in our gene pool. Procreation is the basis of all living things, no reproduction - no life.
We received from our ancestors instincts and unconditioned reflexes that predispose us to procreation, but this does not mean that there is an original meaning in this, although it can be invented. We cannot approach this issue from a teleological point of view, this is incorrect, we do not have “cause and effect”, there are only events that precede and follow them.
Hmm, it's not a matter of design.
You didn't understand me quite correctly. The question did not apply to any third-party creators.
The fact is that the need for food appeared as a response to the body’s need for certain substances, and this is necessary for survival.
And here is the question of reproduction...
It’s not clear how the body knows that reproduction is happening at all?..
This is very difficult to formulate, but at the level of genetic memory, in order for something to be deposited and passed on to the next generations, it must be tested and its effectiveness checked.
And how did this pass on to other generations, if the efficiency of reproduction is, by and large, impossible to measure and test for the body?
Well, the word “why” rather refers to the roots of the entire need for reproduction.
Why exactly “reproduction”, and how it all began and developed.
Answer
The effectiveness of a trait is measured in the number of healthy offspring.
You say “the need for food appeared as a response to the body’s need for certain substances,” but this is just a convention. Signs don't actually appear "in response to something", they appear in a random order at random times. That is, birds did not develop wings in response to the need to fly, they simply developed wings and learned to use them.
The wings did not appear exactly when they needed to fly, they appeared before, they were simply meaningless. It's the same with other signs, it's not a reaction to necessity, it's just a random mutation that came at just the right time.
Let's return to testing efficiency - in nature this is the number of healthy offspring. That is, as I already explained:
1. An individual appears that cannot reproduce, it does not reproduce, does not leave offspring, and its mutated genes disappear from the gene pool;
2. An individual appears that can reproduce, it reproduces, leaves offspring, and its mutated genes remain in the gene pool.
This is a test for efficiency - how many offspring an individual has given, and the efficiency parameter is not measured within one organism (the organism does not check what is beneficial for it and what is not, it simply does what is programmed, and evolution gives the answer). Efficiency is measured within a population or species, so the organism itself does not need to measure it. That is, even if we are talking about the need for food - yes, it is beneficial to the body so that it is healthy and can get food for itself and escape from a predator. But ultimately it all comes down to him giving offspring, and his offspring giving more offspring. The biological meaning of life is to preserve it. That's all.
Moreover, leaving offspring may be unprofitable for the organism itself - after this, some species die immediately. But at the same time, the function of this organism has already been completed - it has left offspring, which means it is no longer needed for procreation.
Therefore, it is impossible to measure the “efficiency” of reproduction from the point of view of the reproducing organism; it alone does not need this for survival, but at the level of all life as such it is necessary criterion survival of the species. That is, there may be no point in this; the mutation appeared and became beneficial for evolution. All.
Answer
CommentANTONINA SAMSONOVA: Hello, you are watching and listening to the program “The Day After Tomorrow”. Watch on the RTVI TV channel and listen on the Ekho Moskvy radio. My name is Tonya Samsonova, and with me is my colleague, the host of this program, Sergei Guriev, rector of the Russian School of Economics. Hello, Sergey.
SERGEY GURIEV: Good evening.
A. SAMSONOVA: Today we are talking on the topic “ Successful people must multiply." Today is Children's Day, after all. Maxim Mironov, professor at the Epres Institute business school (Madrid), hello, Maxim.
MAXIM MIRONOV: Hello.
A. SAMSONOVA: Maxim, you successful man?
M. MIRONOV: Yes.
A. SAMSONOVA: Do you really think the topic of reproduction and the topic of kindergartens, which we will touch upon today, is the most important?
M. MIRONOV: Yes.
A. SAMSONOVA: And this is exactly what you devote your activities to?
M. MIRONOV: Yes.
S. GURIEV: No, well, reproduction is one question. Another question is kindergartens. Those. Do you think that kindergartens are the most main topic for the development of Russia.
M. MIRONOV: Yes, I believe that this is one of the most important topics, because in the end, any development depends on people. And this is a global understanding not only in Russia and in the world. And if we want not only to pump oil and gas, which could still run out in our lifetime, then we need to ensure that there are talented people who will move the economy further.
A. SAMSONOVA: Do you have children, Maxim?
M. MIRONOV: Yes.
A. SAMSONOVA: In Russia there is a problem with kindergartens, and, nevertheless, you had a child. You somehow do not correspond to the thesis that you state.
M. MIRONOV: Let's just say there are two parts. Firstly, I didn’t have a child in Russia, let’s put it that way. One of the reasons is precisely because it is very inconvenient to have children in Russia. It was precisely this topic, the difficulties that are associated with the birth of a child, that made me think, generally speaking, what needs to be done so that there are more children in Russia, among other things.
A. SAMSONOVA: Maxim, how complicated everything is for you. But the correspondent of Forbes magazine, our colleagues and partners in the program, the Russian version of Forbes magazine Anna Sokolova, has figured out your biography, and will now tell our listeners and our viewers about it.
