Information Community as Natural the Phase of the Historical Development of World Civilization

The economy of a post-industrial society is interpreted as the unity of information technologies and global production institutions. The methodological and instrumental specificity of the study of the economy, which is an open non-equilibrium self-organizing system, is shown. One of the latest trends in science is considered economic kinetics, or meta-economics, which studies the laws of the evolution of world civilization. The article presents a critical analysis of the existing theoretical approaches to identifying historical types of economic management, demonstrates a new model of economic formations and interformational transitions, justifies the introduction of a new production criterion in the digital economy labor wages, which ensures the predominant development of human capital.


Introduction
The expression "digital economy" is a metaphor that characterizes a certain quality of post-industrial society, or rather a system of information production technologies and institutions adequate to them. Information technology is a reality unfolding before our eyes on a global scale. As for institutions, scientists in general, and especially social scientists, have a little work to do. to create new rules and institutions necessary for the full functioning of the existing and expected information technologies in the future. A significant role in this matter should also belong to economic theory (economics), which has succeeded in studying the functioning of the modern market economy but is still unable to satisfactorily describe both the historical past and the long-term future of social production.
American economist Paul Samuelson (1915Samuelson ( -2009 instead of the one adopted in at that time of dividing chronology into two parts, he considered the historical triad corresponding to the "trinity": the "age of the Father" of the Old Testament period, the "age of the Son" of the New Testament period, accounting for 42 generations of 30 years each, Spirit ", which was supposed to begin according to Floorsky's calculations in 1260. The millennial "age of the Spirit", according to the author, should not know private property, slavery, poverty and war. Thus, in Floorsky we find a second theological periodization of the history of the development of mankind and a characteristic of high promising socio-economic norms. For all the primitiveness and theological nature of both structures, they are distinguished by their expansive content, including, in addition to the history itself, natural and predictive elements, and are preserved for a long time in the ideas of ordinary people and scientists [3].  Aron (1905Aron ( -1983) (Introduction to the Philosophy of History, 1938), affirmed: "There is no prime mover of the entire historical movement" [5]. Only in the most recent time has it been marked by a certain strengthening of historical problems in economic theory, stimulated, on the one hand, by the successes of institutionalism, and, on the other hand, by the practical need to explain and predict qualitative transformations in modern society. Marx's theory and the Marxist trend in the development of economic theory turned out to be very fruitful in the issue of identifying qualitatively definite, replacing historical forms of economy, since they were based on universal criteria for the growth of production efficiency and human freedom.
However, the incompleteness of Marx's formational model, its distorted interpretation, the general dogmatic approach to "political economy in a broad sense" in the theory of real socialism, and the subsequent rejection of the practice of "building communism" did not make it possible to create a true dialectical model of change historical forms of economy. At present, after a long period of the official canonized Marxist ideology and the subsequent collapse of the "socialist economic system" in Russia, the attitude to Marx's formational theory was emotionally negative and it was rejected.
At the same time, the crisis of the industrial society, which broke out in the West, makes specialists again turn to Marx. After a strip of sharp criticism of Capital, the so-called neo-Ricardianism is formed -a trend in economics that continues Marxism and the theory of real socialism, there is a kind of "renaissance" of Marx's theory as a whole. The English economist Mark Blaug (1927Blaug ( -2011 wrote about this: "In his hypostasis of the economist, Marx ... is still relevant as none of the authors, ... his ideas have become an integral part of the world of ideas in which we all think" [Blaug,from. 207].
An ever-wider circle of scientists and politicians are constantly turning to the scientific legacy of Marx. The need to work out a longterm development strategy for Russia requires the rehabilitation of the formational teachings of Marx in the country.

Karl Marx Models
The ideas inherent in Marx's formational model, in our opinion, have not exhausted their heuristic potential, at present they attract the attention of economists, but they need certain development and improvement, supplemented with institutional elements.
