The events currently happening in our country cannot leave anyone indifferent. It is becoming increasingly clear that it will no longer be possible to return everything back, unchanged. If one side wins, Ukraine will slide back many years and will “proudly” surpass many “developed” countries, entering the bottom five in terms of quality of life, ease of doing business, population satisfaction, etc. If the other forces prevail, there is hope for positive progress toward European standards of life and economy. Of course, it’s not perfect there either, but by all measures it’s better than here. At least there is a set of more or less fair and stable rules, which everyone tries to live by. So, what will the new rulers do if things turn in their favor? I don’t even want to think about the opposite outcome. But here’s the question: Is there a plan of action, a program for implementing change, a strategy for getting out of the economic, political, and social crisis Ukraine is currently facing?
We tried to reflect on what rules would be personally acceptable for us. We don’t claim to have the final truth, but if everyone could formulate the principles they are willing to live by, and what rules they strictly follow, maybe the overlap would produce something resembling a fair code of law (norms). Living within this framework would be happy, free, creative, meaningful, exciting, and safe.
For example:
1. No one has the right to make decisions on behalf of the people—not deputies, nor the president. Every adult who is legally capable has the right to express their opinion on issues concerning society as a whole. Yes, I am talking about a permanent referendum. The organization of a system for remote voting on issues put to a referendum. I don’t think anyone doubts the technical feasibility; all that’s needed is the will. Today’s level of technological development is quite sufficient to solve this task. For example, if there is a need to make a decision about protecting domestic stool manufacturers, the initiators propose options, experts evaluate the potential consequences and accompany the proposal with their comments. If the issue is of interest to society, for example, 30% of the population will express their opinion; if fewer than 30% participate, then the issue is not important for society, and no changes need be made. Let them compete with the rest of the world by improving quality, reducing costs, offering additional services, and so on. Gradually, only truly important and fundamental questions for the entire population will be put to a referendum. We will no longer need a Supreme Rada—why? What would they decide? There’s no need for it; I can decide for myself if necessary. Representative democracy is obsolete; with today’s communications technology, it has become an atavism.
2. Ban political parties. Any politics is an attempt to manipulate public opinion and confuse the population. Look around— which of the political programs is honest, which one has been implemented, and who among the current rulers ever remembers it when making decisions for us? No one! A political program is a collection of banalities put together, with the sole purpose of not alienating potential voters, muddling their minds, and making them believe that someone actually intends to do what is written. We do not need a party in power, but professionals who help society use available resources as effectively and rationally as possible and create value.
3. Declare a lustration of the entire bureaucratic apparatus, with a 15-year ban on holding public office. The bureaucratic apparatus has become so rotten that it is nearly impossible to find a true professional among them. Besides, a real professional will have no trouble finding employment in commerce or community work, while the bribe-takers and “trustees” should try to find their place in fields where it matters not who you’re related to or which clan you belong to, but what you can achieve and what real value you can create. If that doesn’t work, then they’ll have to start with something simple. Without an office, a secretary, or a personal chauffeur, but for example, as a laborer on a construction site, or as a taxi driver, or as a shop assistant or loader. Maybe then life will gain a different meaning for them: they won’t have to jump up at every rustle in the night, or change cars every time a new model comes out, or turn up the radio when talking to someone. Life will become simpler, healthier, and there will certainly be less harm from them.
4. Introduce a maximum prison sentence for those caught accepting bribes. Corruption destroys any economy, no matter how sound its foundational principles may be. Imagine how much money would be freed up if corruption were stopped. This would be comparable to the country’s GDP. These funds could be directed not towards offshore accounts, or creating excessive comforts and luxuries, but toward modernizing the economy, improving education quality, developing modern healthcare, reviving science, developing sports, and other areas beneficial to society. Corruption should be eliminated as a concept. A few exemplary cases would instill confidence in the inevitability of punishment. No one consciously tries to stick their fingers in a socket. It will hurt—and it could even be fatal. Everyone understands that such an action will have a predictable reaction. So why do bribe-takers keep taking and taking? They are confident in their impunity, believing that if punishment comes, it will be carried out by other bribe-takers, and they’ll be able to buy their way out. This kind of thinking must be eradicated. Only the inevitability and severity of punishment can stop pervasive corruption—until a corruption-free life becomes the norm.