DOSSIER ON MAN OF THE 21st CENTURY
ANNA SOKOLOVA: Maxim Mironov, 30 years old, was born in Novosibirsk. Graduated from Novosibirsk State University, Russian School of Economics and Chicago Business School. Defended his dissertation in America. “I was the first to measure with a high degree of accuracy the level of tax evasion for virtually every Russian company"- says Maxim. According to his calculations, in 2003-2004 the leaders in tax optimization were Gazprom, Lukoil and RAO UES. Returning to Russia, he worked as investment director of the Promsvyazkapital company. Oversaw major transactions, as well as a project in the field of media and telecommunications. Since 2009, he has been working as a professor of finance at the Madrid Business School of the Epres Institute, where he teaches corporate finance. Adheres to the principle that family is more important than career. She has two children and often thinks about how to make giving birth and raising children in Russia easier and more enjoyable. Mironov is close to the ideas of the Chicago School of Economics. About the free market, which itself is the best at determining what the economy needs. What irritates him most in Moscow is traffic. Life is too beautiful to spend it in traffic jams, says Maxim. In his free time, he lives in Buenos Aires.
S. GURIEV: Maxim, like this interesting biography. On the other hand, you, as a professor of finance, could talk about other things, but you think that it is the project to create kindergartens in Russia that is profitable business project. Although you want help from the state in this project too. Talk about numbers. Finance professors, they all work with numbers.
M. MIRONOV: I will briefly summary project. What I really think is this is one of the most important projects precisely because, as was said, I support myself with the dialogue that the market will figure out what to do. But for the market to figure out what to do, the market does not work on its own. We need people who are educated, talented, and motivated to do something. Therefore, in my opinion, the state should invest money in projects other than those that the market itself can build. Such as financing factories, even constructing pipelines, etc. The state must provide the necessary conditions so that there are people who would implement this project. And this is exactly what, in my understanding, the state should do.
S. GURIEV: Well, you don’t seem to be saying that the state should be involved in the reproduction of people. People can deal with this themselves.
M. MIRONOV: Yes, people figured out a long time ago how this is done. But for anyone modern man giving birth to a child is a significantly different process than being born there even 100 years ago. Now there is quite a lot of urbanization going on. People are moving to cities, they have a significantly different lifestyle, and in order for people to have children, it is necessary to create qualitatively different conditions than they were even throughout the world, in Russia even 50 years ago. That is why, I believe that the state should not only kindergartens, but the entire chain, starting from hospitals, maternity hospitals, and ending with the army. The process of raising a child is a very large one, from conception to release into adulthood. Therefore, the state must deal with all this.
A. SAMSONOVA: Maxim, again a contradiction. You say that you like the market. But why don’t you want to leave such an area as kindergartens to the market? After all, we have low-income people who really need subsidies and cannot pay for kindergartens. They have access to them. And rich and super-rich people can create infrastructure, as you write in your theses on the website echomsk.ru, for your child. They can do it for their child kindergarten on the territory of his personal plot of 20 hectares. As for the middle class, why not organize it, why not create private kindergartens. This is an uphill and possible process.
S. GURIEV: They exist in Moscow. They work.
A. SAMSONOVA: And indeed a lot.
M. MIRONOV: I will explain. Well, firstly, having a child is, of course, a person’s decision. But we should not forget that it is not only humans who receive great benefits from the birth of a child. Of course, this is happiness. And let me tell you, it’s a very pleasant feeling. But the state also receives very large benefits. And it is precisely the philosophy of even the free market that says that if there are social benefits to society, if there is some kind of benefit, if, in the end, there are taxes. Those. if when people grow up, they will pay taxes. How more people pays taxes, the more taxes they pay, it is a benefit to the state. That's why…
S. GURIEV: Well, that’s what the state says when it builds a plant. It says the market doesn’t understand, it doesn’t build factories itself. Let's build a factory. He will pay taxes, it is profitable. How does your logic differ from the logic that it is necessary to build a plant, a pipeline, affordable housing?
M. MIRONOV: In short, when a plant is built, it has been proven in many studies that the state generally manages the plant worse precisely because all the benefits from the plant go to the owner. Therefore, the owner, as proven by many studies, knows better how to manage the plant, how to maximize profits, etc. From the point of view of the birth of a child, it is not only the parent who benefits, but the state, for example, if you give birth to a potential criminal, relatively speaking, the state will have to spend on prisons, will have to spend on compensation for those people to whom he committed a crime, etc. If you give birth to a person who will work, pay taxes, create something else that cannot be measured by money, then, first of all, the state, as a society, will benefit. Therefore, the state must, first of all, finance those projects that benefit not only the individual, but also society in a broad sense. Through taxes, through other factors.
A. SAMSONOVA: Maxim, but you yourself say that if something is managed by private hands, it is better than if something is managed by the state. Because the same logic most likely applies to kindergartens and educational institutions. As far as I understand, in America, private universities are still better than public universities for the most part.
S. GURIEV: This is true.
A. SAMSONOVA: And we want the maximum good for our child. We do not want to make sure that the state pays fairly for what it receives its benefits from. We want the child to feel good. Therefore, maybe it makes sense to pay less taxes, but use this money to start private kindergartens?
M. MIRONOV: My project does not call for the creation of public places in kindergartens. He proposes that the state in some form, for example, provide free premises. Naturally at the competition. If there is a desire to develop a completely transparent scheme, for example, an entrepreneur comes and says: I want to organize a kindergarten in this area. They tell him: ok, we will pay, let’s talk within the framework of Moscow. Prices in other regions can be divided by 2. We will pay you rent within the range of $4,000 per child. And if you...