It is also necessary to revise the system of generalized economic coordinates and indicators of Marx. The fair Marxist thesis that each historical stage in the development of economic activity has special production relations inherent only to it, not only does not exclude, but, on the contrary, presupposes the need to develop universal initial concepts and categories, the use of which makes it possible to trace the development of the natural social continuum, the continuity of the transition from the "economy of nature" to the "nature of the economy", designated by the classic of political economy, the Englishman Adam Smith (1723-1790) (Study on the nature and causes of the wealth of peoples, 1776) [6].
The fundamental characteristics of the economy correspond to its most stable, deep structure. The morphology (structure) of the economy in a generalized form was considered by the theorists of classes, property and the organization of labor, he did not exclude the possibility of studying the "production process in general", in the form "in which it is characteristic of all social structures, that is the process of production outside of its historical character, if you like, a common human process " [Marx,vol. 46,part I,p. 274].
The analysis of the "production process in general" indicates its duality, its existence as labor and human cooperation at the same time. "Production ... manifests itself as a natural (labor) ... [and] social relation, social in the sense that it means the cooperation of many individuals, it does not matter under what conditions, how and for what purpose" [Marx,vol. 3. p. 28]. "Labor is, first of all, a process that takes place between man and nature, a process in which man, by his own activity, mediates, regulates and controls the exchange of substances between himself and nature ..." (Marx,vol. 23,p. 188 ). But in production "people enter into relationships not only with nature. They cannot produce without uniting in a known way for joint activity and for mutual exchange of their activity " [Marx,vol. 6,p. 44]) [7].

Communication relations can be called "cooperation relations"
in a general, essential sense. Historically, these relations can be far from cooperation and even opposite to it, for example, in market conditions they take the form of rivalry. And yet, historical, concrete modifications of industrial communication cannot completely suppress in it the initial and permanent cooperativeness, interdependence and assistance of producers. It is the social nature of production, as opposed to the individuality of labor, that is taken into account by the category of "relations of cooperation." The totality of "labor" and "cooperation" can be called "human activity".
Production relations cannot exist and develop by themselves, in their pure form, they are always mediated, materialized. "Political economy deals not with things, but with relationships between people ..., but these relationships are always associated with things and are manifested as things" [Marx,vol. 13,p. 498]. Therefore, the interaction of people with the surrounding nature (production relations of labor) materializes in the means of labor, and the interaction of people with each other (production relations of cooperation) materializes in the means of communication, in social institutions, that is, in the "economic mechanism" in the broad sense of this concept, covering not only economic, but also all other institutions of society. If the instrumentalization of labor mediates the interaction of a person with an external object, then the institutionalization of cooperation orders, regulates and ensures the stability of human life [8].
The means of labor and cooperation are "means of production" in the broad sense of this concept and characterize the level of development of all production relations. In Marxist literature, a person is usually declared a "bearer of production relations," but in reality the means of production are the material substrate of relations. Man is the subject of production relations. The analysis of the duality of production relations and the means of their realization inevitably affects the concepts of "productive forces", "basis", "superstructure" and "socio-economic formation", considered in detail by Marx. First of all, we note that when the concept of "basis" is expanded to include production relations of labor, the concept of "superstructure" is also transformed, since labor relations have their own "superstructure", their material design in the form of means of labor. We call these means of labor, in conjunction with the labor process itself, "production technology" and consider this concept as the first universal, generalized coordinate of meta-economics.
This approach of Marx is most concentratedly expressed in the concept of "basis" as a set of relatively stable production relations of society, relations that represent its structure. However, the "superstructure" of society in this case, as we have already noted above, does not contain "basic" institutions. It turns out that the institutional design of production relations in Marx is outside the economy and society, and the corresponding concepts are outside the subject of economic theory.
