Mikhail Khazin: “in three years, most of our oligarchs will go bankrupt. New economics according to Khazin Khazin Mikhail Leonidovich global crisis

Mikhail Leonidovich Khazin was born in Moscow on May 5, 1962, in the family of academician Leonid Khazin. Brother Andrei Khazin is a statesman and public figure. After graduating from school, Mikhail entered Yaroslavl State University. In 1984, he graduated from the Faculty of Mechanics and Mathematics of Moscow State University with a degree in statistics.

Mikhail Khazin grew up in an intelligent, educated family. His father, a well-known mathematician, academician, and scientist in the USSR, instilled in his son a love of science from childhood. Since school, Mikhail's favorite subject has been mathematics. Having an analytical mind, he easily solved any problem. In addition to mathematics, he was attracted by economics, to which he devoted his life. However, before becoming a famous economist-reformer, Khazin had to go a long way.

From 1984 until the collapse of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Khazin worked as a researcher in one of the departments of the USSR Academy of Sciences. In the early 90s, for a short time he headed the analytical department of ELBIM Bank, and then was an employee of the Work Center for Economic Reforms. At this time, Khazin published his first articles on economic topics. Thanks to his determination, he achieved a position in the Ministry of Economy of the Russian Federation.

From 1995 to 1997, Mikhail Khazin served as head of the credit policy department of the Ministry of Economy of the Russian Federation.

Since 1997, Khazin worked as deputy head of the economic department of the President of Russia. After working in this position for less than a year, Mikhail left the civil service. He decided to take up economic forecasting and worked as a private consultant for two years, from 1998 to 2000. It was at this time that Mikhail Khazin, together with Andrei Kobyakov and Oleg Grigoriev, created the theory of the economic crisis. They are also the founders of a new economic theory - “neoconomics”.

After working for two years at the auditing firm Modern Business Technologies, Mikhail Khazin, together with his colleagues, founded the NEOCON company in 2002, becoming its president. The company is engaged in economic consulting and forecasting.

Mikhail Khazin is the creator of the website Worldcrisis.ru, where he posts reviews and forecasts for the development of the modern world economy. He is also the author of a large number of publications on political and economic topics. Since 2009, Khazin regularly appears as an expert on the television program “However”, and in the past was an author of the magazine “Profile”.

Together with Gavrilenkov, Khazin developed the methodology and terminology of “project analysis”, the cornerstone of which is the “Global Project”.

Best of the day

Khazin constantly makes economic predictions. His first forecast dates back to 2000, when he, together with Grigoriev, in the article “Will America Achieve the Apocalypse?” predicted the coming global economic crisis.

However, not all of Khazin’s economic predictions turned out to be accurate. For example, in October 2008, he predicted the following development of the economic crisis: “the US economy will shrink by a third, and the global economy will fall by 20%. The planet will face 10 years of severe depression. In Europe and the USA, many people will starve, and a car will become a luxury item.”

In October 2013, a scandal erupted over an attempt to remove an article about Mikhail Khazin from Wikipedia. The site's functionaries decided that the famous economist was not worthy of having his biography published in the Russian encyclopedia. It’s interesting that the article about Khazin was on the site for many years, and then for some reason they decided to remove it.

Mikhail Khazin immediately responded to this news. On his website, he wrote an appeal to the Russian community, in which he explained why Wikipedia functionaries did this. According to Mikhail Khazin, it’s all about the economic theory that he developed together with his colleagues. It allows, in contrast to liberal economics, to understand the mechanisms and consequences of the economic crisis. Wikipedia, like liberal economics, is a mainstream project that aims to introduce the “correct” understanding of life to the uneducated masses. Including the “correct” one, that is, the economicist economy. And the disagreement is that there is no theory of crisis in economics. Therefore, adherents of economics believe that since the crisis theory is not in the “only true economic theory,” it means it does not exist at all.

Mikhail Khazin believes that sooner or later the article about him would be removed from Wikipedia. Adherents of economics do not recognize the new economic theory, therefore they are in confrontation with Khazin. They consider Mikhail and his colleagues to be charlatans, cheaters and hoaxers who fool people in pursuit of their own personal goals.