S. GURIEV: Per year.
M. MIRONOV: That it is quite possible to provide for one child 6-7 square meters, which meets international standards, so that there are small groups, etc. The business of organizing, attracting teachers, marketing, ensuring that children do not get sick lies with the entrepreneur.
A. SAMSONOVA: Maxim, Kommersant Vlast has calculated the cost of creating a private kindergarten. And there are fixed costs and there are variable costs. So, the cost of renting premises does not account for the lion's share of costs. Because employee salaries are comparable. Fire alarm– this is half of the rent of the premises, we are talking about a group for children of 10-15 people. And about the area of 400 sq. meters.
S. GURIEV: It seems to me that this is not the most important thing...
A. SAMSONOVA: This is not the main barrier.
S. GURIEV: Maxim says that, in principle, if you transfer these 4,000 dollars a year per child, then this translates into tuition fees, which turns out to be 300 dollars a month. Those. you're just talking about subsidizing private daycares to the tune of $300 a month.
M. MIRONOV: You can say so. And basically how to do it. Here it is important to understand how the state can do so as not to spoil the market incentive. Let me ask you how much Kommersant calculated the cost of one seat?
A. SAMSONOVA: There is no cost per place per child, there are costs...
S. GURIEV: For some reason, the amount here turns out to be quite small...
A. SAMSONOVA: Let’s count about 2 million per month, taking into account the fixed...
S. GURIEV: For 65 people. Those. it's not very much.
M. MIRONOV: I can just say where I got these numbers from. Let's just say I have a job in finance and I have quite a lot of experience in valuation different projects. If you don't know the economics of a project, I don't know the economics of a kindergarten project. I’ll be honest, I haven’t organized a single kindergarten in my life. But I can look at how the market in other countries solves this problem. How much does it cost. For example, in Spain, where I now live, a place in a kindergarten in Madrid, in a rather expensive area, costs 500-700 euros per child.
A. SAMSONOVA: And the month?
M. MIRONOV: Yes.
S. GURIEV: In Madrid there are actually hidden subsidies for kindergartens through various mechanisms. It is not available in America, and there it costs about one and a half times more.
M. MIRONOV: Here are 500-700 euros, yes. Considering that the cost of labor in Russia is still lower, well, even if we take these figures, it is 600-850 dollars at the current exchange rate. Those. relatively speaking, if the state provides free rental (INAUDIBLE) services, which is quite consistent, let’s say, from $300 per month, you provide, then the final cost for the consumer will be $300-500 per month, depending on the quality.
S. GURIEV: And you think that such a subsidy of cutting kindergarten tuition fees by half or by a third can sharply increase the incentive for fertility for people with high incomes.
M. MIRONOV: Yes, I am absolutely sure of this, because the birth of the middle class, that the target audience my project, which I wrote, is a fairly wide audience, well, in Moscow these are people who earn from 2 to 4 thousand dollars a month. This is a broad class of people, not just people who work as managers. These are highly professional electricians, these are plumbers, these are people who are designers. In principle, a very wide range. And indeed, if now the cost of kindergartens in Moscow is from $1000 per month, i.e. relatively speaking, the person who can now financially afford to have one child will be able to have two children. The person who can afford two children can afford 4 children.
A. SAMSONOVA: Well, Anatoly Vishnevsky, director of demography at the state university, does not entirely agree with this High school economy. He read your theses. Let's listen to his comment.
THE WORD OF MAN OF THE 20TH CENTURY
ANATOLY VISHNEVSKY: Maxim Mironov proposes to solve demographic problems, in particular the problem of the birth rate, through the construction of a million places in child care institutions. It seems to me that he simplifies the situation somewhat. Of course, children's institutions are needed. They need to be built, there are not enough of them, but it is very naive to think that they will solve everything. In France, the birth rate is higher than in Russia, it is true, but still it is not so high either. There, all children can 100% enter kindergartens. There is no such problem. But this raises the birth rate a little, but not to the level that we would still need. Therefore here simple solutions There are no very complex problems. In general, it seems to me that the blogger overestimates the importance of such ordinary common sense when it comes to very complex things. Society is very a complex system. And the reasons why such long-term trends, including demographic ones, are formed cannot be understood and changed based simply on what seems reasonable. It also seems reasonable to me to build child care institutions so that there is no waiting list, but the reasons for the low birth rate are much more diverse and deeper. And that’s why I don’t think everything can be solved so easily.
S. GURIEV: Maxim, really, how exactly can kindergartens help solve this problem? Can a person really refuse to have a child because kindergartens will cost more or less? In the end, you can make the choice that many families made 50 and 100 years ago, that one of the parents will remain at home with the child.
A. SAMSONOVA: And then at the time of the decision to have a child, this problem is simply not in the head. Other issues are important.
S. GURIEV: Well, probably in the finance professor’s head.
M. MIRONOV: Well, I’ll try to answer now. There have been several comments here and I agree with most of them. For example, if you look at the thesis I wrote, I said that there are many problems in Russia, starting from maternity hospitals, and ending with kindergartens, schools and, ultimately, the institution of the conscript army. When my wife was pregnant with a boy, she already asked the question: what are we going to do? I stated my position. Even this question...