In reality, however, the economic superstructure exists in the form of an "economic mechanism" as a material substrate, means of realizing production relations of cooperation, that is, a system of informal customs, principles, norms, rules that regulate and ensure sustainability, developed in the course of economic practice and its cognition. economic life of society. The economic mechanism organizationally formalizes the existing system of production 133, 134]. Therefore, the economic part of the "superstructure" is its main component, which determines all other social orders and formations [9]. This means that, for example, "the political system ... is only the official expression of civil society" [Marx,vol. 27,p. 402] that politics as a "concentrated expression of economics" [Lenin, vol. 42, p. 278] "always only reflects, records the requirements of economic relations" [Marx,vol. 4,p. 112]. The economic essence can be found in other social institutions. You can even say that non-economic social institutions represent a kind of infrastructure of the economic mechanism. This infrastructure completes and fully realizes the structure of society. That is, the statement on the primacy of economics means that non-economic institutional formations are not so much derived from economic relations as necessary for their existence and reproduction. At the same time, one can speak of all existing institutions of society as an "expanded economic mechanism." From the momentary complex system of modern social institutions in the historical aspect, its various elements acted as an economic mechanism, the sequence of which was as follows -institutions of kinship, political, religious, market, and in the future, ethical institutions will act ... That is, the means of implementing production relations of cooperation were alternately taboos and customs, the state, the church, the establishment, and in the future self-government will also be used.
This circumstance allows, in general terms, the entire complex of social relations and institutions to be considered a single economic mechanism. In this broad sense, we call it the "sociology of production." We oppose this concept as the second generalized coordinate of economic theory to the coordinate "production technology". "Social relations are also produced by people, like canvas, linen, etc." [Marx,vol. 4,p. 133], as well as the institutions of society. Therefore, the sociology of production and production technology are integral systems, but also closely interrelated formations. Thus, the economic structure of society can be represented with the help of the dualism "technology-sociology of production", which can replace the triad "productive forces-basissuperstructure" of society and become a more productive tool for understanding the dialectics of economics. If the triad of Marx was traditionally considered the subject of the so-called "Historical materialism", then the proposed generalized coordinates should, in our opinion, be included in the subject of economic theory in its broadest understanding, which we called the metaekonomix [10].
Above, we gave a qualitative description of the technology and sociology of production, which are universal generalized coordinates of meta-economics that permeate the history of social production. But these coordinates require their own quantitative measures, which would make it possible to carry out a comparative (comparative) analysis of the historical forms of the economy, to investigate the laws of the development of society. In this aspect, economics cannot differ from the natural sciences, which have long had generalized indicators. The development of general historical economic indicators is a very difficult task, but it is necessary for the current stage of its development, characterized by the transition from the stage of analytical differentiation and accumulation of knowledge to the stage of its integration and synthesis. To introduce the required indicators for the coordinates "production technology" and "sociology of production", we will use Marx's methodology for measuring the levels of development of production relations, which introduced the indicators "organic structure of capital" and "rate of surplus value" into our analysis of the capitalist economy.
To give these indicators a general historical character, we express the structure of the aggregate product of society in the We have shown above that labor is a production relation.
However, the relationship of communication is a united "laborcooperation", "that is, an intelligent productive force that arises due to the joint activity of different individuals conditioned by the division of labor ..." [Marx,vol. 3,p. 33]. Profit is the emergent (systemic) effect of division and cooperation of labor. In other words, we can say that production technology creates the value of the product, and the sociology of production redistributes it in such a way that the profit of cooperation is formed. Technological economy is realized only through "political economy", since "combined activity means organization" [Marx,vol. 18. p. 303] [11]. forecasting of changes in production [12].
