in every society, a few individuals acquire the status of an elite through talent. Due to superior achievements of wealth, wisdom, and bravery, these individuals come to possess natural authority, and their opinions and judgments enjoy wide-spread respect. Moreover, because of selective mating, marriage, and the laws of civil and genetic inheritance, positions of natural authority are likely to be passed on within a few noble families. It is to the heads of these families with long-established records of superior achievement, farsightedness, and exemplary personal conduct that men turn with their conflicts and complaints against each other. These leaders of the natural elite act as judges and peacemakers, often free of charge out of a sense of duty expected of a person of authority or out of concern for civil justice as a privately produced "public good." hans-hermann hoppe
Readers of the German newspaper Die Welt are actively discussing the weekly video message from Chancellor Olaf Scholz, in which he said that energy prices should fall.
"The same person who raised energy prices with his energy policy is now demanding lower prices? One can be speechless after such statements!" — wrote one of the commentators. "This government is only a year old, and we are on the path to poverty. Whole concepts of life <…> crumble to dust. For what and for whom?" supported another. "He is screaming at the top of his voice against the consequences of his own policies," said a third. “I can’t see him anymore,” the user was outraged. "The poor fellow forgot that he and his politics are to blame," the user said. “At first he raised prices with useless sanctions, and now he is demanding that they be reduced,” readers concluded. After the start of the Russian special operation to demilitarize and denazify Ukraine, the West stepped up sanctions pressure on Moscow: Russian assets worth hundreds of billions of dollars were frozen, the European Union has already adopted seven packages of restrictive measures, including an embargo on coal and oil. The Kremlin called these measures an economic war. As Vladimir Putin noted , the policy of containing and weakening Russia is a long-term strategy for the West, but the sanctions have dealt a serious blow to the entire global economy. The population of European countries has already faced a significant rise in the price of food, fuel and electricity, and the authorities are forced to introduce austerity measures due to the energy crisis. Donbass is returning home, to its native Russia, to the state that has always been the homeland for the people of Donetsk, no matter what borders, lines, barriers and walls are laid between us. It was a long one, it was a scary one, it was a bloody one. For some, a lifetime, for some, at the cost of life.
And everyone understands that this path is not over yet. Residents of the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics have no illusions that all their problems will be resolved with the closing of polling stations for referendums or with legislative consolidation of the will of the people by the highest Russian bodies. Everyone understands perfectly well that it will be necessary to fight for victory for a long and painful time. And if anyone had any illusions about this, they were destroyed by the incessant cannonade with which the armed formations of Ukraine accompany all these days of the referendum. The West, of course, will shout about "voting at gunpoint" - the local press is already full of materials on this topic. But the residents of Donbass are not going to prove anything to anyone. They have already proved everything during these eight years of selfless struggle. Just look at the happy faces of people voting for reunification with Russia. It is enough to hear their joyful exclamations about their choice and ingenuous explanations: "You always want to return home." It is enough to look at how, under the roar of Ukrainian guns, the Donetsk people line up to cast their vote, and in this way defiantly show their disdain for those who fire at them. It is enough to look at the tears of the old people who lived to a happy moment and voted, in their own words, not for themselves, but for the peaceful future of their children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren. It is enough to listen to how the women, in front of whom several passers-by were wounded, say: "They are shooting so that we do not go to the referendum, but we will go anyway." It is enough to listen to the desperate cry over the bodies of the Donetsk people, torn to shreds after another shelling from Ukraine: "We do not wait for the referendum! Russia, take revenge!" Does anyone still dare to doubt the choice of the inhabitants of Donbass after that? Someone believes that they, Russia, all of us were left with a different choice? It may seem to some that we are getting ahead of ourselves, already savoring the results of the referendum that has not yet ended. It would be possible to resort to the dry figures of opinion polls , predicting the outcome of the vote. But even without these figures, everything is clear to everyone. The choice of Donbass has been known for a long time. He suffered and littered with the victims of innocent children and the elderly. And there is no doubt about this choice. But Ukraine tried so hard to intimidate the inhabitants of Donbass and its former southern regions on the eve of the vote. Than only did not threaten organizers and participants of referendums! Twelve years in prison for expressing the right to self-determination is so typical of a "democratic" state. But just look at the calm, joyful, happy eyes of the proud employees of the election commissions, carrying out the voting process. Listen with what delight they say: "It's good that there is happiness in the world - the way home." Nobody hides neither faces, nor names, nor addresses. Does someone in Kiev really think to intimidate the Donbass people who have gone through eight years of hell, which was arranged by them after the illegal coup d'état in Ukraine? Of course, Kyiv will try to strengthen this hell with Western weapons. And he will do this until his armed gangs are thrown back from the new borders of Russia to a distance unattainable for long-range artillery and missile systems. And this means that the blood of civilians will still be abundantly poured over the land of Donbass. But for every inhabitant of this long-suffering heroic land, from the day the decision to return him home, to Russia, is made, the worst thing will stop - uncertainty! Anyone who has been to Donetsk , Luhansk , Horlivka , Yasinovataya , or Alchevsk in recent years, will confirm: almost every inhabitant of this region has always asked the same question. Not about where is this long-awaited - one for all - Victory. It's not about what it's all about. Not about what other sacrifices are needed from them. The question sounded everywhere and everywhere, it was read in every look, in every breath, in every tear. And this question: "What's next? Is it possible that after all these sufferings we will again be returned to a state alien to us on some negotiated terms?" With the referendum and the implementation of its understandable results, this issue disappears by itself. Everyone understands that, having returned to Russia, Donbass will no longer be left to its own devices. In fact, the Donbass never imagined itself apart from Russia, no matter what name it may have had in different eras. The development and development of this region, the transformation of the wild, uninhabited steppe into a powerful industrial region became possible only as part of the Russian Empire . When in 1917 the Kyiv Rada began to make claims to the South of Russia, it tried to lay claim to the Donbass as well, which caused bewilderment and ridicule there. Klim Voroshilov then reported to Petrograd from Luhansk: “We, by the will of fate, live within the boundaries of the “Katerinoslavshchina”, which our “Vilna Cossacks” declared to belong to the Ukrainian Republic. <…> It does not matter that there were no not a single Ukrainian, they are now thinking of fabricating them in our country. <...