A. SAMSONOVA: What is your position, by the way?
M. MIRONOV: I am a supporter, if there is a conscript army, then everyone should join it. Because otherwise the army with the marginalized... I don’t know, I live abroad now, if my child lives abroad, then most likely he will be there. I don’t know whether they go to military registration and enlistment offices based on subpoenas or not. But generally speaking, I'm a supporter. If a society has a conscript army, then everyone must serve.
S. GURIEV: Did you serve, Maxim?
M. MIRONOV: Well, I never ran. I never graduated from the military department, and moreover, I even went to the military registration and enlistment office, and I was declared unfit for some reason in war time. I got the military registration and enlistment office to assign me category A, that I was fit at any time. But the summons to serve did not come to me. I never from her...
A. SAMSONOVA: Sergey, did you serve?
S. GURIEV: No, I didn’t serve, I’m also a reserve officer, and I graduated from the military department, and never ended up in the active army. Well, we won’t ask you, because in Russia women are not conscripted.
A. SAMSONOVA: Unfortunately.
S. GURIEV: But as a father of both a boy and a girl, I can say that this is also a big question for me. Will my son be drafted into the army or not?
A. SAMSONOVA: In general, in fact, the whole complex of attitudes towards childhood and motherhood is a big question, these are big incentives or disincentives.
S. GURIEV: Tonya, we, as professors, can tell you. You cannot solve all problems at once, especially during a short transfer. We can concentrate on one problem. Maxim proposes spending $20 billion on a million places in kindergartens.
M. MIRONOV: Yes, I will now explain the second part of the comment, very sensible, that indeed in France, in Sweden, etc., there are good kindergartens, and they are free, and there people give birth less than in Africa, where children gardens nothing. Firstly,
S. GURIEV: In Africa they give birth a lot.
M. MIRONOV: Yes, that’s what I’m talking about. In Africa, although there are no kindergartens, they give birth a lot. Firstly, we don’t know what the birth rate would be if there were no kindergartens there. We don't know if it will upset Russian society, but in general we are a poorer country in terms of per capita income than France, etc. and we give birth less than people with similar income levels. Those. in fact, we should rather not compare with France...
A. SAMSONOVA: And with whom?
S. GURIEV: Portugal, Slovakia.
A. SAMSONOVA: Maxim Mironov compares Russia with Portugal and Slovakia, I remind you (SPEAKING TOGETHER), Maxim Mironov, professor at the business school of the Epres Institute of Madrid. We will continue our conversation in a few minutes on the topic “Successful people must reproduce.” This is the “The Day After Tomorrow” program, don’t go anywhere. We'll be back in a few minutes.
NEWS
A. SAMSONOVA: Hello, we are back in the studio. You listen and watch the program “The Day After Tomorrow”, watch it on the RTVI TV channel, listen to the radio “Echo of Moscow”. The Day After Tomorrow program, which we are doing together with our colleagues from the Russian version of Forbes magazine. I represent my colleague, the host of this program, Sergei Guriev.
S. GURIEV: Good evening.
A. SAMSONOVA: Rector of the Russian Economic School. My name is Tonya Samsonova. Today we are talking about the topic “Successful people must reproduce.” We speak with Maxim Mironov, a professor at the business school of the Epres Madriz Institute. Hello.
M. MIRONOV: Hello.
A. SAMSONOVA: We wanted to give you the opportunity to respond to Anatoly Vishnevsky’s comment.
M. MIRONOV: I will now tell you the rest of his comment. About common sense. In my defense, I would like to give an example of one scientist from Chicago, where I studied, his name is Stephen Levid.
M. MIRONOV: One of the problems that he managed to solve at the level of economics and common sense was why the birth rate fell in America. Crime has dropped. And he showed that there were many demographers, bright minds who tried to solve this issue, but no one could. And he, using common sense and basic numerical methods, showed that it was the legalization of abortion there that led to a sharp drop in crime 20 years later. And I consider myself one of those people who believe that common sense, economic logic can solve a problem that perhaps other areas of knowledge cannot solve. Let me explain the example of kindergartens. Why is this guaranteed to lead to an increase in the birth rate. I can't say for sure, it will be 100,000, 500,000, 10,000, but it is guaranteed to lead to an increase. Because why is the birth rate falling in wealthy developed countries? Because having a child, the richer people are, can afford more children. But the more expensive their time is, the less they can afford, because raising a child and having a child costs time. Those. on the one hand, the richer they are, the more they can give birth; on the other hand, the more they earn, each hour costs them more.
S. GURIEV: This is written in the book of Nobel laureate Gary Becker, Maxim’s scientific supervisor in Chicago.
M. MIRONOV: Yes.
A. SAMSONOVA: You are simply economic determinists.
S. GURIEV: Economic imperialists.
M. MIRONOV: Therefore, if the state provides the right segment of the market with the opportunity to reduce the time it takes to raise a child, and this, of course, then those people will give birth to more children, because this is only a factor that works only in one direction.
A. SAMSONOVA: Well, the answer of sociologists, excuse me, gentlemen, economic imperialists, to the same problem is that when it became socially acceptable that a woman who gave birth to two children continues to work, and does not sit at home with them, and puts them in child care garden or nanny, then women began to give birth to children. Because before that, if you have two children, you know what, honey, stay home.