According to Khazin, this happened right now because the crisis theory has become very popular. Previously, Wikipedia functionaries ignored the existence of Mikhail and his colleagues. But gradually, as their popularity grew, they developed cognitive dissonance. They were unable to explain the economic crisis, so their attacks on the new theory reduced their authority among the people. Mikhail believes that the authors of Wikipedia could not accept defeat and simply deleted the article about him.

However, Mikhail Khazin is sure that this does not play any role. Neoconomics has gained great popularity, and no one can argue with it. Now, at a minimum, it must be taken into account, since it explains what classical economics cannot explain. Time will tell who is really right.

Will the US achieve the apocalypse?

Oleg Grigoriev,
Mikhail Khazin

The global crisis should begin in November of this year

When, at the end of 1997, the authors of this article prepared the first information about the upcoming Russian crisis for the President of the Russian Federation, they drew attention to some similarities in the processes taking place in Russia and the United States. However, it was pointless to develop the topic of the upcoming global financial crisis in official reports at that time - in those days it only caused smiles. But today it is already quite popular, and it can be discussed with all seriousness.

Unfortunately, today, speaking about the world economy, the overwhelming majority of sources consider exclusively the phenomenon of the so-called new economy, and analyze it exclusively at the empirical level. The preference for an empirical approach is understandable: the short history of the new economy does not make it possible to build adequate models for it, and therefore today modern science cannot accurately determine whether the new economy has approached a dangerous line, has crossed it, or still has a large margin of safety.

However, something else is unclear: the new economy is viewed in isolation. Although it would seem more logical to analyze the interaction of new, information, sectors with traditional, industrial ones, and use this analysis to forecast the general economic situation.

In this article, we tried to do just such work - to describe the interaction of new and old sectors of the economy and to determine the mechanism of the global economic crisis, which, in our opinion, could begin this fall.
New and old

Almost all new technological revolutions that seriously changed the world economy operated according to the same standard scheme. Its essence is that those industries in which fundamentally new products appeared, intended for the consumer market, giving a significant increase in profits, transferred their innovations to them in a fairly short time through close interaction with old sectors. As a result, a new holistic technological structure was formed, ensuring growth in productivity and income in almost the entire economy (until the next breakthrough).

However, the most recent revolution associated with the development of information technology has developed differently. There has not yet been a noticeable impact of the new information sector on the traditional one, in the sense of a significant increase in labor productivity and profit margins. We do not mean management mechanisms or marketing technologies, which have changed a lot, we are talking specifically about industrial technologies, and they have remained the same. The main reason, in our opinion, for this phenomenon is the huge difference in the characteristic time of innovation in the new and traditional sectors of the economy. Any attempt to rebuild industrial production in accordance with the latest developments of “information technologists” becomes morally obsolete already at the design stage, since during this time several generations of computers and software products are replaced, the information field is significantly modified, etc. As a result, “material” does not happen. technological “tying” of information and traditional sectors of the economy to each other, each developing in its own direction and the gap between them continues to grow.

The existence of this gap is actually recognized (although still not fully understood) by the world community. Actually, this is precisely why the economy was divided into two parts: the old one, where growth in productivity and profitability remained at the same level, and the new one. Note that during previous technological revolutions there was no such opposition.
Minus product

In addition to the lack of penetration of the new economy into the old one, which is necessary for the formation of an integral technological structure, the former failed to sufficiently displace the latter in the sphere of consumption. It is the old economy that continues to satisfy the basic needs of specific people. Moreover, a significant part of those who use the products of the information sectors, by and large, can refuse this without much harm to themselves. Therefore, the new economy was forced to look for other applications. This caused two interesting effects.

The interest rate increase failed to contain inflation in the United States, but stimulated a further decline in the profitability of the real sector

First, the main buyer of the new economy’s services has become itself. A colossal virtual “soap bubble” began to grow, the volume of which significantly exceeded the volume of the “umbilical cord” that connected it to the old, real economy.

The second effect was that the main product of the new economy was the sale of new mechanisms for selling products of the old economy. As a result, the main investments in the new economy are made in new marketing technologies based on the Internet.

