Is life for average people getting better or worse in the FSU

[TwoBitBandit]

I had an interesting conversation with my Russian teacher yesterday.  (She's from Tver.)

She said that life for her parents and friends in Russia is becoming harder.... that life is getting harder... pensions are getting smaller.... jobs are getting harder to find... people are worried about what will happen in the next election when Putin steps down... the middle class is disappearing and re-polarizing into rich and poor... the government is becoming more corrupt...

I was pretty surprised by this, because things seem to picking up in Russia.  In Moscow, there are cranes everywhere, and they are multiplying by rabbits.  In Tver, I noticed a few new restaurants and cafes, and the government was redoing the lowest part of Trekhsvyatskaya Street with nice off-red paving stones, and the same to some of the walkways along the river.  However, my observations as a foreigner are probably shallow.  Life is always good in Russia if you show up with a stack of crisp pictures of Ben Franklin.

What do you guys think?

[Turboguy]

I have been going there for 10 years.   Life is getting better.  I think FSU people tend to complain a lot and tend to look at the glass as being half empty.

10 years ago $ 200.00 was a good wage in Moscow and often their pay arrived 6 months late.  Now average is more like $ 800.00.   10 years ago most people had little tv's with 3-4 channels.  Now they have big ones with 40-100 or more channels.  Most people struggled just to survive.   Now they struggle to have a more affluent life.   When you drove along the roads the berms were littered with people driving old ladas that were overheated and broken down.  Now I seldom see that.  You never even saw commercials on the tv's 10 years ago except for infomertials.   There were far more desperate people at the entrances of the undergrounds begging for enough to buy food.  You still see some, but a fraction of what you did.  The government was barely functioning and the Russian government was on the brink of bankrupcy.   Two years after my first visit all the banks collapsed.

The pensioners are still not happy but they have made a little progress.   Yes, there is still to much corruption and the income is divided among too few people.   My guess is in 5 years the FSU women market may be finished.   Why, not because there won't be beautiful ladies but because the economy will have improved enough there won't be a lot of reason to leave Russia.  My two cents worth.

[andrewfi]

TG is about right, but as in the US, there are winners and losers. The losers will, by and large, have died in a few years as these folk are mostly pensioners. They have suffered somewhat as their extensive non-cash benefits (free utilities, telephone, transport etc etc) have been monetised, ie, they get given money instead of freebies, but many insist that the money is not equal to the cost of buying these things.

MOSCOW. Oct 10 (Interfax) - Most Russians are
more or less content with their lives and their
number has grown in the past two years, sociologists say.

The results of a September poll of over 2,000
adults received by Interfax on Tuesday from the
Yury Levada center indicate that 76% of Russians
agree that "life is difficult but bearable" and
that "things are not that bad." However, 19% say
they can no longer tolerate their "miserable state."

The Levada center says that the number of those
satisfied has grown seven percentage points in
two years and the number of those disappointed has fallen by five points.

As for family living standards 56% say they are
average and 9% good or very good and 33% bad compared to 36% two years ago.

Asked about their state of mind 55% called it
normal and 8% excellent. Meanwhile 34% said they
felt tension and fear, however, this is seven
points less than in September 2004.

In two years the number of supporters of the
continuation of market-oriented reforms has grown
6% to 40%. At the same time 20% suggest stopping
them and 40% don't know which is better.

The number of Russians regarding the economic
situation in Russia as poor declined from 46% to 35%.

[Turboguy]

I have a feeling that those living in Moscow, St Petersburg and some other cities in that region are more likely to be satified and those living in the smaller cities in the Urals are less likely to be happy. 

[SANDRO43]

I have a feeling that those living in Moscow, St Petersburg and some other cities in that region are more likely to be satified and those living in the smaller cities in the Urals are less likely to be happy. 

Hard to say, judging from the number of their profiles on MOB sites (however, their percentages might be different), which could depend on their higher PC literacy.

[jinx13]

I have a good friend that lives in Volzhsky (Volgograd) she tells me there are many improvements, the city becomes more modern, lots of construction going on, but she also said "it doesn't change anything"

 I get the feeling there is a lot of change on the surface, but it's still a struggle in the smaller cities to make a good living. Corruption still rules in Russia, I don't see that changing anytime soon. Wages have gone up, but so has the cost of living, but like Turbo said, things have definitely improved in the past 10 years.