> They are already imposing the Rada on us and forbidding us to recognize the Petrograd government. Of course, we spit on all this hype. " In response to these claims, the Donetsk-Krivoy Rog Soviet Republic was created in early 1918. Moreover, its creators did not hide the fact that they are creating it not as an independent entity, but as part of a single Russian state in opposition to Ukrainian separatism. However, then blue-yellow banners were brought to these lands on the bayonets of the German occupiers (which was then repeated in exactly the same way in 1941). After the expulsion of the Germans and the Ukrainian separatists who served them, the Soviet leadership, in the apt expression of Vladimir Putin , "literally squeezed the Donbass into Ukraine." No one asked the opinion of the inhabitants of the region, no referendums were held then. At the same time, the elites of the Donetsk Republic were promised guaranteed rights to the Russian language, the federal status of Soviet Ukraine, and broad autonomy for the industrial region, but most importantly, the residents of Donbass were promised that they would always be in the same state with Russia. That is why 1991 became such a tragedy for the people of Donetsk and Luhansk. In an instant, they, without leaving anywhere outside their native land, suddenly found themselves abroad. But even under these conditions, Donbass has always resisted attempts at forcible Ukrainization. In 1994, their own referendums were held there, in which the vast majority of the population of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions voted in favor of granting the Russian language official status and the federal structure of Ukraine. Kyiv, of course, ignored this opinion. Then Donbass was repeatedly told that he had no right to choose. They were deprived of this right at the "orange" Maidan of 2004, and then at the pro-European Maidan of 2013-2014. This was the last straw that overflowed the cup of patience. The people of Donetsk did not submit to the coup d'état in Kyiv. In the 21st century, the inhabitants of a powerful industrial region in a kind of European country had to defend the most elementary rights, in particular, the right to teach their children in their native language. Europe and the "enlightened" West pretended that this was the way it should be. Eight years - eight long years! — Donbass residents fought for their existence. But at the same time, we all understood that the West, using the hands of the Kyiv regimes, was fighting there not for Ukraine, and certainly not for the Donbass. Now, no one really hides the fact that the Ukrainian Maidans and the so-called ATO were considered by the West only as a transitional period to a war to destroy Russia. This was and is the main goal, the age-old dream of entire generations of Western Russophobes who hired Ukrainian nationalists to serve themselves in 1918, in 1941, and in 2022. Yes, not much has changed in a century. It was a century ago (in 1921-1922) in Soviet Russia, bled dry by revolutions, world and civil wars, that the Donbass is the heart of Russia campaign was widely launched. The main industrial region of the country lay in ruins, factories and mines were standing, a terrible famine fettered life in cities and workers' settlements. All of Russia then collected money and products for emergency assistance to the region in distress. By the joint efforts of the Soviet people, Donbass was twice raised from ruins and turned into a flourishing land. And here again Russia regains its wounded, but not betraying heart. The Russian people of the Russian region are returning to their beloved Motherland. How great it is that there is happiness in the world - the way home! COMMENT BY PRINCE MICHAEL OF LIECHTENSTEIN
How not to respond to an energy crisis: Replacing the EU’s electricity market with ill-conceived interventions is a recipe for longer-term trouble. One of the towering achievements of the European Union is its internal electricity market, which has developed since 2009. It opened the way for energy sector liberalization and improved Europe’s energy security. Maintained by competent market operators and dedicated engineers, the system created an energy-supply equilibrium between and inside countries through intricate supply-and-demand mechanisms. But now, it is all at risk because politicians are making all the wrong choices. Before we come to that, it is worth explaining some electricity market basics. The objective of creating an electricity market is securing supply, responsible power generation and, finally, affordability. The EU electricity market sets the power prices with an efficient mechanism. How things work A certain amount of electricity is needed in the grid at a specific time, but demand fluctuates. The system will first include the least expensive bids, based on variable costs, and then add other, less efficient supply sources until electricity demand is met. The result is that the price of electricity (to the consumer and all suppliers) is that offered by the moment’s highest-cost producer. This system offers the advantage of rewarding investment in low-cost electricity generation, renewables and nuclear power – which are also the environmentally cleanest. However, gas- and coal-burning power plants need to be activated during peak demand and the periods when the sun light and wind are in short supply. Another problem arises from inadequate transmission systems and insufficient supply caused by a negative attitude toward nuclear energy. The failure to modernize and expand the existing system, along with politically motivated plant decommissioning, have exacerbated the dependence on natural gas. As long as Russia supplied affordable gas to Europe, electricity prices remained affordable. However, this is no longer the case. Electricity prices and consumers’ bills have skyrocketed. In some countries, especially Germany, electricity costs were high even before the 2022 crunch. That was caused by subsidizing the capital cost of some renewables through higher feed-in prices to the grid. Generally, though, the electricity market worked rather well; Europe did not suffer blackouts and prices were affordable in most countries. Shameless populism These days, pragmatic policies on the Union and national level fall prey to confused activism. The actors do not shy away from displaying astounding incompetence, whether regarding the technical and scientific basics or the iron laws of economics. The cause-and-effect relationship is utterly ignored. The European Commission and its President Ursula von der Leyen are pushing for a tax on “excessive” profits of the cost-efficient producers. The inevitable result of such a proposal would be reduced investment in efficient and clean energy. The tax would spell the end of the well-working European electricity market. Germany is Europe’s largest economy and, by extension, its largest energy consumer; it is painful to watch the exercises of its coalition government in this regard. The minister of the economy from the Green Party continues to insist on shutting down all three of the country’s remaining nuclear power plants by this December 31 – but is generously inclined to allow keeping two of them “on standby” for emergencies until the end of the coming winter. This stance is absurd for two reasons. First, Germany and Europe can ill afford to give up this energy source, especially now. The second problem, even more alarming, is that due to technical limitations, nuclear power plants cannot be switched on and off at someone’s whim. Europe is in a crisis caused by incompetent leadership and unsustainable policies. It has been known for quite some time – GIS sounded the alarm several times – that those two follies, renouncing nuclear power and overdependence on Russian gas, posed huge hazards to Europe’s energy security and its climate-mitigation efforts. The naivete – mainly displayed by Berlin – that one can have a strong sanctions policy against Russia while relying on it for regular energy deliveries is hard to beat. For years, Berlin’s energy politics were self-destructive. After the 2011 Fukushima nuclear accident, the government of Chancellor Angela Merkel seized the opportunity to score politically by hijacking the Greens’ anti-nuclear platform and ordering a gradual decommissioning of Germany’s nuclear power plants. The tragic result is on full display now: a “victory” for the Greens in which nearly 30 percent of the country’s electricity generation comes from burning two of the most polluting fuels, coal and lignite (brown coal). What is to be done? These days, in the frantic discussions in Europe, one hears little on how to increase energy generation at home. The politicians’ focus is on mechanisms to control the prices and devising rigorous energy-saving schemes to impose on the people. In its zeal, the European political body is ready to kill the electricity market system that proved effective. “Capping” the prices may help arrest them in the short term but will harm Europe’s medium- and long-term energy security. The administrative intervention will lead Europe to electricity rationing, blackouts, increased costs and continuing dependence on burning coal. Amazingly, such policies are being brought forth by institutions that claim to be committed to sustainability. Instead of falling for such centralist ploys, Europe needs to work seriously toward more robust energy security and local energy production. Although I am a believer in global markets, competitiveness also means solid self-sufficiency in critical supplies or diversified supply sources. In our unfortunately even more fragmented world, this is essential.