5. Everything that is not prohibited is permitted. I do not mean permissiveness; I mean that the set of rules should be similar to the 10 Commandments in the Christian religion. Do no harm to anyone, do not worsen your surroundings, take full responsibility for your actions, and if you cause harm—whether intentionally or accidentally—compensate it 100%, and so on. I am confident that all rules (restrictions, prohibitions) would fit on a single sheet of paper. What good is it that we have tens of thousands of regulations, laws, decrees, directives, etc.? No one, including those who wrote them, actually uses them or knows them in detail. Trying to replace common sense with an endless number of restrictive rules will lead to nothing but total confusion. Everything should be simple and clear. Just think how much easier it would be to do business, how much the lives of entrepreneurs would be simplified, and how many resources would be freed up for creation instead of being wasted on defending against the current system and complying with absurd regulations.
6. Introduce a turnover tax, for example, 1% of the turnover of goods and services. Accordingly, cancel all other taxes. 70% of the tax remains at the local level, while 30% is directed to the national level. Not the other way around, where everything goes to the top and then you get back whatever you can beg for, but specifically this way: the region transfers 30% of the collected taxes to the national fund and keeps 70% for its own needs. Just think how much time will be freed up for accountants, how much simpler tax calculations will become, and how much money will come out of the shadows and flow into the real economy!
7. Introduce a self-declaration tax system. Each taxpayer must independently, once or twice a year, declare the amount of tax they will pay and submit reports confirming their calculations. And the tax authority is almost unnecessary. With today’s technology, monitoring total turnover is quite simple. The task of the tax authority is to track the completeness and correctness of the use of the accounting system. Accounting can even be maintained on a unified platform administered by the central tax authority, or a two-tier system can be created, with the first level at the regional level and consolidation at the central level. An entrepreneur should focus on business development, searching for new opportunities, optimizing operating costs, and maximizing profits, and not on organizing tax accounting for the tax authority and filling out a million forms and templates, whose sole purpose is to take away earned income and find grounds for fines for imaginary violations.
8. Dismantle the army in its current form. It’s no secret that having a combat-ready army is just a dream for us now. The army has ceased to exist as a fundamental element of statehood. The army does not create any value for society. 30,000–40,000 people consume considerable resources without providing any benefit to society. The army’s assets are idle. It cannot protect us from any potential enemy. On one side is NATO, on the other is Russia, and we’re in the middle. It’s laughable. Why waste resources maintaining a completely useless institution? Sign two treaties on peace and good neighborliness—one with the NATO bloc, and one with Russia—and that’s all. It’s cheaper and safer. Otherwise, our army regularly blows things up or fires off somewhere within our own territory—out of boredom, it seems.