Since the current cost of goods is determined by the balance of supply and demand, it cannot be significantly changed through intermediary services, even if they are the most advanced. Therefore, almost all new economy companies are valued based on future profits, often taking into account the monopoly component. This model for determining their value was chosen and supported based on general consensus. This is due to the fact that since the sales networks of companies generally develop, and future profits depend exponentially on their growth, all investors can record excess profits. It was this model that became the basis for the colossal growth of the new economy.

Thus, the purely economic mechanisms of the new economy turn out to be different from those that operate in the old one, which allows it to provide rates of profit that are an order of magnitude greater both in comparison with the old structures and in comparison with what corresponded to the state of the new economy in essence.

However, such a situation undermines the new economy itself, since it is too similar to a financial pyramid, the stability of which largely depends on purely psychological reasons. To neutralize possible “psychological failures,” the creation of a new “direction” in the economy was even financed, proving that developed countries have entered a crisis-free path of development.

We consider the phenomenon of disproportion between the new information and traditional sectors of the economy to be the main cause of a possible crisis in the world economy.
The cycle has long since ended

There is one more factor that needs to be taken into account when analyzing today's situation. Economic development is cyclical in nature - growth is always followed by recession. Theoretically, the recession phase of the American economy should have begun back in the 50s, but after the dollar became a world currency, the crisis could be delayed by expanding the dollar zone.

The collapse of the world socialist system and the seizure by the United States and its allies of those markets that were previously controlled by the USSR extended the growth phase of the US economy for several more years. However, this reserve exhausted itself quite quickly, and in the early 90s there was every reason to expect a crisis. But the timely flourishing of the new economy, which absorbed excess financial resources, made it possible to repeat the phenomenon of the 20s - rapid growth with virtually no inflation and postpone the stage of overheating for about another ten years. However, this time is already over.
Crisis trigger

The rapid growth of the new economy by the mid-90s led to a significant increase in income expectations of both individuals (households) and financial institutions. As a result, the real cost of credit for industry has increased significantly. As a result, it began to switch to more and more economical modes of activity, and the speed of its development using its own resources slowed down significantly.

In March-April 2000, the inflation rate equaled the level of normal profitability of industrial production

Costs have increased. It became more difficult to attract qualified young professionals as they flocked to more financially attractive sectors of the new economy. This began to manifest itself especially strongly in those countries where the new economy was developing most actively.

Since the main criterion for the work of managers in the United States for quite some time now has been the stock price of the enterprises they manage, for the time being they successfully “hid” these problems in their balance sheets (which does not need to be taught to the Russian reader).

Industrial profitability around the world has fallen increasingly, leading to a significant increase in the minimum volume of production required to make a profit. The share of own funds in relation to borrowed funds of enterprises continuously decreased. In order to save available resources, a wave of mergers of companies with similar areas of activity began; International monopolistic concerns were created in almost all markets. This process was further exacerbated by the introduction of marketing technologies that came from the new economy.

The constant and steady decline in the profitability of the old, real economy, and above all industry, in our opinion, is the trigger for the future global economic crisis.
Impact of the Asian crisis

Separately, it is necessary to dwell on the stock market collapse in Southeast Asia in the fall of 1997 and other regional crises. As already noted, in almost all developed countries of the world, industry became less and less profitable. As a result, the stability of all markets with returns lower than the US stock market was undermined, and at some point the least stable of them, primarily stock markets, “collapsed.”

In fact, these markets played the role of a safety valve for the American economy, and with their crisis, the only way to delay the crisis in the United States itself was through non-economic mechanisms (such as aggression in Yugoslavia). However, after Yugoslavia, the crisis of the world economy and the crisis of the American economy can be equated.
Signs of an impending collapse

The colossal growth of the “soap bubble” of the virtual economy could not but cause an accelerated (compared to the growth of industry) increase in consumption. The long period of growth and success of the new economy provoked a decrease in the share of savings among US citizens, who began to spend more, while significantly increasing their debt obligations.