 I don't think the FSU women market will dry out in 5 years, you can improve the economy, but you can't change the weather!    Russian women would still be interested in Western men, especially the ones from California and Florida! Seriously though, there is more to improving your life situation than just the economy, there is still a slight shortage of men there, Western men are still more stable, and family oriented, less likely to cheat, and so on. I also think Russian women like us for the same reasons we like them too, it's interesting to meet with someone foreign, and we have cute accents too! 

[BradSTL]

2-bit--- what an interesting question...

My most frequent exposure to Russians is also thru Tver (and an  occassional Canadian Cowboy who posts here)... and your comment about nervousness over Putin's departure from office is also something I have heard.

It seems those living in Tver have it better than in other parts of Tverskaya oblast--- leave Tver and some goods get short in supply, here and there.

Consumer inflation seems to dog them, as it did Americans in the 1970's, very corrosive on pay increases.  Incredible that Russians still must bear thru pay-less paydays .

Oil money is helping the Russian economy, and the governments are spending on improvements, but the demands on the funds are broad-based, and the pensioners will want their share.

Its wait-and-see if the Russian economy can build momentum or not.   There seems to be so much of the communist legacy in FSU culture.

[jb]

Is life for average people getting better or worse in the FSU?  I suspect this depends entirely on whom you ask.  Progress on economic fronts has been made in the city centers of the nations, i.e., Moscow, St. Pete, Kiev, etc., but things in the hinterland are slow to catch up.  If you were to spend a week in Moscow, Kiev, or St Pete, then fly out to Vladivostok for the next week, I'll bet you would believe you had gone to a different country.

One of the biggest misconceptions I see men still have is; "average wages".  Well,,, the average wage for Moscow is not the same as the average wage for any given occupation elsewhere.   Moscow is the city I have the most familiarity with, so let me just say that wages are relatively high in Moscow.  With that said, remember that Russia is considerably behind the times with respect to women's pay for the same job if a man were hired to fill that position.  Women still typically work the same job and hours for a third less than a man doing the same thing.  It ain't fair, but that's life in Russia.

Moscow is also a big attractor for jobs, thus there is the usual influx of unskilled workers flocking to Moscow looking for work.  There are jobs going unfilled in Moscow, I'm sure, for lack of qualified applicants.  Meanwhile, the "average" wage looks less than what is actually happening amongst Muscovites who are better educated and better equipped for moving with the improving economy.  However, a highly educated and gifted starving artist in Moscow, is still probably starving.   In other words, a well qualified engineer has a better chance of earning a decent and living wage than does an arts major of the same age.  It's pretty much the same model we see here.

So when men say; "My g/f says she only makes $250 per month", one must look at that wage against the backdrop of an economy in flux.  Weighing location and cost of living carefully against sexual bias, living at home with parents vs footing the bill for a flat and supporting children, etc.  Some people are just going to do better than others by virture of what they have to offer on the local job market and what they are supporting with that wage.

[Darth Vader]

I find this strand interesting for several reasons.

First of all, "getting better" implies that something was wrong. 

Yes, I know.  Americans can see parts of the Russia and Ukraine as being 3rd world.

For the newbies, Eastern Europe is much more like Europe than the true 3rd world countries we see in Central and South America and Africa. 

But the important think is not our perception, but their perception.

My wife, and the girls I dated down the pathway to marrying her, did not see themselves as being "poor" or deprived in any way.  They were very proud of their country and city and people.  And they actually manage to dress better than Americans.  Perhaps they eat at home and save all that fast food money we Americans blow? 

Second, JB makes a good point with his argument "one must look at that wage against the backdrop of an economy..." 

Furthermore, the actual income or statistics cited (i.e. $250 per month) is incorrect.  It's a cash oriented society. FSU girls typically make 3 times more from hidden money that is tax free; FSU workers DON'T like to pay taxes!  Hmm..interesting concept :-)

[Turboguy]

As far as implies "something is wrong".   Something was wrong.  Communism  was what was wrong and throw in a crooked government and the mafia and that is what they are recovering from.

Personally I think you are over estimating the earnings ability of the gals there.

Yes, there is some off the books income but most often that is their first income.   I know my former fiancee made $ 200.00 a month with no income showing.   It was all cash income off the books.   She was quite happy with that income.   Now she makes $ 120 a month and as far as I know it is taxable income.   She is not happy with her income now.  The only thing she likes about it is that she makes so little she can take off time to travel with her new boyfriend from England without feeling guilty.

I agree they are proud of their country and for the most part just don't know better because they have not traveled enough to know what the rest of the world is like.   I am not saying they should not be proud of their country, just the earnings potential is not there yet.

Yes, most of the lower income gals have to spend their money wisely and they can get by on that income by living as a family, often in one room. 

[jb]

Second, JB makes a good point with his argument

jb was not making an argument, merely offering some perspective and a possible insight for newbies who are going to suffer some culture shock when they finally make their first trip to the Rodina.

Yes, I know.  Americans can see parts of the Russia and Ukraine as being 3rd world. <snip>
Eastern Europe is much more like Europe than the true 3rd world countries we see in Central and South America and Africa. 

Incidentally, Russia and the USSR were never part of the 3rd world, they were always the 2nd world.  Being 1st, 2nd, or 3rd world does not imply social or economic status, but rather political alignment.  Perhaps a small thing, but we all have our pet peeves and the missuse of this term is one of mine.

[BC]

I may be risking a flame with this, but subtract costs of the car or two in the driveway and credit debt (mostly spent on luxuries anyway) from the 'average' western take home pay and there might not be that much difference in real buying power with what's left over.

I'll take a beat up Lada and somewhat cramped (but paid for) apartment over a 'dealer financed' and ARM anyday...

It's all relative folks..

[jb]

Good point, BC.

[Turboguy]

I have to say I agree 100%.   I think one of the difficulties that AM men face is they bring over a gal who was making $ 200 or so a month and she sees an income of $ 5,000 a month and thinks she is the Countess of Monte Cristo.   On her $ 200 a month she managed to eat, have an apartment and get by just fine.   Many people here making good money can not say much more about thier life, sometimes they don't even do that well.

[Todd]

I think that one needs to take the individual members of the FSU one by one.  Because if its supplies of oil and gas, Russia has done quite well economically for the segments of the society who benefit from this boon either directly or indirectly.  However Belarus with an aging population and lacking oil and gas is doing worse as a result of higher prices.

[Darth Vader]

Incidentally, Russia and the USSR were never part of the 3rd world, they were always the 2nd world.  Being 1st, 2nd, or 3rd world does not imply social or economic status, but rather political alignment.  Perhaps a small thing, but we all have our pet peeves and the missuse of this term is one of mine.

The year now is 2006, not 1991.  This discussion is about the economic plight of the independent FSU countries in 2006--not what the USSR was classified as in the 20th century. 

The political meaning of 2nd world and 3rd war is not the same as it was in the 20th century.  Yes, in my university studies in 1980, I learned what 2nd world meant,  but that term is a historical one now.  So you may want to update your pet peeve, JB.

Here is what 3rd world frequently means today, in the 21st century, to the typical person:
From Wiki:
Today, however, the term is frequently used to denote nations with a low UN Human Development Index (HDI), independent of their political status (meaning that the PRC, Russia and Cuba, all of which were very strongly aligned during the Cold War, are often termed third world).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_world

What I wrote is true-- I said "Americans see parts of the Russia and Ukraine as being 3rd world."  You also got the spirit of my post wrong, since I was DEFENDING life there and not calling them 3rd world countries.

[jb]

Ohhhh, you're so smart,,,, but you shouldn't rely on a Wiki for information.  A Wiki is generated by non-experts voicing opinions and sometimes they don't quite get their facts straight.  Heck, we have a Wiki here and you can write whatever you want there,,, but that doesn't necessarily make it right.

For a better explanation I suggest you have a look at:
http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/third_world_countries.htm  for a more scholarly review of the term.

The term "Third World" may be antiquated, and I agree it is, but it still does not apply to nations of the former Soviet Union.

Just my opinion of course.

[Bruno]

Here is what 3rd world frequently means today, in the 21st century, to the typical person:
From Wiki:
Today, however, the term is frequently used to denote nations with a low UN Human Development Index (HDI), independent of their political status (meaning that the PRC, Russia and Cuba, all of which were very strongly aligned during the Cold War, are often termed third world).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_world

Ok, let see what say the rest of the wikipedia...

However, there is no objective definition of Third World or "Third World country" and the use of the term remains common. Some in academia see it as being out of date, colonialist, othering and inaccurate; its use has continued, however. In general, Third World countries are not as industrialized or technologically advanced as OECD countries, and therefore in academia, the more politically correct term to use is "developing nation".

And if you check the OECD countries ( in wikipedia ) , Russia are not part of them but :

By May 2007 (or some time after that), new members will join the OECD for the next time, most likely including the remaining EU members who are not yet OECD members (Cyprus, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Slovenia; plus Bulgaria and Romania acceding in 2007), Israel, Russia and Chile.

Some other source :

The only country with which the OECD has any kind of formal commitment for future membership is Russia, which signed a cooperation agreement in 1997 with the objective of eventual membership.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/story.cfm?c_id=3&ObjectID=10381445

So, let say that Russia is now from the 3rd world... but that they can be from the first world next year...

For these who wish read a long interesting paper ( English and French )
FIFTEEN YEARS OF ECONOMIC REFORM IN RUSSIA: WHAT HAS BEEN ACHIEVED? WHAT REMAINS TO BE DONE?
http://www.olis.oecd.org/olis/2005doc.nsf/43bb6130e5e86e5fc12569fa005d004c/2f17a06ff272d551c1257006002c6e9b/$FILE/JT00184107.PDF

I think that Russia have make a great job in only 15 years... compare by the long and slow economical grow from Europa... who have started after the WWII and have not yet reach the US level... give 15 years more to Russia and i think ( and hope ) that they will be a top country !

[Albert]

First, we can never attach any meaning to monthly wages in a particular country without also detailed info about the cost of living.  I don't have the numbers readily available, but there are undoubtedly sources on internet that allow you to price/cost adjust wages in any country to make them comparable to those in another country.

Second, there is a big cost of living difference in FSU between those who were 'given' ownership of their apartments after 1990-92; and those who were not given ownership of such apartments and now have to rent or purchase apts at market prices.

Third, I recently spent 3 weeks in Ukraine with a gal I have known for 3 years.  Without my asking, she volunteered that she had recently asked her parents, several aunts and uncles, and their friends if they were better off now than they were under communism.  Despite some complaints about current conditions, they all said the same thing.  They were better off now.  These are people from mid 50s to mid 70s in age who have ownership of apartments, free standing houses, or small farms.

[DKMM]

Well here is my perspective, and I did spend a lot of time there talking to locals about it.  It's almost inevitable to offend people on a discussion like this btw.

1st of all, America's standard of living has increased a ton since 1991 as well.  Unless you didn't invest properly or learn a useful skill, then you probably feel left out...

2nd, our standard of living is quite a bit higher than most of Europe as well, spend some time there if you don't believe me.  Maybe its because I'm from the a coast though, I know some areas of the US aren't as nice as others...still we have the same sized economy as the EU and 250 million less people, do the math.

The girls I talked to know its not bad now, probably because they make so much more than their parents.  But they also don't have confidence in the future there as much (the 18 yr old did).  The system there is corrupt.  The rich boys are all jerks, the nice ones are broke or have some sort of other problem.  That's what I heard, I have no idea if that part is true.

Bottom line, the market is still good for most of us.  I guess the takings are going to shrink as their economy improves but I'm happy for them.  I didn't really plan to play the rich guy card anyhow or I'd just do that here.

[Jet]

As far as implies "something is wrong".   Something was wrong.  Communism  was what was wrong and throw in a crooked government and the mafia and that is what they are recovering from.

In order to really answer the question, you have to set definative time parameters. My wife (and her family) would be quick to tell you they are better off now than they were through the mid '90's, but not better off than they were before 1991. Perhaps it's just nostalgia, but my wife's father and grandmother both think times were better under the Soviet Socialist government than they have been at any point since. I wasn't there in the old days so I can only relate what's been told to me, by those that lived through it 

[Darth Vader]

Perhaps it's just nostalgia, but my wife's father and grandmother both think times were better under the Soviet Socialist government than they have been at any point since.

My wife feels exactly the same way.  And she blames the US on destroying that way of life 

Guess she forgets the food lines they used to have.

I'm going to try to keep her away from that new Charlie Wilson movie, the one where he helps Osoma bin laden kill all the Russian boys in Afgan.

[andrewfi]

Guess she forgets the food lines they used to have.

Funny how folks remember the propaganda. Food was not in short supply until the very end of the Soviet Union and afterward. People queued not because there was a shortage of goods overall but because of specific shortages due to centralised planning that was simply not up to managing a complex economy.