"History can be viewed from two sides, it can be divided into the history of nature and the history of people. However, both of these sides are inextricably linked" [Marx,vol. 3,p. 16]. In anthropology, as a rule, "human consciousness" is taken as the fundamental factor of anthropogenesis. However, homo sapiens is derived from homo faber: "The first historical act ... of individuals, thanks to which they differ from animals, is not that they begin to think, but that they begin to produce the means of life they need" [ Marx,vol. 3,p. 19]; "Consciousness ... from the very beginning is a social product and remains so as long as people exist at all" [Marx, vol. 1, p. 478]. The well-known position of Engels that "labor created man" cannot be recognized as accurate, since the productivity of "labor" from "cooperation", the derivation of the primordial technology of production from its sociology, technogenesis from sociogenesis was shown. The "intellectual" interpretation of anthropogenesis, as well as Engels's labor theory of the origin of man, do not completely solve the problem, because they raise questions: "Why does an individual become a rational being and why does an individual begin to work, produce material goods?" Therefore, only the "ecological" concept of the emergence of society deserves attention.
Economic literature usually simply states the cooperativeness and instrumentality of the activity of ancient man, while in reality anthropogenesis not only requires some explanations from the economic theory, but also has an economic essence, which, in our opinion, can be cognized within the framework of meta-economics.
First, anthropogenesis lends itself to explanation only from the standpoint of the natural-social continuum, and for this, first of all, it must be divided into two parts -socio-and technogenesis.
The nature of the interaction between the natural environment and the proto-society is described by the universal "Le Chatelier principle" proposed by the French chemist Henri le Chatelier (1850-1936), according to which the effect that brings the system out of equilibrium is, causes processes in it that seek to weaken this impact. A sharp deterioration of the habitat associated with coldness due to the onset of the next geological ice age on the planet about a million years ago, caused such an internal restructuring in the proto-society, which to a significant extent compensated for the external catastrophic unfavorable ecological gical impact. The change in the internal structure of the system in this case could be reduced only to a closer contact of individuals, to their cooperation.
The break of subjects with a familiar object -a nature useful for them -meant the establishment of additional intersubjective relationships [13].
This cooperation of individuals has conditioned the formation of the primordial "sociology of life" in the form of a set of certain rules, norms, taboos (prohibitions), traditions, language, and the mythological consciousness of people. Thus, sociogenesis is primary in history. In Figure 1 shows a socio-technological cycle with an initial deviation towards "sociology", S. It is important to Thirdly, the initial diachrony of socio-technological genesis persists throughout the subsequent development of the economy and is expressed in the alternation of significant historical technologies and sociologies of production. In fact, the entire history of society is a staged and cyclical process of restoring natural equilibrium through economic activity. Superwaves of adaptation spread from the primitive "ecumene" to the future developed highly organized "noosphere" [14].
Since anthropogenesis is associated with the emergence of a significant rarity of life benefits, the economy is a system of survival, and then the development of society, while economic theory solves the problem of overcoming this rarity, ensuring the growth of human well-being. And, fourthly, since from the point of view of the natural-social continuum, the emergence of people occurred at a certain level of their natural herd cooperation, the initial phase of the trajectory of the development of society somewhat goes beyond the frame of reference. The corresponding equation for the growth of civilization S = f (P) in the third approximation of the model will already look like this: S = P + ε sin (k s), where k under the sine sign is the proportionality coefficient, characterizing the initial phase of the megacycle. The horizontal sections of the model, lying along the ascending abscissa "P", correspond to the historical sequence of significant production technologies -manual, agricultural, commodity, machine, information and environmental, and the sections characterizing the advance along the ordinate " S ", represent, respectively, the tribal, communal, estate, constitutional, monopoly and global sociology of production.
The change in technologies and sociologies of social production in its history occurs in such a way that each of them is not destroyed, but in a transformed form is included in the economic mechanism of a more developed society, that is, there is a process of "removing" the simple from the complex as cyclic development of the initial syncretic state of society. Transitions to higher levels of technology and sociology of production also mean the achievement of higher levels of production efficiency.

On the New Formational Division of the Evolution of Public Production
Specific historical forms of economic management represent a unity of significant technologies and sociologies of production.