Given the rise in lending rates, this would inevitably initiate inflationary processes. Their first signs appeared back in 1998, when for the first time in many decades the United States closed its budget with a surplus. But these processes were not reflected in market prices for a long time due to the competent and competent policies pursued by the Federal Reserve System. However, by the end of 1999, it was no longer able to contain inflation. The critical point was reached in March-April 2000. At this point, the annualized inflation rate in the United States reached the level of normal industrial profitability. American goods began to be squeezed out of the national market and imports began to grow rapidly. The Fed's attempts to combat inflation by raising the discount rate further undermined the financial position of industry.

The fundamental deterioration in the state of industry indicated one thing - there were no objective factors allowing for the growth of the Dow Jones index. The index, which has been growing steadily over the years, has actually stagnated in the 10 to 11 thousand range since the beginning of 2000. The investment profitability of the stock market has sharply decreased, but at the same time the speculative activity of its professional participants has increased, which has led to an increase in the amplitude and frequency of its fluctuations. From that moment on, the magnitude of the next fall began to depend on a combination of a various number of increasingly small and random factors, while at the same time, fluctuations in the stock index became the most important sign of how close the United States was to the beginning of the collapse.
Timing of the crisis

So, starting from April 2000, the likelihood of a crisis has increased significantly. Let's try to make a more accurate forecast.

The key moment is the US presidential elections, which will take place in early November: they determine two possible scenarios. The first is realized if the American financial oligarchy controls both major parties. In this case, nothing will happen before the elections, and immediately after them, objective information about the real state of affairs, which will inevitably appear in the media in early November, when the publication of balance sheets for the two quarters of the financial year begins, should cause an active dump of shares of industrial enterprises.

Let us note that local oligarchs are preparing for the crisis. In the fall of 1999, the United States repealed the law prohibiting the combination of any two of three types of activities: insurance, banking and stock trading. This law was adopted as a result of the crisis of 1929, in order to protect the interests of ordinary investors and prohibit uncontrolled speculation with other people's money. The repeal of this law will allow owners and managers of financial institutions to preserve personal capital after the outbreak of the crisis (much like what happened in the fall of 1998 in Russia).

The second scenario is realized if the leadership of the Republican Party in the United States is relatively independent. Then it can go to accelerate the crisis, firstly, to guarantee victory in the elections, and secondly, so that the first and most unpopular measures after the crisis breaks out are taken by the Clinton administration. This option is indicated by the latest statement by the head of the US Federal Reserve, Alan Greenspan, about the onset of a crisis in the next few weeks (more precisely, in the twenties of August).
Consequences of the crisis

A sharp collapse of the stock market will lead to the loss of assets with a total value of about 10 trillion dollars (the April NASDAQ crisis “cost” about 2 trillion). This will sharply intensify inflationary processes, which will lead to the return of dollars accumulated abroad to the United States.

There will be a massive bankruptcy of financial institutions, a significant part of whose assets are securities of investment funds, insurance companies, venture capital and pension funds.

Those free funds that investors can withdraw from the most affected sectors of the economy (we are talking about trillions of dollars) will be invested in any available long-term assets. This will cause a sharp increase in the cost of gold, other precious metals and products made from them, real estate and other “eternal” values.

For most banks, securities do not constitute a significant part of their assets, but they are used to manage liquidity. In addition, a significant amount of loan debt is guaranteed by packages of securities owned by the borrowers.

Bankruptcies of some and serious difficulties of other financial institutions will significantly undermine the American and world economies.

According to the most preliminary estimates of the authors, we can expect that average consumption in the world will fall by 1.53 times, which will require a significant structural restructuring of global industry and the international division of labor and will lead to many years of stagnation of the world economy.

The management bodies of international corporations will not be able to adequately reflect the rapidly changing crisis environment. As a result, they will begin to close production, which will cause serious protest from national authorities who are not interested in increasing the unemployed in the context of curtailing social programs. This will inevitably lead to the collapse of the WTO system and the restoration of traditional mechanisms for protecting national markets. This process will also be stimulated by the fact that the US dollar will quickly lose its function as an international currency, and the euro will not have time to quickly occupy its niche.

To support national industry, which is suffering from a lack of credit in the context of an acute crisis in global financial institutions, many countries around the world will switch to budget lending to domestic enterprises. This will spur inflation, but will also increase the competitiveness of national enterprises in world markets.

In our opinion, it is the interaction of mechanisms for protecting national markets that will determine the development of the world economy in the first post-crisis years.

