cia historical review program release in full
forward momentum achieved in thes in improving
consumer welfare, slowed8 According to Soviet data, real
income per capita (which includes wages, farm incceie-lr.-kind, and transfer
payments) rose slightly moreercentercent
in contrastercent annually. The slowdown in
per capita
the growth ofas even moreercentercent, respectively, compared to an average rateercent. Some letdown8 in the rate of growth of consumptloc VCJ SAticipateJUmby trie regime, occasioned by the fiftieth anniversary Jubilee year celebration, to give theetter shake, however, the continued decline9 was not expected and was In part explainedoor agricultural year. esult, the upward trend in Improving the quality of the Soviet diet was reversed; per capita consumption of some quality foods such as moat was lower9 than
in the past several years, consumers continued to saltof their excess purchasing power in savings banks. For the fiftha row, saving* deposits rose by aboutercent The6 billion rubles was equivalent to ipnmxlrately tvo-chirds ofin personal Income. At the endotal deposits amounted
-/-
to more than one-fifth of that year's personal incoao, compared with one-seventh
The excess purchasing power was also reflected in rising
prices in89 in themarket, the only
organized free market in the USS3. Prices for perishable foods in Moscow collective farm markets rose sharply during the second halfS, roaehingercent above those of the second half The upward price spiral continued9 the average level for the year wasercent above thatrends In Consumption A. The
3- The acceleration in growth of per capita consumption of goods and services achievedas not sustained. 9 growth in per capita consumption had declined to approximately half7 rate (see table below) and was the lowest posted under the Brezhnev-Xosygin regime. In addition to the overall slowdown, the rates of improvement among the various categories of consumption differed considerably in both years. he durable goods, persona! services, and health and education components grew at more rapid rates thanhe food and soft goods components grew markedly slower. rowth of all categories declined to rates below those achieved
U. Per capita consumption of food, which comprises over half of persona! consumption in the OSSB, increased byercentoreover,esult of the boost in farm supplies of meat and milk7 andhe quality of the diet improved. Tho situation changed
USSR: Average Annual Rates of Growth in Per Cagita Consumption by Major
Percent
Total consumption per capita
Food
Soft goods Durables
Personal services
Health and education cervices
4.0
2.8
5
5.9
9 ft
5.4
4.6
4.6
5-7
2-7
Seefnd notes to tables on consumption. The base year for the calculations shown in each column is the year before the stated initial year of thehe average annual rate of increases computed by relating consumption in the0 to base
sharplyood consumption grew by less than one percent. ecline in supplies of meat, fresh fruit, and vegetables forced consumers to substitute less desirable starchy foods In ordor to maintain the daily level of calorie intake. Indeed, annual per capita consumption of meat and vegetables9ercent5 levels. Although the average cRlorie intake of the population has fluctuated narrowly over the pastCOayhere hadteady decline in the share of calories provided by basic foods such as potatoes and grain products, along with an Increase in the share of calories provided by quality foods such as meat and milk The share of calories derived frees starchy foods, the so-called starchy staple ratio, dropped fromercent0 toercent However, it increased toercent
% Although the rate of growth of per capita consumption of soft goods
has been falling off since? peak, it is still far above the rate
registered during the first half of the decadea period noted for consumer
resistence to the low quality and lack of variety of clothing, fabrics, and
shoes in the market. Steady growth of domestic production, emphasis on
quality improvement, and continuing Importsrimarily readymade clothing
and shoesfrom both Eastern and Western Europe have resulted in substantially
higher rates of increase in recent years. In contrast, after nearly two
docadea of rapid growth, the rate of growth of per capita production and
eniee of durable goods dropped sharply The declinehe
fall-off in/growth of production of some goods, particularly refrigerators
and washing BachineSjand sales of others, particularly television sets.
Although households have rapidly increased tholr holdings of durablo goods,
available stocks remain low,ent-up decani! for many types of durables
still exists. Long delays In retail availability are common; for example,
orders taken3pecific brand of refrigerator were being filled
On the other hand, the large differential between the rates of
increase in output of television setspercent8nd
retail salesno increase8uggest that the backlog of consumer
demand for at least cne major durable has been filled (at the relatively
high and fixed level of retail prices).*
mprovement in housing conditions continued to be slow. The quantity
of housing constructed in89 was below that
Nevertheless, for the two-year periodhole, the stock of available
1
bousing Increasedercent,light Increase in per capita living space. The current per capita availability ofquare feet is still far short of the official standard Soviet authorities have setinimum for health andquare feet per capita). Nevertheless, the current level does represent an increase in space per capita ofercent0 and has been accompanied by an appreciable improvement in individual privacyfewer people per room and more apartments with private kitchens and baths.