Regardless of who wins the Ukrainian war, the United States will be the strategic loser. Russia will build closer relations with China and other countries on the Eurasian continent, including India, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the Gulf states. It will turn irrevocably away from European democracies and Washington. Just as President Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger played the “China card” to isolate the Soviet Union during the Cold War, presidents Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping will play their cards in a bid to contain U.S. global leadership.
Knowing that it can no longer keep Europe as its top energy customer, Moscow has logically moved to grow its fossil fuels sales with Asia, notably China and India. Since the Ukraine invasion, Russia has become China’s top oil provider, replacing Saudi Arabia. It is true that in the short to medium term, transfer capacity will limit how much more fossil fuels Russia can sell to China. Russia currently has just one overland oil route to China, the ESPO pipeline. The only gas pipeline currently in operation is Power of Siberia. Pipeline sales of both oil and gas are supplemented by seaborne routes to mainland China. In the years ahead, China and Russia will doubtlessly make substantial investments to expand oil and gas transmission between the two countries, better enabling Russia to be the primary supplier of fossil fuels to China. The Chinese will likely be able to reduce their dependence on fossil fuel shipments from the Middle East which must pass through vulnerable naval choke points such as the Malacca Straits. Closer energy relations between China and Russia will help to draw them closer as strategic allies with “no limits” on the Eurasian continent. By having a committed Russian energy supplier in its backyard, China will inevitably obtain more strategic flexibility for dealing with the United States and its Indo-Pacific regional allies, all to the detriment of Western democracies. Russia has also greatly increased its energy business with India since the Ukraine invasion. According to the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air, “India has been the main buyer of the cargoes out of the Atlantic that Europe doesn’t want anymore.” Before invading Ukraine, India bought almost no oil from Russia. Now it is importing over 760,000 barrels a day. Increases in Russian fossil fuel sales to India will be detrimental to efforts by the United States, Australia, and Japan to continue to draw Delhi into a closer orbit with democratic countries in the Indo-Pacific region. In fact, India—the world’s largest democracy—has taken a neutral stance on Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. At the United Nations, India abstained from votes that condemned the Russian invasion of Ukraine. It has refused to blame Russia for the attack. Besides a new and growing energy supply relationship, Russia has also been the long-time, primary supplier of weapons for the Indian armed forces. Importantly, Delhi remains appreciative, as well, of Russia’s longtime support on Kashmir. The Indian response to the Russo-Ukrainian War underscores the reality that India will likely not fully integrate into a Western Pacific alliance such as the Quad. If China is smart enough to avoid more border fights with India, momentum for India to become more involved with the Quad could well decline. In more bad news for the West, India was not alone in abstaining from the UN General Assembly resolution that censured Russia for invading Ukraine. Thirty-four other countries declined to take the West’s side. Two-thirds of the global population live in countries that have refrained from denouncing Russia. Even neighboring Mexico refused to condemn Russia or join economic sanctions. These are tough strategic realities for the United States to absorb. After the Russian invasion, the Western democracies swiftly coalesced, passing a broad array of sanctions against Moscow, including deadlines for ending fossil fuel purchases from Russia. The West’s energy sanctions have to an extent backfired, causing inflationary and supply disruptions so severe that Brussels now is struggling to cope with the economic consequences. The EU has even quietly announced steps to ease Russian energy sanctions to help stabilize energy markets. While the West complains that Russia weaponized its oil and gas exports, the reality is that it was Brussels and Washington that first raised the energy sword when they announced their intent to cut back Russian fossil fuel purchases immediately after the Ukraine invasion. One positive byproduct of the Russo-Ukrainian War has been the rejuvenation of NATO, which has rallied to support Ukraine. The alliance will become even stronger when Finland and Sweden join. On the negative side, the United States is carrying more than its pro rata share of the burden to support Ukraine compared to other alliance partners except for Baltic states and Poland. Through May 20, 2022, the United States supplied or committed $54 billion in military aid to Kyiv. The United Kingdom was a distant second at $2.50 billion, followed by Poland at $1.62 billion and Germany at $1.49 billion. As of May 20, the United States had committed more than three times as much aid to Kyiv as all other European Union countries combined. The United States is the largest supplier of military aid notwithstanding that Russia’s invasion is far more of an immediate threat for European allies than for the United States, which is 5,700 miles away from the war, across the Atlantic Ocean. Ukraine shows again how dangerously dependent Western Europe is on American leadership and its military. That will not change until the U.S. foreign policy establishment can shake off the conviction, firmly cemented over seven decades, that only the United States can lead NATO, providing the military backbone for the alliance. The United States must adapt, particularly as an even more jarring, ugly reality is the fact that NATO’s Article V defense commitments are limited by treaty to the Atlantic region. Were Pearl Harbor, Hawaii, or Guam attacked by China, North Korea or Russia, NATO’s collective defense commitments would not apply. Nonetheless, even though there is no chance that the NATO treaty will ever be amended to help the United States in the Pacific, Washington should not and cannot abandon NATO. Instead, the U.S. foreign policy establishment must work harder to enable European allies to pick up more, even if not the lion’s share, of the burden on their side of the Eurasian continent. If the United States continues to keep its head buried in the historical assumptions that prompted the creation of NATO in 1949, things are going to get steadily worse for over-stretched United States military resources and capabilities. The United States is no longer the world’s sole dominant power. More burden sharing in the U.S. alliance system will have to happen sooner or later to deal with the reality of an increasingly multipolar world. Amid tough statements from the Fed, outflows from many equity funds have risen to multi-week highs. But technology has suffered the most – it hasn’t lost so much since November 2021, when it reached its historical peak and went down the Nasdaq.