M. MIRONOV: Well, we seem to have gone through this revolution.
A. SAMSONOVA: Russia no.
M. MIRONOV: Why not? In Russia, back in Soviet times, there were kindergartens, and people actually sent their children to kindergarten, women went to work.
A. SAMSONOVA: Well, we encountered it to a lesser extent than the Italians, for example.
S. GURIEV: This is true. But one of the problems, and if you really look at the demographic data, is that in the 90s there were fewer children and the demand for kindergartens, many kindergartens closed. And now the demographic wave has come again, and now there is a huge demand for kindergartens, and it will only grow in the coming years. And now this demand is not being met, and in the coming years this will be an even bigger problem than it is now, so this is really not a theoretical problem at all. How can a demographer, a sociologist and an economist talk about this? But, as an economist, I have a question for you, Maxim. In principle, there is maternity capital, where for every second child the state gives a fairly significant subsidy in fixed rubles, thereby encouraging the birth rate in the poorer segments of the population. And you seem to profess the same approach. For each child in kindergarten, it is true, but for each child you give a fixed amount of money. Maybe just give someone a place in kindergarten without any subsidies? For example, what is he doing now? Russian state, You can, if you send your child to kindergarten, you can write off a certain amount in rubles up to 50,000 rubles from taxes.
A. SAMSONOVA: To do this, you need to pay taxes and have a white salary.
S. GURIEV: Well, the middle class pays salaries in white. Maybe not limit it to 50,000 rubles? This is not a very large amount, because it will be the equivalent of 50,000 rubles per year, which means that it is only 13% of this amount...
A. SAMSONOVA: This is 2 months of kindergarten.
S. GURIEV: Yes. This is not a very large amount. Maybe just don't limit this amount. So that any money you pay for a child, you would put 13% of it in your pocket. Maybe we can do this? Or subsidize any amount. You spent a ruble on kindergarten, the state returned 50 kopecks to you in any case. Maybe we can do this?
M. MIRONOV: There are so many ways to solve the problem. I will comment, for example, about maternity capital. This is a certain fixed amount of money, in my opinion, 350,000 rubles, taking into account indexation, which, in principle, can be spent on a very wide range. If you look at how you correctly said that this mainly stimulates the birth rate among the poor, because, well, an example. If your salary is $2,000 a month, you are middle class. 60,000 rubles is only 6 months of your salary. It turns out that a woman receives 6 months of salary from the state, which needs to be received, a lot of time, and probably another month on top. And if your salary is 10,000, then you get 2.5 years, and naturally this stimulates the birth rate among the poor the most. Why did I propose this project? Because as a financier, I am mainly a specialist in developing profitable projects. This project is guaranteed to bring profit to the state, no matter what its results are. Let me explain with an example. If it stimulates the birth rate in the numbers that I wrote, i.e. for a million places there are 100,000 new children, then these children, when they grow up, will pay so many taxes that...
A. SAMSONOVA: They will pay off.
M. MIRONOV: All costs are more than enough.
S. GURIEV: Maxim, but you have one more problem. When you talk about the birth rate among poor Russians and among the middle class, for some reason you assume that those children who are born to poor Russians will work worse, earn less money and contribute to the prosperity of Russia. For some reason, you want to stimulate the birth rate among rich Russians. Which, it seems to me, firstly, is not very fair. Why should public money be spent on the rich and not the poor? On the other hand, perhaps the most successful people will be born among poor Russians.
M. MIRONOV: I completely agree with this thesis that they are not necessarily born to the rich (INAUDIBLE). And my project is not designed for the rich, but is aimed at at least 20-25% of the Moscow population. 2,000 dollars - if you say that 2,000 dollars a month in Moscow is a rich person, I think this is not true.
A. SAMSONOVA: Let me defend Maxim, because why is stimulating the rich beneficial to the state, because if a mother, whose salary is $3,000, stays at home and takes care of the child, then she does not pay extra taxes.
S. GURIEV: This is beneficial, but it cannot be fair.
A. SAMSONOVA: Moreover, it’s unfair. In our country, all subsidies are distributed regardless of whether a person needs them or not.
M. MIRONOV: Yes, about justice. I studied at NES. For a while. And one...
S. GURIEV: Exactly as much as needed. You graduated from NES.
M. MIRONOV: Graduated from NES, yes. And one of the most useful lectures was the lecture (INAUDIBLE) when he talked about Arrow's theorem. I don’t want to go into details, but briefly he said that the world has always known that there is no justice and Aerrow proved that there is no justice and cannot be. Fairness depends on how you define it. This is generally the business of politicians. I'm not a politician. If you define justice one way, you will get the same results if you define justice another, so I am not ready to say whether it is fair or not, but I can say that all segments of the population will benefit from this project. And the poor, and the rich, and the middle class. Why will the poor benefit? Because if you create places in kindergartens for the middle class, the queue for the poor in kindergartens will decrease.
S. GURIEV: Free.
M. MIRONOV: Yes. You know, now in Moscow you have to wait 2-3 years to send your child to kindergarten. And pay bribes.
S. GURIEV: And not only in Moscow. In Russia. An entire parents' association.
A. SAMSONOVA: Do you understand that at the social level this makes huge changes in society, and that if you create different kindergartens for children from different groups income, then this, at a minimum, gives rise to some kind of trouble; our stratification is already quite high. You are trying to fix it.