The crisis will bring very serious changes to the balance of power on the world economic arena. The weakening of the American economy (amplified by powerful social unrest) will lead to the fact that regions that receive a significant portion of their income from sales in the United States will suffer. Primarily these are Japan, China and Southeast Asia.

The stock market is dominated by speculators. When their nerves give out, nothing will keep the US economy, and with it the entire world economy, from a crisis similar to the crisis of 1929

Serious stagnation also awaits Europe, which at the same time, due to the expansion of the euro, will provide itself with powerful investment potential. Part of it will be sent to Latin America.

Let us note that after the destruction of the WTO system and the restoration of protectionist mechanisms, the situation in the world economy will be very reminiscent of the picture of the early 30s. A small number of very large international monopoly concerns, multi-currency, a large number of unemployed, growing social tension, inflation and stagnation - all these phenomena will determine the picture of the world economy at the beginning of the new century.

The post-crisis situation in Russia will be strikingly different from the global one. The collapse of world stock markets seems to us to be a rather abstract event; the only problem is the loss of people’s savings (however, this is far from the first).

The main difference in the Russian situation is different. Free capital totaling at least a trillion dollars will be feverishly looking for where to invest. At the same time, potential investors will be willing to accept very significant (but fixed) losses, since it is not so easy to find assets whose value is comparable to a trillion dollars.

The authors managed to find only one such value - the subsoil of the Russian Federation. Moreover, in conditions of a sharp drop in demand for resources, no one will be interested in their direct development. We are talking about purchasing long-term rights (thirty to fifty years) for their future development.

Another factor in Russia’s investment attractiveness is related to the fact that in rapidly changing crisis conditions, enterprises will need high flexibility in working with personnel. As a result, many large industrial concerns will begin direct investments in countries with more lenient labor laws, but at the same time having a sufficiently skilled and educated population. These conditions are met by a number of Latin American countries and Russia (but not India or China).

Unfortunately, taking advantage of all these potential opportunities requires careful and serious work, which has not even begun yet. Taking into account the time factor, it can only be carried out with the participation of a large foreign partner. The historical traditions of the development of Russian business, Russia’s relations with Western countries in recent decades, and the volume of financial investments clearly indicate that Germany should become such a partner.

As for the further protection of the interests of investors, it must be taken into account that private individuals with a dubious reputation cannot act as guarantors of the preservation of their capital, no matter how close they are to power. The state power itself will be able to satisfy investors only if its representatives work in accordance with the laws, and not at the behest of their unofficial patrons. It can be assumed that, starting in the fall of 2000, the Russian authorities will be subject to powerful international pressure demanding a principled anti-corruption campaign.

Briefly, but quite thoroughly, your idea of causes and consequences of the global crisis Mikhail Khazin outlined in the following video lecture:

The articles below reveal in more detail the three components Khazin's concepts. Actually, Khazin's materials- this is an analogue of historical materialism, which explains the end-to-end history of human civilization. Quite entertaining and very useful reading. Additional Khazin's articles can be found at the link Educational program.

The first component of Khazin's concept

Theory of technological zones

Khazin’s first theory is based on the theory of “technological zones”, which was proposed by Oleg Grigoriev, developing the concepts and thoughts of Rosa Luxemburg in the field of global division of labor. The provisions of the theory of “technological zones” make it possible to point out the main reason for the current crisis - the achievement of the limits of expansion of a single world American technological zone within the borders of the entire planet Earth.

The second component of Khazin’s neoconomics

Theory of global projects

Another component was the theory of global projects, which the journalistic economist developed together with Sergei Gavrilenkov and a group of their comrades. The theory of global projects provides a system for describing social changes in human history that is different from Marxism. The theory of global projects is more productive than the amorphous theory of civilizations.

The third component of Khazin's neoconomics

Crisis theory

Crisis theory- this is an attempt to explain the causes of the modern world crisis, but most importantly - it gives forecast of the crisis in Russia and the rest of the world, on the basis of which a global conclusion can be drawn, the essence of which is that capitalism in the form single The global economy can no longer be saved.