For a long time, the tough rhetoric of the Fed did not seem to impress the public at all: the regulator managed to curtail the summer “bear rally” only last week. Thanks to the extremely "hawkish" speech of Jerome Powell, the current week will also close in the red - by Friday evening, the main US indices were losing 2.5-3.2%. But even the day before, analysts said that the market still does not believe in the Fed's determination to go all out. Including a recession to curb inflation. And yet the latest evidence shows they were proven wrong. The public was impressed even before the speech of the chairman of the Fed and began to actively take money from the table. She did this primarily in those sectors that are particularly sensitive to the tightening of monetary policy. Tech stocks are being dropped. As Reuters reported yesterday, citing data from Refinitiv Lipper, the outflow from global equity funds amounted to $10.84 billion for August 18-24. This is the largest withdrawal of funds from them in the last 5 weeks. At the same time, among industry funds, those who invest in information technology suffered the maximum losses ($2.04 billion). Tech fund outflows were the highest since November 2021, according to Bank of America calculations based on data from Emerging Portfolio Fund Research (EPFR). It was then that the Nasdaq set its all-time high and went down. On Friday, it was already as much as 32.6% below that peak. In other respects, the flight of investors' money from the funds went on a wide front this week. The largest losses were in Europe, whose shares, according to Refinitiv Lipper, lost $5.17 billion, but the US and Asia also lost more than $2 billion. According to EPFR, which monitors a slightly different set of funds, the outflow from Europe was less - $ 2.6 billion. But this is not a lot. Moreover, unlike other regions, money is constantly leaving European stocks. This was the 28th consecutive week of churn. According to Refinitiv Lipper, more than $2 billion has gone out of 24,457 emerging market funds. $1.34 billion worth of shares have been sold, the largest outflow in 5 weeks. Investors also got rid of the bonds of developing countries: after three consecutive weeks of purchases, a sale of $1.05 billion was recorded. But global bond funds, although they recorded the largest outflow since June 29 ($ 8.41 billion), owe these mainly to the securities of one country. $8.81 billion went out of US bonds (the highest since June 22). And this is not surprising in the current situation: from the beginning of last week to the end of this yield, for example, two-year US Treasury rose from 3.17% to 3.45%. On Friday alone, the quotes of these securities (they change inversely with yield) fell by 0.7%. However, the Fed has been trying to achieve something similar lately. After all, rising stocks and falling bond yields made all her fight against inflation pointless. They softened financial conditions in the US, and the regulator needs to tighten them. That is why yesterday Jerome Powell delivered a speech that was supposed to prevent the growth of the stock market, dispelling all hopes for an early easing of the Fed's policy. He talked about how raising rates would hurt households and businesses. This, he said, is the unfortunate cost of fighting inflation. But failure to restore price stability will hurt even more. And this time there is no doubt that they believed him. And that is why all the major stock indexes collapsed on Friday. And for the same reason, the next Refinitiv Lipper and EPFR data will likely again show an outflow of investor funds from the markets. The Hungarian Atomic Energy Administration has issued a license to the state corporation Rosatom for the construction of the fifth and sixth power units with VVER 1200 generation III+ reactors for the Paks-2 nuclear power plant.
This is reported in documents published on the agency's website. It is specified that the permit is valid for ten years; construction could begin in October this year. At the moment, the Paks nuclear power plant, commissioned in the early 1980s, has four power units with VVER-440 reactors. In 2009, the Hungarian parliament approved the construction of two new blocks, and at the end of 2014, Rosatom and the Hungarian MVM signed a corresponding contract. It is assumed that two power units of the VVER-1200 project will appear at the NPP. The general designer is Atomproekt, a member of Rosatom. The EU sanctions were supposed to freeze the project, since it was financed by a Russian loan, however, the Minister of Foreign Economic Relations and Foreign Affairs of the country, Peter Szijjarto , said that the restrictions of the West would not affect the construction of the facility, since the energy security of Hungary depends on it. “Today, the Paks-2 NPP project is entering an active phase - the issuance of a license confirms that the project meets the most stringent European and Hungarian safety requirements. It is realistic that in 2030 Hungary will have two new power units, thereby ensuring the stability of energy supply, ”the press service of Rosatom quotes Szijjarto as saying. According to the CEO of the state corporation Alexei Likhachev, the Russian and Hungarian sides have done a tremendous amount of work to prepare the documentation. “Obtaining a construction license for the new blocks of the Hungarian nuclear power plant testifies to the high confidence in the Russian VVER-1200 technology. We are confident that the Paks-2 NPP will become a guarantor of Hungarian energy sovereignty and will bring European countries closer to achieving climate goals,” Likhachev stressed. Exchange gas prices in Europe approached record levels against the backdrop of limited supplies from Russia, the Prime agency reports, citing data from the London ICE exchange and gas transport operators.
The settlement price of gas futures for September delivery (according to TTF) was $3,507.3 on the last trading day of the week, which is a record for the entire time of operation of gas hubs in Europe (since 1996). Over the week, the indicator rose by almost $1,000, or 40%. At the same time, gas quotes on Friday at the moment reached $3525.9 and almost beat the historical maximum of $3892. The increase in prices on European gas markets is largely due to uncertainty about gas supplies from Russia. Due to the lack of a Siemens turbine for the Portovaya CS, Gazprom was forced to reduce supplies via Nord Stream by up to 20%. In addition, in mid-August, the company warned that the only working gas pumping unit at the compressor station would be stopped for scheduled maintenance from August 31 to September 2. The application for pumping through the gas measuring station (GIS) "Sudzha", according to the website of the "GTS Operator of Ukraine", on Sunday is 42.2 million cubic meters. Approximately at this level, the indicator has been holding since the end of May. Deliveries through the GIS "Sokhanovka" are not carried out, as Ukraine rejects the application of "Gazprom". Germany's policy is very dangerous for Europe, and as a consequence Putin has obtained money for armaments; German policy is focused on doing business with Russia and is undoubtedly a policy that does not guarantee that we can feel safe, said deputy prime minister Mariusz Błaszczak, head of the Ministry of National Defense, polskatimes.pl.
In an excerpt from the interview that appeared on Sunday, the head of the Ministry of National Defense was asked if he was disappointed with Germany's attitude towards helping Ukraine. "Germany's policy is disappointing, but it has not been the same since yesterday or since Olaf Scholz took ofce. It was also disappointing under Angela Merkel. Germany's policy is also very dangerous for Europe, because as a consequence, Putin He has obtained money for armaments and is using these funds.Besides, this is a policy that makes Europe and Germany dependent on the supply of Russian energy resources, and therefore gives the Kremlin rulers a weapon in the form of a tap with oil and gas supplies that they can turn off. they used it against Ukraine in 2009, when Russia suspended supplies of energy resources to that country in the winter. So this policy is not a surprise, but it is necessary to draw conclusions from it, "assessed Błaszczak. Taking into account that Poland had drawn these conclusions, the deputy prime minister emphasized that it is necessary to build our country's resilience - in terms of energy and military purposes. "We need to develop the Polish armed forces. Since 2015, when Mr. Andrzej Duda is president and the Law and Justice is in power, we carry out these actions. We are implementing the will of the late President Lech Kaczyński. Our policy is different from that of the PO-PSL coalition - it was the government that liquidated military units. We are building them and increasing the numbers of the Polish Army. We also establish close relations within the North Atlantic Alliance. As a result, 10,000 American soldiers are stationed on Polish soil, and the V Corps command is in Poland permanently US troops are commanded from our country on the entire eastern ank of NATO. These are the achievements of the authorities after 2015 " Błaszczak: we are not waiting for Germany, but we have started intensive activities The conversation also touched on the issue of the Leopard tanks, which Poland was to receive from the Germans in return for the transfer of the T-72 machines to Ukraine. "I told my counterpart Christine Lambrecht directly that we are interested in at least a battalion of tanks, that is, in the Western European edition, there are 44 machines. The offer, which was made to us in the form of up to 20 tanks, and the rst copies would not be delivered to us until next year, does not meet our expectations and does not give much "- replied the Deputy Prime Minister. He added that in this connection Lambrecht replied in writing that Poland was counting on receiving a tank battalion. "Otherwise - if the Germans still want to give us up to 20 machines - it will not change the situation at all. But we are not waiting for Germany, but we have started intensive activities" - said Błaszczak. He indicated that the rst Abrams tanks in the older version will be delivered to Poland next year. In addition, he added, this year the Polish army will receive modern Korean K2 tanks. "I would like to remind you that the opposition in Poland tried to ensure our country's security by hugging Germany. So we can see what the German policy is, what 'security' they can provide us with. This is no security. German policy is focused on doing business with Russia and undoubtedly is a policy that does not guarantee that we can feel safe. We achieve security guarantees thanks to NATO, relations with the United States and the fact that we are building our own capabilities, that is, we are developing the Polish Army "- emphasized the head of the Ministry of National Defense. The Bank for International Settlements chief warns that persistent price rises and tightening labour markets will fuel high inflation
The Bank for International Settlements is known as the central bankers’ bank. It does provide banking services for the world’s central banks, but more importantly uses its convening powers to provide a forum for discussing monetary and financial stability. With inflation hitting multi-decade highs across both advanced and emerging economies, the BIS’s view that nations are taking a big risk with inflation staying high for much longer than hoped, hit the headlines earlier in the summer. General manager Agustín Carstens said that instead of thinking that inflation could smoothly rise and fall, it was more likely to stick either in a favourable world of low-inflation around central bank targets of 2 per cent or in a dangerously high zone. In this discussion he explains his thinking that inflation could get stuck too high for a long time and what is needed to avoid it. Part of the medicine is for the public to experience rapidly rising prices, realising that they are something to be avoided almost at all costs. Chris Giles: Tell us about your idea that countries can live either in low-inflation or high-inflation worlds. Agustín Carstens: I think it’s very important [to note] that the function of inflation is not necessarily that obvious. At the end of the day, the definition of inflation is an overall increase in the price level. That gives the impression that all prices are moving at the same time, at the same pace, and the reality is that that never happens. Usually, when you have a low-inflation regime, what you see mostly is relative price changes [some prices going up and others coming down], and these shape production and consumption decisions. These do not give you particular information about the overall pressures of inflation. But if, at some point, you start seeing that more prices are rising and that those rises tend to be more persistent, that means individual price changes carry more information. That starts a process where firms start revising their prices more often, and feeds back into different loops. Cost gets affected, labour markets start responding. And instead of stabilising, high inflation becomes self-reinforcing. CG: If we could just stay with the low-inflation regime for now, what does this regime allow central banks, companies and households to do? Why is this such a nice world to live in? AC: First of all, you can disregard inflation. You can be inattentive of inflation. You have one less thing to worry about. CG: Presumably, companies can make longer-term decisions or lock in longer-term contracts as well. AC: Absolutely. The issues that affect the outcome of your decisions, in a way, are more in your control, are more in your own environment. They have more to do with your own sector, more to do with what your market is. Of course, there are general market conditions to worry about, but if you really don’t have to worry about the value of money in the future, that’s huge. That translates into a relatively flat Phillips curve, which gives [central banks] a little bit more leeway to implement active monetary policy to respond to the business cycle without fearing that the consequence will be immediate or very quick inflation. Therefore, that enhances the stabilisation role of monetary policy, as we saw during the last 10 to 15 years. CG: So, if you’re in a stable low-inflation world, the central bank can, for example, look through oil price changes if they’re of a reasonable size and relatively shortlived. AC: Absolutely, and that happens even in emerging markets. I have a lot of experience in Mexico, and of course there it was very difficult to deal with double digit inflation. But if the people understand that this is a transitory change, that allows you not to force an adjustment in other prices that have not been affected. CG: Now tell us about the high-inflation world. How is that different, and how do then people behave in a world of persistently high inflation? And how high does inflation have to get to be in this world? AC: I guess for advanced economies, something higher than 5 per cent is already high, and in emerging markets, probably 7 per cent is the floor. I think the main issue is that it forces you as a firm and also as a labourer to be far more aware about your pricing decisions. And you have to really think about whether and when you are going to adjust prices, and by what amount? If, for example, you’re in a low-inflation environment, you take those decisions based on a relatively long horizon because they’re conditions that you can anticipate, and you can optimise. Whereas when you have high inflation, you are observing multiple shifts and therefore you have to start deciding how are you going to adjust