M. MIRONOV: Well, in general, I absolutely disagree with you. Because, if only because by nature, inequality is fixed from the moment of birth. But these are not places for the rich. This subsidy is where anyone can give a place. It's not the same if you have less income, i.e. the market already determines who will go. The state pays 3-4 thousand dollars a year in subsidies. Then all additional costs are paid by the parents in the end. Therefore, anyone can send their child there. Regarding the delamination. The stratification in Russia does not come from the fact that we have a large middle class. The stratification is taken because we have 5% of people who own everything.
S. GURIEV: 1 or 05%.
M. MIRONOV: Relatively speaking, 1%. And 90 and middle class within 10% of the population. So, if you increase the size of the middle class, and if you stimulate the birth rate among the middle class, then inequality will decrease and the world will become, according to your interpretation, more just.
A. SAMSONOVA: Okay, let's listen to the commentary of a man from the Forbes golden hundred. Dmitry Ananyev, Chairman of the Federation Council Committee on Financial Markets and Monetary Circulation, also read your theses and has something to say.
THE WORD OF MAN OF THE 20TH CENTURY
DMITRY ANANYEV: Regarding Maxim Mironov’s blog, I almost completely agree with the economic calculations, which, perhaps, look a little too theoretical from the point of view of the profitability and profitability of this project. I see the main difficulties in the following, in the harsh realities of life, which consist in the fact that there is such significant urbanization in our country. Those. Having a very large territory, our territory is actually losing its economically active population in small medium-sized cities. And large, large cities, in terms of infrastructure, are poorly managed compared to Western countries. This will make certain adjustments to this project, which overall looks very bold and interesting.
S. GURIEV: Well, Dmitry doubts that market incentives will work in our realities, where not all markets function effectively, and he, as the chairman of the Federation Council Committee on Financial Markets, probably knows this well. What do you think, Maxim, are there enough subsidies for the market to work?
M. MIRONOV: Well, as far as I heard what Dmitry Nikolaevich said, the main reason is that people really began to move to large cities, to megacities. And indeed, when people lived in villages and small towns, people really gave birth a lot and there were no problems with kindergartens. But this trend, when people move to megacities, is a global trend. This is a trend in China, this is a trend in Russia, India, and Europe for a long time. Therefore, unfortunately, we cannot do anything about this trend. I don’t want to debate whether this is good or bad, and Dmitry Nikolaevich said the second thing, that the cities really turned out to be unadapted to the fact that children and people would come there, and even more unadapted, that these people would suddenly want to have children. And we were faced with the problem that quite a lot of people came to Moscow, constantly coming and not only to Moscow. To Novosibirsk, to Krasnoyarsk, to any major city. And the city has no infrastructure. The second question is whether the market can cope with this. Well, for example, 20 years ago there were no adequate stores in Russia. There wasn't much.
S. GURIEV: There was no beer. Mobile phones.
M. MIRONOV: And then I didn’t drink beer yet. I am inclined to say, and the market has solved a lot of problems where the state interfered with it, or interfered not very much. Therefore, even if the state helps, the market will solve this problem, just as it solved it in all other countries of the world, the laws of the market according to the laws of physics. They work regardless, even in communist countries the laws of the market work. So the market will solve the problem.
A. SAMSONOVA: Maxim, apparently our listeners are concerned about this topic, because a lot of messages have been received via SMS +7 985 970-45-45, I will read them out in a row. I think if we comment on them all, we will not have enough time, but we would like to receive your comments by phone 363-36-59, and we ask you to call, attention, people who do not have children and are under 30 years old . This is your attitude towards pouring, excuse me, money into kindergartens when there are so many problems in Russia. How do you feel about this, how important is this problem to you? This is by phone at 363-36-59, and the SMS is like this. Tell me, why then doesn’t anyone stimulate the birth rate in the USA? There are no benefits or concessions here. Sveta writes from Chicago. Ket 164. A listener sent us a message via the Internet: my daughter went to great garden. You should have seen the American one. Ours was remembered as paradise. I live in New York. You know, Vladimir Grishin, 44 years old from Tula, is accusing you of some terrible sins. Actually, from this slogan. Meaning “Successful people must reproduce” smacks of Reich-era Germany. Next you will need to clarify - healthy, beautiful, etc. Compare, for example, income levels and expenditure levels. It must also be considered not at the level of theses. The rest is also superficial and incomplete, writes Vladislav regarding your theses. Before the broadcast, I read Maxim’s theses. His calculations seemed reasonable to me, writes Larnik. But what about the Mexicans living in the USA, they have 4-5 children, they live in two-room apartments, the children sit with their mother, and the father works 10-12 hours. And nothing. The successful ones should reproduce, but what should the unsuccessful ones do? Listen, we only have messages from America. You see how concerned they are about our problem.
S. GURIEV: Maxim, really, why do you think kindergartens are not subsidized in America?
M. MIRONOV: Let me answer about America. As I wrote in the very first lines of the program, there are two ways to solve the problem of lack of human capital. You can import it...