9. Ввести обязательный (реальный) конкурс на государственные должности. Ну нельзя быть министром, не будучи лучшим по компетентности и лидерским качествам в профильной области. А откуда берется компетентность, она возникает как результат хорошего образования и успешно реализованных практических проектов в коммерческих, государственных или общественных организациях, причем как в нашей стране, так и за рубежом? Неужели нам не подойдет специалист, успешно руководивший отраслью в Германии, например, или крупной успешной компанией в Украине. На должности чиновников должны попадать только лучшие из лучших профессионалы (с одной «ф»). От них зависит разработка и создание условий для реализации стратегии развития своей отрасли, будь то сельское хозяйство или энергетика, образование или экология…. Изучение, адаптация и применение лучших мировых практик, вот задача министров, а не выдача разрешений, контроль, создание помех в работе, раздутие бюрократии, создание узких мест, развитие коррупции и пр. Вроде не так сложно, лежит на поверхности, но почему же никто не делает-то? А представьте, насколько интересной и прогрессивной может стать работа министра и его команды? При этом, конечно, привлекая ведущих специалистов, надо платить им рыночные зарплаты. И это не так сложно, если министерство – это не центр бесконечной бюрократии и тысяч бездельников, а стратегический центр, разрабатывающий рекомендации и инструменты развития отрасли. Помогающий предпринимателям и предприятиям в их освоении и внедрении. При такой роли министерства, мы можем платить специалистам зарплаты даже выше рыночных. Каждого министра можно назначать на срок 3 года, соответственно к работе он приступает только после утверждения значений Ключевых показателей эффективности (KPI), отражающих его видение стратегии развития отрасли, которых он добьется через год, через 2, через 3. На основании мониторинга этих параметров, принимается решение о прекращении полномочий, если они хуже плановых, продолжении полномочий, если они хорошие. Как может продолжать работать, например, министр здравоохранения, если растет детская смертность, увеличиваются темпы распространения СПИДА, сокращается средняя продолжительность жизни, и т.д. Это значит, что работа его не эффективна и приводит только к ухудшению состояния здравоохранения в стране. Гнать надо такого министра. Мы же не мазохисты, чтобы делать себе хуже, за собственные деньги. Значит этот специалист недостаточно компетентен и настойчив в своей области. А может и не специалист вовсе.
10. Create a preferential regime to attract direct foreign investment. A 10-year tax-free period for enterprises that genuinely invest in Ukraine’s economy. Capital flows where it is most effective, that is, where conditions are created for its multiplication. What do we have now? Potential investors fear Ukraine like the plague. Corruption, unpredictability, lack of guarantees of return, a harsh tax system, endless numbers of inspecting and controlling authorities, bureaucracy—these are clearly not the factors that attract investment capital. Our market is a market with potential for rapid growth, and it is of interest to everyone actively looking to put their capital to work. There are not many such markets left, and we are clearly losing the competition for attracting such resources. It sometimes seems as if someone is deliberately trying to think of more ways to drive potential investors away from our country and from developing our economy. But that’s a separate topic for discussion. I see great potential for the development of our economy through the attraction of direct foreign investment. The country could make an economic leap, but to do this, we need to fulfill almost all the previous points, including this one.
11. Allow the carrying and use of weapons for self-defense. I am sure that many will find this condition controversial. But how can we ensure that ordinary people are able to protect themselves, especially since the transition process is not quick? If every criminal knows that any potential victim could have something to defend themselves with, and it’s not prohibited, I think he’ll think long and hard and weigh the risks. Is it worth it, or are there safer ways to make a living? In this case, weapons serve as a deterrent, until society improves to a point where weapon ownership becomes meaningless.
Probably, a few more conditions could be formulated, under which our lives would become simpler, calmer, happier, and more secure. But even if only these are fulfilled, the situation will start to change noticeably. These principles, laid as the foundation for building the state, will prevent it from heading in the wrong direction. Each element should have feedback, allowing for monitoring of key parameters, timely assessment of the situation, and quick response to find the right solutions to correct it.
It seems simple, it seems logical, and it even appears to be successfully implemented (with rare exceptions) in many countries. So why is it that even intelligent people, upon entering power, stop being critical of themselves and those around them, become involved in a circle of useless, and often harmful, actions and activities for Ukraine? Why do assessments change, and we are told that bad things are good, and good things are bad? Why is so much effort made to call a collapsing economy ‘recovering from recession and developing,’ to call unjust court decisions ‘fair,’ to call the impoverishment of the population ‘an increase in well-being,’ and the loss of entire sectors of the national economy ‘their development’? Who needs these lies? After all, if things are good, there’s no need to talk about it—everyone can see things have improved. But if things are bad, then something needs to change!
S.N. Filyanin
01.2014