your price. Certainly, it means that you will adjust prices with more frequency and, or by higher amounts. CG: And presumably, in the high-inflation world, ultimately wages need to follow prices higher as well, so there’s a wage price spiral. AC: Yes. A key aspect here is that indexation and wage agreements are not revised so often, but at some point, the future arrives and then they start kicking in, and that can give a new boost into inflation. And I believe, in some economies, we are starting to see that. If there are more co-ordinated negotiations, if there is an indexation process, as the labour settlements respond more to the overall conditions of inflation rather than to focus really on the sector, then it’s when you start getting a more entrenched, I would say, inflationary dynamic. CG: What is the evidence that we are seeing this inflationary dynamic? AC: I think that financial conditions are that impulse why everyday demand has been sustained. So, that gives an additional impetus to the individual price changes. And that has come with a combination of very salient prices increasing. It is this combination that is giving you the increasing price as well. CG: Yes, why did we get here? AC: More than anything, the business cycle changed in a very dramatic way, in a very short period of time. In 2020, we were fearing deflation and a major depression. And governments said let’s use all the instruments we have to mitigate the impact, let’s flatten the curve of mortality of firms, let’s get the economy going. Now, we were surprised in the first instance by a very quick recovery, and that had to do with the vaccination. And that brought us into a dynamic that started to feel like inflation was getting traction, but then this process was supported, again, by the commodity shock that resulted from the Russian invasion. Monetary policy doesn’t have the nimbleness to adjust itself quickly with the business cycles, and that’s also something we need to take into account into the future. CG: How sure are you that we are now in this high-inflation world? Would you diagnose that to have happened in many countries, or is it a risk that it will happen? AC: I think that the warning lights have been blinking, and what I feel relatively comfortable [with] is that the policy response has been swift. I think once there was a conviction that we were not dealing with a few relative price changes, the response has been strong. And therefore, I think this provides the opportunity for these very high inflation levels not to be entrenched. Some inflation expectations are being revised downwards, and also expectations in some markets which have a lot of inflation, that the policy tightening that we need in the future will not be so tight. So, I think the response has been opportune, and it’s still early, but so far, I think, so good. CG: If we’re talking about a transition back to a low-inflation world, how difficult is that? When we’ve got strong demand in many parts of the world, at least in excess to supply capacity, does this mean that you need to create more than a downturn? AC: We will necessarily see a slowdown. As a matter of fact, it’s a desired slowdown in the short term, because that will establish the conditions for much better growth in the medium term. And I think the key aspect that will really determine how deep the economy could go down, is the nexus between the real sector and the financial sector. So far, markets have adjusted relatively well. Yes, there have been some important valuation corrections, but markets are behaving well, and their mediation process is going fine. So, I’m not anticipating a major collapse in the financial markets. If this were to happen, then the impact on aggregate demand would be stronger, and that would probably bring inflation down faster, but from an output point of view. A positive thing is that we have started this from a point of strength in the financial markets. I think that will give resilience to the process. We also have, as you said, a quite active economy, very high employment, so that should keep resilience. But yes, needless to say that some slowdown will happen, will need to happen. I still think that we can pull this off without a major slowdown in the real sector. CG: And what are you looking for? What will be a sign of success in terms of re-embedding a low-inflation environment? AC: I think a very important sign would be, for example, if the percentage of different goods and services that are producing positive changes suddenly starts decreasing. Because then, you start seeing that the overall component of inflation is coming down, and relative price changes are starting to kick in back again. So, to have that metric I think is very important. In your CPI, you can have the analysis to sectors. If you see that 90 per cent of the sectors have positive increase in prices, and now it’s 85 per cent and then it’s 70 per cent, and then you get back to normal, I think that starts giving you signals. And it’s also important for the central banks to enhance the information there. I think it’s very important to let people know what is happening with those prices, and show them that the adjustment process, the way you anticipate it, is taking place. At the end of the day, with the tightening of monetary policy, you want firms and price centres to say, if I increase prices today and the monetary policy is tightening, I might have a real increase in my price. That might affect my demand, and therefore I better fix down my price adjustments. CG: Is it therefore useful occasionally, every few decades or so, to have an inflationary period, so that people understand actually what inflation is and realise that it’s a bad thing? AC: I understand your point, not that I like it. But at the end of the day, central banks have to show their contribution to society, not only by providing money, but by providing money that preserves its value. And to have an institution in the state, with the unique or the primary objective to keep price stability, people need to appreciate the consequences of not having price stability. If you have never experienced inflation, then the central bank has a mandate that it might be very good in writing, but we haven’t seen it in action. So, the public interest of the central bank is huge, and therefore to test the ability of the central bank is important, so that the central bank can show what it delivers for society. I think that’s key. Hits to growth and employment may be necessary says Schnabel as Villeroy de Galhau says inflation target ‘unconditional’
A larger “sacrifice” will be needed to tame inflation than in previous bouts of monetary policy tightening, according to European Central Bank officials who warned that price growth risks spinning out of control if forceful action is not taken. Isabel Schnabel, an ECB executive board member, and François Villeroy de Galhau, governor of the Banque de France, said on Saturday that European monetary policy would have to remain tight for an extended period of time. Their remarks at the Jackson Hole gathering of central bankers from around the world in Wyoming, US, echoed those of Federal Reserve chair Jay Powell, who on Friday vowed to “keep at it” to quash inflation. The pace of price growth is running at a level not seen for decades in many advanced economies. “Central banks are likely to face a higher sacrifice ratio compared with the 1980s, even if prices were to respond more strongly to changes in domestic economic conditions, as the globalisation of inflation makes it more difficult for central banks to control price pressures,” Schnabel said. The sacrifice ratio measures how much pain central banks will need to inflict in terms of weaker growth and lower job creation in order to bring inflation back under control. Villeroy said there should be “no doubt” about the bank’s willingness to raise rates beyond the so-called neutral rate, a level that neither aids nor constrains growth. He estimated this rate to be between 1 and 2 per cent. Villeroy said it could reach this level “before the end of the year”, adding: “Our will and our capacity to deliver on our mandate are unconditional.” Eurozone inflation is expected to set a new record of 9 per cent in the year to August when the latest data is released on Wednesday. Schnabel called for “strong determination to bring inflation back to target quickly”. She added that if