A. SAMSONOVA: From Russia.
M. MIRONOV: Well, not only. Not many from Russia.
S. GURIEV: Latin America and China.
M. MIRONOV: From Europe, from all over the world. In America, if you look at the composition of the professors at Chicago, it is one of the leading business schools in America and in the world, almost half of the professors there were not born in America. Those. America was able to create a system where it could take the cream of society from all over the world. Unfortunately, I believe that in the foreseeable future we will not be able to become such an attractive place for people from all over the world as America. Therefore, you need to try other methods. For example, natural reproduction.
A. SAMSONOVA: 363-36-59…
S. GURIEV: I would like to comment. My children went to an American kindergarten and a Russian one. I can say that there are good kindergartens in America...
A. SAMSONOVA: Yes, and in Russia too.
S. GURIEV: And in Russia too. But they cost about the same. And for the same money, kindergartens in America are better than in Russia.
M. MIRONOV: Yes, but in America the salary level is significantly higher and the opportunities...
A. SAMSONOVA: Competition.
M. MIRONOV: Of course, that is. they are accessible to the majority of the population.
S. GURIEV: Not available.
M. MIRONOV: Even the middle class.
A. SAMSONOVA: Let's involve young childless listeners. Hello, you are on the air of “Echo of Moscow”, RTVI television company, what is your name?
AUDIENCE: Hello. My name is Denis Volkov.
A. SAMSONOVA: Denis, apparently, you are under 30 years old?
DENIS: Yes. I am 30 years old, I have no children.
A. SAMSONOVA: Excellent. Well, that is. not very good. But you suit us.
DENIS: And I'm in live already or not?
S. GURIEV: Yes, you are live. Tell us, Denis, how important is the problem of kindergarten for you in terms of how many children you want.
DENIS: I can answer you. I just have a very interesting situation. My very close friends have opened a private kindergarten. And they told me the story of the opening of this kindergarten. And it's really very a big problem. Because a huge number of people who gave birth to children, they say that there are some incredible queues and bribes. Today I was told that in order to get into kindergarten, a State Duma deputy wrote some kind of letter to the kindergarten. And after that they only took the child. And it’s good that my friends knew some deputy.
S. GURIEV: Not all gardens are accepted even with a letter from a State Duma deputy. Sometimes it takes a mayor and a governor.
M. MIRONOV: They were just very lucky. They ended up with some letter from a deputy in a Moscow kindergarten. And my personal attitude to all this is this. I believe that, of course, a market needs to be created here; in my opinion, no subsidies are needed, because all the subsidies in our country, in order to be issued, there are an insane number of queues, bribes and it’s generally not clear what. We just need to create conditions for kindergartens to appear on the market. And again, my friends, who have their own kindergarten, recently opened it using Montessori technology, brought teachers from Britain, and they tell us the situation that is happening there. The country is talking about modernization. And they say: Denis, we pay 35% personal income tax, i.e. income tax individuals, the fact that foreigners work for us. But in Russia there are no people who know how to raise small children using the same technology that they use now in America and Europe. They simply don’t exist, not a single person with such an education. And as a result, the cost price is insane, the prices for getting into this kindergarten are simply incredible. And my friends opened a kindergarten because they could not find a kindergarten in the country that would suit them in terms of quality.
A. SAMSONOVA: Magical.
S. GURIEV: And you yourself, please tell us about your decision. If you can't find a good kindergarten, how important is this problem to you?
A. SAMSONOVA: He has friends, Sergei.
S. GURIEV: Friends tell us stories, and Denis can tell us his own solution.
DENIS: Well, my decision will probably be that I am an entrepreneur, and if I am going to give birth to a child, then I will try to devote a lot of time to him, and probably take some kind of semi-homemade solution. Those. I’ll come up with my own small private kindergarten. But to get involved with our government agencies, honestly, I just, well, I have some kind of pathological hostility towards government agencies, and therefore, going to some municipal kindergarten and humiliating myself in order to get into it is personally disgusting to me.
A. SAMSONOVA: Thank you.
S. GURIEV: Well, it seems to me that this is rather a criticism of my approach. Individual subsidies, write-offs from taxes, than Maxim’s approach, which proposes to subsidize not people, but gardens so that a person does not have to contact anyone.
M. MIRONOV: Yes, absolutely true, just to remove from the chain of unfriendly teachers, unfriendly heads of kindergartens who extort bribes, who do not care about your child, because there are not many people who want to create high-quality kindergartens.
A. SAMSONOVA: Colleagues, what is the story that there are no normal educators in Russia, and we need to bring them from Britain? Like governesses.
S. GURIEV: We are talking about the Montessori system. It’s just that this is a system that is well known all over the world. As you know, when the first McDonald's opened in Russia, well, probably, some personnel had to be brought from abroad. This is changing quickly, naturally. It's not so difficult for a teacher. But indeed in Russia there are many kindergartens where foreigners work. And these kindergartens are sometimes cheaper than kindergartens where non-foreigners work. The point here is not only about the 35% personal income tax.
A. SAMSONOVA: But also in the moral costs that you spend on the child in order to pump him out after communicating with the Russian teacher.