For many, many people life WAS better during Soviet times than it has been ever since. It is not just about material goods but about lifestyle. That said, I am sure that those I know who miss the good old days moaned during Soviet times as well. f course we should not forget that people 30 and under have spent most of their lives under a post-Soviet system and one would have to be 40 or older to have spent any significant part of one's conscious life under the Soviet good times. So, most of the people you want to meet and marry know only the time of breakup and the disorder that followed.

[Turboguy]

Sure some people remember the propaganda.   Others have selective memories.  We may my remember the home run we hit that won the game but forget the 20 times we struck out and the time we missed the catchable ball that cost us the game. 

It is the same with Russia.  They tend to forget the ways life is better and complain about the things that are not. 

I think it is not propaganda to say:

Many people lived in small apartments often sharing a bathroom and/or kitchen with other apartments.

Your television had a plywood cabinet and you got 3 channels.

Few people had cars and the cars were not real reliable.

Fashion for women had much more resemblance to an army uniform than a runway model. 

Maybe they had money but the choice of goods was limited and the goods even to toilet paper was terrible.

It didn't matter much how good you were or how smart you were, it was much more important who you knew or what card you carried in your wallet.

Travel outside the USSR was at best close to impossible unless you were connected or lucky enough to be in the right profession.

The only way a gal had to advance was to use her body.

Life was more an existence than what we would consider a life.

On the other side of the coin, most people felt secure under the USSR.   They knew they would be taken care of pretty much no matter what.   Sorta like our local Steelworkers felt secure back in the 1970's before all the mills closed and the pensions turned out to be near worthless.

I am not sure how secure the 10 or 20 million who were killed under some of the socialest regimes felt.  Actually if you were not on your toes you could end up in Siberia or fertilizing the grass.  There was a fine line between being an important person and an important prisoner. 

Human rights took a back seat.   Things like female Olympic athletes were routinly given D & C's just as a precaution.

If you didn't like something you had best keep it to yourself.

[Bruno]

I think it is not propaganda to say:

Many people lived in small apartments often sharing a bathroom and/or kitchen with other apartments.

But almost nobody was living in street... my stepfather ( from my previous marriage ) was given a appartment by the factory where he was working... and after 6 year, it was his "propriety"...

Your television had a plywood cabinet and you got 3 channels.

The same not long time ago in Europa... I remember when i was young, 3 chanel, black and white TV... and i am birth in 1968...

Few people had cars and the cars were not real reliable.

Russia was not like USA... they was with good public transport... in these time, bus was free... railroad almost free...

Fashion for women had much more resemblance to an army uniform than a runway model. 

Don't care, same in army uniform, Russian women are attractive


Maybe they had money but the choice of goods was limited and the goods even to toilet paper was terrible.

Remember your young time... toilet at the end of garden and newspaper in place of toilet paper

It didn't matter much how good you were or how smart you were, it was much more important who you knew or what card you carried in your wallet.

School, college and university was free... same a child from poor family was able to reach a high level if he was with enough brain

Travel outside the USSR was at best close to impossible unless you were connected or lucky enough to be in the right profession.

Russian was able to travel to some country who was in relative good relation with Russia, by example : France, Cuba... yes, very limited... but USSR cover 11 time zone... western country and ocean, the rest... the world was simply cut in two part... with very few travel from oe part to the other...

The only way a gal had to advance was to use her body.

The more untrue thing i have read... Russian was pioneer in the true feminism... right to work, right to education, etc... of course, nothing to compare with the feminazi from USA...

Life was more an existence than what we would consider a life.

Personal meaning... so, no counter argument...

I am not sure how secure the 10 or 20 million who were killed under some of the socialest regimes felt.  Actually if you were not on your toes you could end up in Siberia or fertilizing the grass.  There was a fine line between being an important person and an important prisoner. 

real problem...no freedom

When you compare soviet time with actual US situation, of course, all seem bad... but in these time, Soviet have "invent" good social measure... mainly, it is corruption and bad organisation who have empty the gold treasure... and lead to the collapse... a closed economie cannot generate enough money during a long time for support a socialist system... Actually, Europe is more socialist that FSU country... but we use the positive result of the capitalism for finance the social measure...

So, USSR was not so bad... but so qsystem cannot survive for ever in a closed country... maybe some old Russian complain about low pension ( retirement money ) but if the USSR have not fall and open to the capitalism, the gouverment was certainly without money for pay pension... Remember at the end of the USSR, some teacher was pay with several hundred kilo of salt since state was without money...