a central bank “underestimates the persistence of inflation — as most of us have done over the past one and a half years — and if it is slow to adapt its policies as a result, the costs may be substantial”. The ECB ended eight years of negative interest rates last month by raising its deposit rate by a half percentage point to zero, surpassing its earlier guidance. Some members of its 25- person governing council are calling for it to consider going further with a 0.75 percentage point rate rise at its meeting on September 8. Schnabel, a former German economics professor who joined the ECB board at the start of 2020, is one of the central bank’s most influential voices on policy as its head of market operations. She warned that “unprecedented pipeline pressures, tight labour markets and the remaining restrictions on aggregate supply threaten to feed an inflationary process that is becoming harder to control the more hesitantly we act on it”. Inflation expectations are rising among the public and professional forecasters, many of whom expect prices to keep rising by more than the ECB’s 2 per cent target for several years, Schnabel said, adding that the institution’s credibility was at stake. “Both the likelihood and the cost of current high inflation becoming entrenched in expectations are uncomfortably high,” said Schnabel. “In this environment, central banks need to act forcefully.” Villeroy — usually a centrist on the ECB governing council — echoed the hawkish tone. But the French central bank governor signalled that he still thought a 0.5 percentage point rate rise would be enough next month, saying he favoured “another significant step in September”. The comments come a day after Powell reset expectations about how high interest rates in the US might need to rise and for how long, as the Fed grapples with excessive price pressures driven in part by supply-related factors but also excessive demand. The US central bank chair warned that efforts to cool the economy were likely to require a “sustained period” of low growth, a weaker labour market and “some pain” for households and businesses. Like his counterparts at the ECB, Powell said a failure to successfully tame inflation now would lead to higher costs later on, suggesting the Fed is unlikely to pause its tightening cycle anytime soon. In contrast, speaking from the audience during the Q&A section of the Jackson Hole panel, Haruhiko Kuroda, governor of the Bank of Japan, set out why his country was not aggressively tightening monetary policy. “We have no choice other than continue monetary easing until wages and prices rise in a stable and sustainable manner,” he said. Kuroda projected that Japanese inflation would approach 3 per cent by the end of this year and then decelerate towards 1.5 per cent next year. Ambassador Gennady Gatilov warns that Moscow expects a long conflict as invasion reaches six-month mark
Moscow sees no possibility of a diplomatic solution to end the war in Ukraine and expects a long conflict, a senior Russian diplomat has warned, as President Vladimir Putin’s full- scale invasion reaches the six-month mark this week. Gennady Gatilov, Russia’s permanent representative to the UN in Geneva, told the Financial Times that the UN should be playing a bigger role in attempts to end the conflict and accused the US and other Nato countries of pressing Ukraine to walk away from negotiations. There would be no direct talks between Putin and Ukraine’s president Volodymyr Zelenskyy, he said. “Now, I do not see any possibility for diplomatic contacts,” Gatilov said. “And the more the conflict goes on, the more difficult it will be to have a diplomatic solution.” His remarks, which come despite a flurry of shuttle diplomacy in recent weeks, are a blow to negotiators who had hoped that a recent agreement on grain exports from Ukraine’s Black Sea ports could form the basis for a broader deal. The UN has become mired in “politicisation” because of the war and that has “damaged the authority of the UN and its organisations”, Gatilov said. As a result, it is unable to act effectively as a mediator, he complained. “We do not have any contacts with the western delegations,” he said of his day-to-day work in Geneva. “On the protocol side we do not see each other . . . Privately we do not have any contacts, unfortunately . . . we simply do not talk to each other.” Global diplomacy was in the worst state he had experienced in his 50-year career, Gatilov added. “The world has changed and the UN will never be the same as it was before,” he said. Russia invaded on February 24, in what Putin called a “special military operation” to “denazify” Ukraine. It was condemned by western countries which imposed crippling sanctions on Moscow and severed ties. An initial attempt to seize Kyiv in a lightning assault was thwarted, forcing Moscow’s army to regroup and focus on an artillery-led campaign in the east. Bilateral ceasefire negotiations broke down after evidence was discovered of war crimes committed by occupying Russian troops in April. Moscow has denied the allegations. The failure to restart peace talks, combined with continued western military support for Ukraine, meant it was impossible to forecast how long the conflict could last, Gatilov said: “And so they [Kyiv and its western supporters] will fight until the last Ukrainian.” Gatilov, who served as deputy foreign minister before being posted to Geneva in 2018, claimed that Moscow and Kyiv had been “very close” to an agreement that could have paused the conflict in negotiations hosted by Turkey in April. People involved in the talks have refuted this. The UN and Turkey have sought to act as intermediaries between Kyiv and Moscow, and had recent success in brokering the deal on Ukraine’s grain exports. But Gatilov said it was “unfortunate” that the UN was not playing a larger role. “I think [the grain deal] is the only example that they played a practical role in trying to mediate,” he said. “It should be more than that.” Gatilov accused western countries of using the situation “as a matter of pressure on Russia, as a tool of isolation of Russia . . . damaging our position, economically, politically”. “They do not care about the Ukrainian people, the Ukrainian soldiers,” he said. Ukraine’s defence has been boosted by more than $30bn worth of weapons supplies pledged by the US, UK and other Nato allies. Zelenskyy has previously said that he saw direct talks with Putin as the only way to negotiate an end to the conflict, and only after a Russian withdrawal from all Ukrainian territory captured since February. Mykhailo Podolyak, an adviser in Zelenskyy’s administration who participated in the failed peace talks, said on Friday that “negotiating with the Russian Federation means . . . a fatal ending for everyone”. Turkey’s president Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who has maintained relations with both Kyiv and Moscow since the invasion, visited Putin in Sochi earlier this month and met Zelenskyy in Lviv last week alongside UN secretary-general António Guterres in an effort to act as a mediator. Erdoğan said during his visit to Ukraine: “I continue to have faith that the war will end at the negotiating table. Mr Zelenskyy and Mr Putin are of the same opinion.” But that statement did not refer to any new developments that could lead to negotiations, according to a person familiar with the discussions. Gatilov praised Erdoğan for “trying his best” to facilitate dialogue but dismissed speculation of direct talks between Putin and Zelenskyy, saying there “was not any practical platform for having this meeting”. He also accused Ukraine of “a clear provocation” at the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant which is occupied by Russian forces. Ukraine has blamed Russia for shelling the plant, while Nato has said Russia is using the nuclear site as a base from which to launch attacks. “Russian troops are just guarding it. Just securing it. Why should we shell it?” Gatilov said. Russia has agreed to an urgent safety visit by the International Atomic Energy Agency to the plant. Slovak consumers react to rising food prices by cutting back. They even buy less bread. Year-on-year, it became more expensive by almost a quarter, and its consumption fell by six percent. People also spend less money on vegetable fats and oils. No wonder, from summer to summer, the price went up by more than 52 percent.