M. MIRONOV: Well, in general, too, yes, there are such moments.
S. GURIEV: Well, we have a lot of wonderful Russian teachers, owners and directors of kindergartens. Tony, don't...
A. SAMSONOVA: In kindergarten, I jumped out of a second-floor window because they locked me there, so don’t tell me. After that, I decided to apply to Echo of Moscow. Let's hold a vote to determine the position of our listeners, is it true that if we make more normal kindergartens, the birth rate in our country will increase. As you think. If it seems to you that this is true, that this is exactly what will happen if the number of places in kindergartens is increased, then 66-00-66-4 is your phone number, call and vote. If not, don’t you think that increasing the number of places in kindergartens will somehow significantly change the birth rate in Russia, 66-00-66-5. So, I repeat the numbers again. The number of places in kindergartens will increase, the birth rate will increase 66-00-66-4. No, there is no such direct relationship 66-00-66-5. Voting is underway, and you and I can probably try to take one more call, especially since all the lines are lit. This listener has never been on air, hello, you are live on Ekho Moskvy and RTVI, what is your name?
AUDIENCE: Hello. My name is Dmitry. I'd like to talk about the following...
A. SAMSONOVA: Dmitry, you have no children and you are under 30 years old.
DMITRY: Yes, I’m 26 years old and I’m single and I’m probably, in quotes or maybe not, the happy owner of a new building in the near Moscow region. We all see that many different residential complexes are being built around Moscow, where naturally the developer is not interested in building infrastructure, and the main problem is the lack of kindergartens. Just in the Moscow region, in a 10-kilometer zone approximately, where in the Moscow region these new residents, who are usually the middle class working in Moscow. And those who go out to live in the evening are precisely such microdistricts, where they have mortgaged apartments, etc. They are not interested in building them, and especially no one will subsidize them. But, in my opinion, in Moscow the problem is less acute, because if you travel around Moscow again, you can see that at the expense of the municipality, municipal kindergartens are now being rehabilitated from 2-story ones into 3-story ones, and new ones are being built in new areas according to standards. And in the Moscow region the problem is very acute. And even if the developer built a kindergarten, the private municipality does not want to accept it even as a municipal one. Because there is no money.
A. SAMSONOVA: Dmitry, unfortunately, there is very little time, a short question. Does this influence your decision to have children?
DMITRY: Yes, very much.
A. SAMSONOVA: Thank you very much. Sorry for interrupting you like this.
S. GURIEV: In fact, this is a really huge problem. Many parents take their children from the Moscow region to Moscow to kindergartens, which... Of course, it does not contribute to the health of children or the desire to have children.
M. MIRONOV: My project is wider than Moscow. This is the Moscow region, a metropolis in modern concept this is larger than the city's federal boundaries.
A. SAMSONOVA: Colleagues, we have a lot of numbers. The first numbers are a vote of 50 to 50, almost 49 to 51. 49 think that you are right. And that if we increase the number of places in kindergartens, then everything will be fine with the birth rate. 51 thinks the opposite. But what is much more interesting is the question that Maxim Mironov asked the audience of the Superjob portal. The population of Russia, over 18 years of age, who came in and voted. Which of the following projects, in your opinion, most corresponds to the long-term interests of Russia as a state? Which project would you choose if only one of the following could be financed? First, holding the Olympics in Sochi costs 20 billion dollars. Second, extension of the lease of the Black Sea Fleet base until 2042 for 40 billion dollars. Creation of a Russian Harvard 25-30 billion dollars, Creation of a million places in modern kindergartens in Russia 25-30 billion dollars, difficult to answer, free, 13% vote for it. Here's how the votes were distributed.
S. GURIEV: Maxim, what do you think was the most popular project?
M. MIRONOV: I don’t know. Because again, I'm not a politician. If…
A. SAMSONOVA: I am a financier.
M. MIRONOV: I am a financier. I proposed a project that I understand. It is beneficial for the state, live cash plus social benefits.
S. GURIEV: You really are not a politician.
A. SAMSONOVA: You really are not a politician. You can’t even feel how many people support you - 52%, despite there being 5 answer options. 52% support your decision. 16% also focus their resources and the country’s resources in the field of education. And to some extent they want a Russian Harvard for 25-30 billion dollars. In third place with the extension of the Black Sea Fleet base in Sevastopol until 1942, 12%. Well, anything can happen. And 7% for the Olympics in Sochi.
M. MIRONOV: Well, at least this is a recipe for politicians what needs to be done in order to...
S. GURIEV: To win the elections.
M. MIRONOV: Increase popularity. If I were a politician, I would win the choice over those who propose, for example, to extend the base of the Black Sea Fleet, or some other projects.
A. SAMSONOVA: You always think in abstract models, Maxim.
S. GURIEV: It is in Sevastopol that kindergartens for Russian citizens will be located.
A. SAMSONOVA: Well, it was the “The Day After Tomorrow” program, in which today, on Children’s Day, we talked on the topic “Successful people must multiply,” we talked about this with Maxim Mironov, a professor at the Epres Institute business school in Madrid. And we want to thank our partners from the Russian version of Forbes magazine, the producer of our program Irina Babloyan. And I want to thank Sergei Guriev, the host of this program, the rector of the Russian School of Economics...
S. GURIEV: Thank you.
A. SAMSONOVA: Thank you. Tonya Samsonova. All the best. Until next Tuesday. And go to the website echomsk.ru, there you will see the theses of our next guest Vadim Novikov.