'
* Bit price reductions onodels in recent years have not Increased their sales significantly.
7. 8onsumers also reaped some benefits from the accelerated efforts in the past several years to modernize the grossly inadequate domestic trade network, and to construct public buildings and municipal facilities to meet the needs of growing urbanization. Personal servicesrew. percent, respectively. Even more welcome to consumers was the substantial expansion in the supply of state-provided "everyday" services (ranging free barber shops and public baths to shoe and clothing repair and cleaning). The backlog of needs in all of these long-neglected areas of personal and communal services is still enormous, however. BL US-Soviet Cccnarlson
8. 8 Soviet consumption per capita was aboutercent of the US level (seep slightly fromercent Per capita consumption of food in the USSB was aboutercent of that in the united States; per capita consumption of soft goods, aboutercent; durable goods,ercent; health and education services, aboutercent; and other, services,ercent (see Daily food consumption in the USSR8 is compared with that In the United Statesn Table 3- Stocks of selected home appliances in the USSR are compared with those in the United States in Table k. As shown in Tablehe Soviet Union has made rapid advances in health and education services. The supply of these services, in terms of available medical and teaching personnel, has exceeded levels in the United States since thes.
Trends in tfoney income
9. otal money income of the Soviet population increased
by nearlyillion rubles to an annual level of raoroillion
disposable;
rubles (see er capita basis, the increase of/incomes amounted toercent8ercent Tho great disparity in the growth rates in the two years resulted largely from an unusually large increase In the average earnings of wage and salary workersercent, compared to lessercent The main reason for the sharp rise in money wages8 was the implementation of wage reforms, which raised wage rates substantiallyillion machine tool operators, increased the general minimum wage byercent (from UO tond reintroduced longevity payments for workers In remote regions.
growth rates of collective farm wage payments8 and ineven more disparate than were the growth rates of earnings of wageworkers. After rising byercentotalmoney wages rose by lossorcent Duringfarmers enjoyed the benefitseries of earnings reformsharvests. The culmination of these reforms8 and aagricultural year9 largely accounts for the more pedestrianearnings of collective farmers
most Western countries living standards are conventionally measured
1
by the total income of the population adjusted for prlco changes. In the Soviet Union, however, central planning and price controls have prevented the producing aectors of the economy from responding fully to the higher
incomes by Increasingantity of goods and services or raising prices.esult, in recent years lncoxe gains have outpaced gains made in levels of living. The rapid rise In personal savings held in state banks is an indication of the gap beto/een incomes and consumption. 5 total personal savings have more than doubled (see The average size account8 equalled more than four months wages of the average worker andor each additionalubles of income nearly 7 rubles were set aside in savings. At tho same time, long queues still exist for many goods and services indicating that savings areesult of shortages than of satiation of demand.
Notes to Tables or. Consumer Welfare A. Consumption
The Internationa! comparisons shown in the followingsubject to both statistics! and conceptual limitations. is believed that the quantitative results are fairly reliable. to non-quantitative factors, however, the comparisonsbiased in favor of the USSR. Although every effort has beenmatch goods of identical quality in the two countries,has not always been possible. In housing and healthparticular, the allowances for differences in quality are Furthermore, there are two characteristicDC aeasured. but thev
are undoubtedly significant: first, the observable lack of balance between supplies of particular kinds of goods and the demand for them that continues to be endemic; and second, the lack of variety and diversity and the resulting lack of choice on the part of consumers.
Differences between the figures presented inelow, and those given in US Congress, Joint Economic Committee, "Soviet Economic, are due to the following:
(1) There are five component indexes (food, soft goods, durables, persona! services, and health and education services) instead Of three.
(2) The USSR Indexes of consumption have been changed as
follows:
The base year weights5 have been further rovised.
The volume indexes of these components have undergone further revision.
(3) Further adjustments have been made in5 ruble/dollar price ratios. Basedeview of new evidence concerning prices and relative qualities of goods and services, some downward adjustment was carried out in the ruble/dollar ratios for food, and some upwardin the price ratios for health and education services.
85dlerI" were used to convert each of the components of consumption from rubles to dollars or from dollars to rubles; in the tables58 dollar price ratios were employed. Because of the divergency in price trends of the major components the calculated shares will differ somewhat.
(5) The slight differences in US consumption indexes resultthe use8 price weights instead6 relative pricesthe several components included in each index. Inthe differences are caused by Honey
The USSR doas not publish estimates of personal disposable money income. However, with the publication, beginningf
monthly
averagefor wage and salary workers end, beginning in
f the total wage bill for collective farmers estimates for the components coveringf the total disposable income can now be derived directly from official Soviet statistics. In constructing estimates for the remaining components, it is necessary to use Soviet data appearingumber of different sources and in some cases, independent estimates.