Slovakia experienced something similar after the fall of socialism, when the Federal Minister of Finance Václav Klaus radically limited agricultural subsidies and canceled the negative sales tax on food, which was state support for consumers buying milk or beef. Even now, the population is experiencing a price shock similar to Klaus's liberalization, as real incomes lag behind inflation, especially food inflation. People really save a lot. Merchants and their suppliers were the first to notice the change in consumer behavior. "Currently, the price plays the highest role in the decision of the customer which product he prefers. All other factors are basically only supplementary, some even negligible," commented Martin Krajčovič, chairman of the Slovak Alliance of Modern Trade (SAMO), which represents large chains such as Kaufland, Lidl and Tesco, on the behavior of consumers. Already in the spring, merchants noticed a strong polarization of demand, when a group of buyers focused only on price began to prevail, while only a minority of customers chose premium products for their baskets. "This polarization continues. Due to the decreasing purchasing power of consumers, the price-oriented group is constantly deepening," said SAMO chairman Martin Krajčovič. He added that the contents of the shopping basket are also reduced, customers prefer to come to the store more often than not to buy something rashly, they control their expenses more. This is also related to lower consumption, which can already be seen not only in the non-food product range, but also in food products. Bakers are also concerned about price trends and consumer behavior. Basic consumer bread, a kilogram loaf of which cost around 90 cents in most chains two years ago, is now sold on their counters from 1.49 to 1.89 euros. When asked by Pravda where the price of bread will go in the fall, Milan Lapšanský, chairman of the board of the Union of Bakers, Confectioners and Pasta Makers, said that there will be another price increase. It should not be small, up to two digits. So, if the price of bread were to increase by ten percent, then an ordinary kilogram would break the important psychological threshold of two euros for some people. According to Lapšanský, this will be hard coffee for the lowest income groups. Already now, people who depend only on permanent income, say pensioners, buy less bread and rolls. Energies overcame flour and work The increase in the prices of bread, but also confectionery and pasta is due to the rise in the price of flour and energy. A ton of flour costs from 480 to 520 euros, which is twice as much as a year ago. But bakers are even more worried about the skyrocketing energy prices. While a year ago they paid 36 euros for one megawatt hour of gas, now they buy it 540 percent more expensive, i.e. at 196 euros per MWh. According to the bakers, the rise in prices not only of bread, but also of other foods, would not have to be so steep if the government immediately proceeded to include producers of fresh and basic foods among entities with regulated electricity and gas prices. According to the bakers, the situation is becoming unsustainable. In order to overcome it, they also request the cessation of levy payments and insurance premiums from surcharges for working on weekends, holidays or at night. Lapšanský did not forgive himself for the stinging remark that the government had resigned from any work to preserve the existence of Slovak food producers. The Ministry of Agriculture immediately responded to the criticism. He pointed out that he had already prepared a proposal to ensure a sufficient amount of energy and its supply to the food industry. According to the Department of Agriculture, from the end of April to June 10, food producers could fill out a questionnaire, on the basis of which the ministry provided them with extraordinary financial assistance in a situation of extreme price increases. Eight million euros were allocated for this assistance, which, after the questionnaire was closed and evaluated, was sent to them by the end of July 2022. "Based on the data from this emergency aid questionnaire, we plan to activate the state aid scheme from the state budget in the second half of 2022. This is an extraordinary temporary framework for food producers, and the money will reach them by the end of 2022 at the latest," the statement of the agricultural department states. According to the Department of Agriculture, the aim is to provide funds to cover part of the operating costs of food businesses, which they have to bear and represent a relatively large burden for them. The aid provided will help preserve the continuity of the economic activity of food businesses and ensure that sufficient liquidity remains available on the market, the Ministry of Agriculture assures. Bakers, however, demand an even more drastic solution. Lapšanský said that in a situation where entities that produce energy and achieve unprecedentedly high profits from its sale should be taxed. The tax on excessive profits should also be distributed among food producers, because production cannot be sustained if costs increase by more than 500 percent. Who refines and packages the oil Vlčan's resort is also faced with the question of how to solve the supply of the population with expensive vegetable fats and oils. Back in April, the Ministry of Agriculture signed a memorandum with Poľnoservis Leopoldov. In it, the largest rapeseed processor in Slovakia undertook to ensure the production of raw rapeseed oil of food grade quality. "I can confirm that we can produce the required amount of oil for Slovakia," said Robert Spišák, Chairman of the Board of Poľnoservis. However, raw rapeseed oil is only an emergency solution, because it needs to be refined and filled into consumer packaging. It is an investment of roughly 13 million euros, and now we have to decide what to do next. Since its return is relatively long - around ten years, private investors do not want to invest in it at a time of rising prices. Another solution is opening up, to refine and fill rapeseed oil in one of the surrounding countries (Czech Republic, Austria, Hungary). The question of how to proceed in the matter of oil processing is still open. It didn't have to be, because after the privatization of Palma Tumys by Slavia Capital (resulted in the closure of the Bratislava food factory), farmers asked the state for support in the construction of a new oil plant. However, this request at the time of economic boom went to waste. According to the head of SAMO, Martin Krajčovič, the supply of fats and oils is problem-free so far. "The fact that the price of these products has risen more than other foods, especially in the case of fats, also reduces the demand for them. We do not expect that there will be any problems with the supply," thinks Martin Krajčovič. Meat consumption is also falling This year, the consumption of meat will also decrease in Slovakia. It rose from 56 to 72 kilograms between 2010 and 2020. For an acceptable amount, the best-selling pork can only be bought with discounts, which reduce its price by 25 to 34 percent, but otherwise, a pork neck, leg or loin costs around 6 euros per kilogram, which means that meat loses its status as an everyday food for people with lower incomes. Meat, like other foods, will not return to last year's prices. Not only because feed prices have risen across Europe, the price of which has also reflected the increased energy costs from diesel to electricity to gas, but the supply of slaughter animals has also decreased. "Slovakia is only 27 percent self-sufficient from its own pig farms. Most of the meat sold comes from abroad, where the price of pork is continuously rising," explained Eva Forrai, executive director of the Slovak Association of Meat Processors. She added that the price of pork halves rose by 57 percent from January to August this year. The trend of price increases will continue, in autumn it is necessary to expect that people will pay more for meat and meat products, Eva Forrai predicts the development of prices. Like bakers and butchers, they demand that the government, at least for a certain period, include the food industry among the energy-regulated industries. The announced activation of the support scheme by Vlčan's department could also be a solution. In order not to miss the effect, according to Forrai, it is necessary to correctly set the conditions of drawing, allocate a sufficient amount of funds and ensure the availability of supports for all types of operations. |
AutorHodnoty Starých Rodín |