However, one should not expect a transition to planned economic management in most countries in the near future. suggests that, under the pressure of reduced demand, the current infrastructure of a unified system of division of labor, which today includes all of humanity, should break up into several (5-6) separate zones. Capitalism may go through another cycle if the world economy again breaks up into separate “currency zones”, within which technological zones are created. The world economy will roll back to its previous state and development will occur according to the proven model of merging individual zones.

Competition between zones and the possible attraction of billions of residents of underdeveloped countries as consumers gives currency zones the opportunity to develop, but humanity must learn to solve its problems peacefully, otherwise contradictions between zones could again lead to world wars.

Materials by Mikhail Khazin

Economic science in Russia

Features of the modern crisis in Russia

Political elite in Russia

Putin regime

biography

Mikhail Khazin is a popular Russian economist, journalist, television and radio presenter, publicist, and head of the NEOCON company.

From 1995 to 1997, Mikhail Khazin served as head of the credit policy department of the Ministry of Economy of the Russian Federation.

After working for two years

in the auditing firm "Modern Business Technologies", Mikhail Khazin in 2002, together with his colleagues, founded the company "NEOKON", becoming its president. The company is engaged in economic consulting and forecasting.

Together with Gavrilenkov, Khazin developed the methodology and terminology of “project analysis”, the cornerstone of which is the “Global Project”.

Mikhail Khazin immediately responded to this news. On his website he

wrote an appeal to the Russian community, in which he explained why Wikipedia functionaries did this. According to Mikhail Khazin, it’s all about the economic theory that he developed together with his colleagues. It allows, in contrast to liberal economics, to understand the mechanisms and consequences of the economic crisis. Wikipedia, like liberal economics, is a mainstream project that aims to introduce the “correct” understanding of life to the uneducated masses. Including the “correct” one, that is, the economicist economy. And the disagreement is that there is no theory of crisis in economics. Therefore, adherents of economics believe that since the crisis theory is not in the “only true economic theory,” it means it does not exist at all.

And he was the host of the “Economy in Russian” program on the “Russian News Service”. One of the presenters of the “Economy” program on the radio station “Moscow Speaks”. Author of numerous publications in the magazines “Profile”, “Expert”, “However”. As a guest expert, he has repeatedly appeared on the radio “Echo of Moscow”, the television program “However” and various Internet channels.

He is the creator and regular author of the website Khazin.ru, which posts reviews of the state and forecasts for the development of the global and Russian economy, as well as geopolitical analytics.

Biography

Mikhail Khazin is the son of leading researcher Leonid Grigorievich Khazin. My father studied the theory of stability at the institute. Mother taught higher mathematics in . Khazin’s grandfather Grigory Leizerovich received the Stalin Prize in 1949 for his participation in the creation of the Moscow air defense system with the official wording “for the development of new equipment.” Mikhail Khazin’s younger brother, academician of the Russian Academy of Arts Andrey Khazin, was a member of the Federation Council, a professor at the State University - Higher School of Economics, and currently the head of the department at Moscow State University.

Khazin was born in Moscow on May 5, 1962, graduated from the mathematics class of school No. 179. By his own admission, he dreamed of studying at Moscow State University, but was forced to enter Yaroslavl State University in 1979. In his second year, he transferred to the Faculty of Mechanics and Mathematics of Moscow State University, from which he graduated in 1984 with a degree in statistics (Department of Probability Theory). By assignment he ended up working with Alan Grivtsov, where he worked on theoretical substantiation of applied problems in chemical physics from 1984 to 1989. On the website of the Physical Institute named after. Lebedev provides annotations of several works by Khazin on statistical physics.

In 1992, he headed the analytical department of ELBIM Bank, and in 1993 he moved to public service. In 1993-1994, Khazin was an employee of the working center for economic reforms under the Government of Russia. Since 1994 he worked in the Ministry of Economy, in 1995-1997 he headed the department of credit policy of the ministry. According to Khazin, in 1996 he was supposed to become deputy minister (at that time the ministry was headed by Yevgeny Yasin), but the appointment was blocked by Yasin’s first deputy, Yakov Urinson. Disagreements with Urinson arose due to Khazin’s report, prepared for the November board of the Ministry of Economy on non-payments, in which Khazin argued that “a reduction in the money supply in Russian conditions does not lead to a decrease in inflation, but to an increase.” From 1997 to June 1998 - Deputy Head of the Economic Department of the President of Russia. He is a retired active state adviser of the Russian Federation, III class. Khazin believes that he was fired from the civil service “for his categorical unwillingness to compromise,” and adds that after his dismissal he “was not allowed to travel abroad for ten years.”

From 1998 to 2000 - a private consultant, then until 2002 he worked in the audit and consulting company "Modern Business Technologies", since the end of 2002 - president of the expert consulting company "Neocon", specializing in strategic forecasting and relations with government agencies (GR ) . At the same time, Khazin, together with Oleg Grigoriev and Andrei Kobyakov, developed a theory of the modern economic crisis, which was reflected in the book “The Decline of the Dollar Empire and the End of Pax Americana,” co-authored with Kobyakov in 2003.

From the fall of 2002 to the spring of 2015, he was the president of LLC Expert Consulting Company Neokon. In 2015 he founded the Mikhail Khazin Foundation for Economic Research.

Khazin is a member of the expert council “Economics and Ethics” under the Patriarch of Moscow and All Rus'.

In 2016, he joined the Rodina political party and participated in the 2016 State Duma elections.

Economic theory

Describing his work in the civil service, Khazin says that he considered his main task to be “to understand how the economy really works and to eliminate problems in the path of economic growth” in Russia. In October 1997, the economic department sent a report to the president in which it predicted the development of the crisis in Russia in the summer of 1998 under the current financial and economic policy.

In his annually published forecasts, Khazin consistently develops the theme of the inevitable global economic crisis. Its main theses include the impossibility of continuing to stimulate final demand and expand markets, a decline in financial and economic indicators, a decrease in the level of division of labor and the collapse of the world economy into several currency zones.

Khazin, together with the head of the economic management department Oleg Vadimovich Grigoriev, after leaving public service, continued to study the causes of the default. In 2001, while studying the interindustry balance of the United States, Grigoriev put forward the concept of technological zones. By the end of the year, the main points of the theory had already been formulated and the scale of the expected crisis was visible. Khazin himself sees the main problem of the crisis as the loss of the middle class, which is the basis of the socio-political stability of society. Khazin believes that the main cause of the crisis is the exhaustion of final demand, aggravated by excessive stimulation of consumer demand and uncontrolled emission of the dollar.

After the crisis, according to Khazin, the US dollar will cease to be a global currency, but will become a regional one, other regional currencies will be: the euro and the yuan; it is also possible - Indian rupee, dinar, ruble and some currency of Latin American countries.

Khazin opposed Russia's entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO). He expressed his position at the V International Congress “Open Russia: Partnership for Modernization” on March 25, 2011.

Public performance

Many Russian media, including the RBC-TV channel, Expert and Itogi magazines, slon.ru, Izvestia and Komsomolskaya Pravda newspapers, and the Interfax information group, call Khazin a famous Russian economist. According to Professor Dmitry Ognev, Khazin’s performances combine lively language and accessibility to a wide audience.

Khazin actively opposes the ideology of neoliberalism and plays the role of the economic “Cassandra” of globalism and the world financial system. He consistently propagates the idea that the West and the American-centric world economic system are doomed for objective reasons by the finitude of capitalism.

In 2000, an article by Khazin and Grigoriev was published in the Expert magazine, in which they forecast an economic crisis in the United States, expected in the same year and leading to a drop in average consumption in the world by 1.5-3 times.

On September 10, 2001, at the Expert magazine forum, he warned about the high probability of major terrorist attacks against the United States (http://web.archive.org/web/20040814162047/http://www.expert.ru/tmp/konfold/my18900.htm )

In October 2008, Khazin described the long-term and large-scale nature of the global financial crisis; according to estimates arising from his theory, he predicted: “as a result, the US economy will decrease by at least a third. The world will fall by 20 percent. After this, the planet will face 10-12 years of severe depression. In the USA and Europe, I think many will live from hand to mouth. And the car will become a luxury item." Explaining these words in an interview with Pozner, Khazin talks about the deliberate sharpening of the topic, that he needed to challenge the then dominant “liberal” idea of the unshakable state of the US economy as a “City on a Hill”.

At the end of 2009, speaking to Ural businessmen, Khazin predicted that the current global economic system would inevitably collapse, the middle class would cease to exist, the WTO would collapse in 2-3 years, but thanks to this, Russia would have a chance to survive - because all countries will soon have to start from scratch.

In his forecast for 2012, Khazin predicted “the beginning of a powerful emission in the United States, which is almost impossible to avoid. More precisely, it is possible in the event of a tightening of monetary policy, but such a scenario is unlikely before the elections in the United States. So, as soon as the emission is launched (at the latest - in the early summer of 2012, so that it could have a positive impact on the result of the US presidential election, for Obama, of course), energy prices rise sharply and strongly - perhaps up to 150 $200 per barrel. At this moment, many representatives of the Russian elite and managers will have the feeling that happiness has returned, but this prosperity will not last very long. Then, after 3-5 months, a powerful inflationary wave will begin.”

In 2013, Khazin made a forecast about the development of the economy of Kazakhstan: “I think it will be possible to maintain 5-7% economic growth even against the backdrop of a global recession. And the world economy will “fall” the same way it “fell” in the United States during the Great Depression - by about 30-35%. The GDP of Japan and the EU countries will “fall” by approximately 50%. US GDP will “fall” by somewhere between 55% and 60%.

Khazin regularly appears as a presenter or guest expert in programs of the Russian News Service and Echo of Moscow radio stations. According to 2013 data, he heads the TOP-7 invited guests of the radio "Echo of Moscow", most often appearing in the program "Credit of Trust", and was also the most popular presenter of RSN with the program "Economy in Russian" (in the last issue of 2013 there was announced his departure from the program). Khazin regularly performs in the genre of “answering listener questions live” and gives comments on the topic of the day on RSN and Ekho Moskvy. Khazin was also a repeated guest of the “Vis in Peace” program on Voice of Russia radio.

In 2007, Khazin hosted the program “Five in Economics” on the Spas TV channel, which was the only weekly economic program on Russian television at that time. As part of this program, Khazin conducted an hour-long interview with Lyndon LaRouche, which was broadcast on May 18, 2007 and was widely discussed on the Internet. In 2011, RBC-TV launched a series of programs, hosted by Viktor Gerashchenko, Mikhail Khazin and Sergei Aleksashenko. The involvement of famous economists, according to RBC Holding, made it possible to expand the audience of the channel. Khazin hosted the program “Dialogue with Mikhail Khazin.” Khazin is also one of the experts on the television program “However” on Channel One.

Khazin’s articles are published by many newspapers and magazines, including Komsomolskaya Pravda and Expert. Until 2009, he was one of the authors of the “Profile” magazine, after 2009 - of the “However” magazine. Khazin repeatedly communicated with readers of the newspaper “Arguments and Facts”, gave forecasts and answered questions. Interviews with Khazin and quotes from his speeches were published in media outside Russia: Lithuania, Azerbaijan, Ukraine. Khazin is one of the authors of the information and analytical service “Russian People's Line”.

In his review of the book “The Decline of the Dollar Empire and the End of the Pax Americana,” Pavel Bykov notes the enormous amount of background information, systematically presented and deeply researched. He notes that the authors of the book present their vision of the history of the development of the US economy, which is accompanied by a forecast of further events with many scenarios.

At the beginning of 2009, Forbes magazine columnist Leonid Bershidsky believed that “Khazin’s economic forecasts, which mainstream economists laughed at, have recently tended to come true, people are beginning to listen not only to him, but also to those whom he advertises - carriers of even more unambiguous ethical judgments."

In 2009, Khazin’s article “In three years, famine will begin in Eastern Europe” was published in the newspaper “Special Letter”. Vladislav Inozemtsev, in a special interview, criticized Khazin’s article, noting that the article “has some truth and some very serious exaggerations.” Thus, Inozemtsev notes a number of incorrect statements by Khazin, in particular that after the war the United States bought more than it sold, and that there will be famine in Eastern Europe in three years. Khazin Inozemtsev attributes the last judgment to “a symbiosis of alarmism and incompetence”