USSR and United States: Total Consumption Per
1/ )
.
States)
consumption per capitaercent or United States V
Composite index of five major categories
food,
goods,
health
education services.
Based on data of the US Department of Commerce. Tn addition, estimate; of current public expenditures on health and education arc included. Data to permit calculation of US consumption9 are not published until
3/ The datum5 is derived in the same way asomparison of Consumption in the USSR and the United States,owever, some adjustment in5 ruble/dollar price ratios changer. USSR consumption per capitaercent of USSR slightly (seo note above) . Data for the regaining years are obtained by moving the datum5 by the indexes presented in Tableelow.
Tibia 2
USSR and United States: Ccnsunptlcn Per Capita, by Major Component
products
ussroo)
United States )
93
99
100
101
301
103
106
107
LO?
109
ercent of US 2/
goods
USSR)
United States)
9*
96
100
LOt
107
11s
117
La
126
189
ercent of US 2/
goodt
USSR)
United States
(18
100
106
u*
lSk
LSI
1C1
as percent of US 2/
services USSR) United States)
91
97
LOO
L03
:o7
mi
117
180
L2h
m
as percent of US
and education services USSR) United States
Bl
93
100
107
LIT
122
130
lso
lWi
rcent of us 2/
Indexes for the USSR were obtained using the basic procedures presented in US Congress, Joint EconosUc Cossaittee, Mew Directions In the Soviet Economy.hereafter referred to as Hew Directions). Indexes for the United States are based on data froa the US
f Cceeserco.
2/ See footnoteable 1,
USSR and United States: Availability of Food Products for Human Consumption, by Major Food Group,
Selected
Calories per capita per day
1/
States
s Percent
2/
cl 2/
products, potatoes, and pulses
and oils, including butter
and fish
and milk products, excluding butter
fruit, eggs, and other food3
T7 Consumption of food in the USSR was estimated as described in Hew Directions,nd was converted to calorie values with factors from UN Food and Agriculture Organization, Food Composition Tables for international Use, The average daily intakealories is based on Kommunist, No.nd other Soviet sources- It is, of course, an arbitrary parameter vithin which consumption of individual products is distributed according to production end utilization data. The difference between the total calories derived from foods for which reasonably reliable production and utilization are available and aboutercent of the estimated daily per capita intake is estimated to have been made up by grain products- Theercent is estimated to have been derived from vegetables, fruit, eggs, and other foods-2/ US Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Agricultural Sconomic Report,, Food Consumption, Prices, Expenditures,.
S Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Supplement to Agricultural Economic Report,, Food Consumption, Prices, Expenditures, Washington,.
USSR and United States: Household Stocks of Selected Durables, Selected
Units per thousand persons
i/
g/
as Percon
d
j*/
machines
5/
eachinns
sets
-
1/ US Congress, Joint Economic Committee, Soviet Economic,
2/ Tsentral'noye statistlcheskoye upravleniye, Marodnoyo khozyaystvo8 godu,hereafter referred to8
or for other years in the sories of official Soviet statistical yearbo/ Based on data for production, imports, exports, and estimated retirements.
hj Based on data from US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of the Unitedof rcfrigorators and washingbe understated because they are based on numbers of households with one
(or more). Hence,ousehold has more than one refrigerator. It is tabulated as "one/ lectric machines only.
6/ - 6. The nuriber of radios is adjusted to include radio-television combination sets;
the number of television sets includes color sets.utomobil- Facts andetroit, Michigan,
USSR and United States: Comparative Indicators of Health and Education Services Selected
V
1/
2/
0 persons)
3/
beds0 persons)
y
enrolliwnts (thousands)
6/
of teachers
6/
of students per teacher
New Directions,-
2/ ,.
3/ US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.
Abstract he
State
.
Data are
Elenentary and secondary. In the USSR elementary and secondary includis0 for the years given; in the United States, it includes
6/ Public schools only. US Department of Commerce, bureau of the Census, Statistical Abstract of the United.
USSR: Personal Savings Held in State
Total savings (billion rubles) i/
Average size account (rubles)
Share of additions! disposable income saved (percent) tV
.8
: Tsentral'noye statisticheskoye upravelenlye, Marcdnoye khozyaystvo ho'yaystvo PiTiyda,. 2.
2/ noremonts from preceding year divided by tho additions to disposable income derived from Tableine 7-
Original document.
Comment about this article, ask questions, or add new information about this topic: