As in Bahrain: is it possible to transfer “oil” money to the accounts of newborn Russians

All the best, as you know, children. And at the present time, nothing better than a bank account in our mercantile world can not be invented. So one of the factions of the State Duma went down the beaten track, announcing a project according to which petrodollar revenues should be sent not to the National Welfare Fund, as they are today, but to the savings accounts of newborn citizens. “MK” found out how real the implementation of such an idea is.

The essence of the project is to draw up a savings account for babies from the moment of birth. And every year, up to 18 years, to finance it at the expense of the country’s additional oil and gas revenues – today, as you know, they are accumulated in the National Wealth Fund. In addition, parents and relatives of the child can voluntarily and without restrictions deposit funds into these accounts.

With the implementation of their initiative, the authors of the idea propose not to delay, but to start right next year. According to their plan, in this way an 18-year-old young man will enter an independent adult life with a solid initial capital. If for some reason his money remains unclaimed for 5 years, then they will not burn out, they will be sent to the citizen’s pension account.

The idea, of course, is a good one, and the population would like it. Well, what do we need some abstract trillions in the National Welfare Fund, no matter how much we are convinced that this money is being accumulated in our own interests? But for the replenishment of the accounts of our children and grandchildren – even if not in trillions and billions, but in much more modest amounts – we will follow, as they say, both ways.

This is on the one hand. On the other hand, it is strange that such an idea came to the minds of parliamentarians today, when, due to tough economic sanctions and a price ceiling on energy exports, there are not so many of these super-profits in Russia. And the budget is in deep deficit. It is clear that under such conditions the project of the Duma faction (especially the faction of the opposition in some way) is doomed to failure in advance. However, if we ignore the political games in the parliament, how acceptable is the idea in itself for our country? We decided to ask a specialist in social issues about this.

– The idea of ​​our parliamentarians is not new, similar practices exist in some countries of the Middle East, – explains Alexander Safonov, professor at the Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation. – For example, in Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates.

– The practice is good, and the Russians would certainly like it …

– The National Wealth Fund was created for other purposes, which contradict the Duma initiative. It was formed in order to painlessly overcome the problem associated with a decrease in the number of able-bodied population in the country. The same structure in Norway was taken as a model.

And the transfer of funds to the accounts of newborns is a kind of maternity capital. In fact, he is a contribution to the child, only his mother uses it.

– But at least theoretically, the proposal to open a savings account for all newborns can be implemented in Russia?

– I doubt. According to the law, money can be transferred to such an account only in domestic currency, this is not discussed. With an unstable ruble exchange rate, it is not known what the purchasing power of savings will be in 18 years. There are other points as well. Oil prices are constantly changing, there are market problems … And how many years will we sit on the oil needle? After all, it’s time to jump off it. All this creates certain risks in opening savings accounts tied to oil windfalls, which may not exist.

In a word, we will not solve the problem of increasing the birth rate of the population in this way and will not achieve anything. We need at least 2-3 children per family. And people will never have enough money.

– What to do? Are there any other options?

– In my opinion, it is much easier to form a free infrastructure around the family. Which would allow families with different incomes to confidently look into the future.

– More?

– In particular, free education, including cultural, free meals in schools. Remove this financial burden from parents, they will know that the state takes care of every child in the family.

In Finland, children come to school with everything ready, regardless of the number of children in the family. Parents do not buy them textbooks, stationery or gadgets. Free sections and circles, trips to the cinema and theaters. A separate topic is the extension. Children do not just sit under the supervision of a teacher at a desk, waiting for their parents. They do their homework at school, that is, they develop. This is also very important and also costs some money, the state assumes the costs. And dads and moms can safely work in the modes that exist in their companies.

Higher education should also be free, today parents spend a lot of money on educating their children in universities, often forced to get into loans.

In a word, the birth of a child should mean the free provision of certain services, regardless of the income in the family. This is a simple and clear principle, meaning that the child will be protected. There should not be such a rule: in order for the state to start supporting, you need to become poor. Nobody wants to become poor.