In the global wave process, one can distinguish "Preformation", "Dformation", "Mesoformation", "B formation" and "Conformation", indicated in Figure 1 circles covering specific pairs of technologysociology. Each socio-economic formation is institutionally determined, has its own distinctive sociology of production, which formalizes its basic technology, but this sociology itself produces a new technology. Thus, all six historical significant technologies turn out to be connecting links of formations and are located in transition zones (in Figure 1, these zones are located at the overlap of adjacent circles -"formations"). "Preformation" means the first historical cycle of production, the cycle of its formation, in which the asymmetry of anthropogenesis is manifested and the whole "program" of the further development of society lies (the phenomenon of preformism, the most studied in the biology of the development of a living being). "Preformation" includes two production technologies -manual and agrarian -and two sociologies -generic and community [15].   only to clarify the subsequent analogous, repetitive processes, but also to make a long-term forecast of socio-economic changes [17].
But, firstly, if Smith considered the division of labor a purely positive phenomenon, contributing to the growth of his productivity, then Marx showed the negative side of the division of labor -its alienation. We have shown that "alienation" is "alienation of people" as a form of development of their primordial cooperation, cooperation, and "labor" is an objectified labor, a commodity. Both negative manifestations of "human life activity" are characterized by the concept of "human implementation", which encompasses a number of formations. And, secondly, if Smith considered the market society to be natural, just and eternal, then according to Marx it is unnatural, unjust and immortal. The concept of "Biformation" means a bifurcated formation, which is formed on the basis of machine technology. The corporate monopolistic sociology in the West, which has formalized and consolidated sectoral control by the largest producers for the last 150 years, is supplemented in Bioformation with a centralist monopolistic sociology of countries with planned economies (see the second vertical bifurcation in the historical cycle in Figure   1). In this regard, Aron wrote: "I do not ask myself whether there is a contradiction between socialism and capitalism, I consider capitalism and socialism as two varieties of the same industrial society" [2]. And one can agree with this characteristic, adding only that, despite the differences in the institutional design of sectoral and national economic monopoly, both of these varieties can be designated by the concept "Social economy". The structure of "Biformation" is such that it contains not only a single initial technology for the market and planned economies, but also a common path for them to further develop production along the line of its informatization. The transformation of scientific information into the main means of labor and cooperation determines the   [Inozemtsev], "post-civilizo bathroom "by the American economist Kenneth Boulding (1910Boulding ( -1993 [Boulding], the" active "American sociologist Emitai Etzioni (b. 1929) [Etzioni], the" technotronic "American politician Zbigniew Brzezinski (1928-2017) [Brzezinsky]," informational "by the Japanese anthropologist Tadao Umesao (1920-2010) and extensively presented by his compatriot, the philosopher Yoneji Masuda 91905-1995) [Masuda] [19].
We consider the names with the prefix "post-" and including "post-industrial society" to be inappropriate due to their vagueness, the name "information society" is the most adequate to the object under study, but it is more suitable for characterizing not the society

The Essence of the Current Crisis of the Industrial Economy
The industrialization of sectors of the economy, which sharply increases the size of capital and rapidly changes their competitiveness, makes the inter-sectoral flow of capital more intensive. As a result, competitive justice is established in society - of the trend is that, despite the aspiration of private business to increase the profitability of business through the mechanization of production, at the macro level, a gradual monotonic decrease was observed. This, at first glance, a paradoxical phenomenon reflected the internal crisis of "Mesoformation" [21].
If we divide the numerator and denominator of the fraction by wages V in the indicator of the profitability of production (by the expenditure of "variable capital", in the terminology of Marx) and discard the resulting unit, then we find that profitability is The classical method of "internal" growth of enterprises by converting part of the profit into additional capital (ΔK), that is, by concentration of capital (Figure 2b), in the conditions of the industrial economy is insufficient and when establishing "Monopolistic sociology" is complemented by the process of centralization of capital, which made it possible to quickly increase the size of the corporation due to its "external" growth, that is, the absorption of small and medium-sized firms by large ones (Figure 2c). However, with the formation of the corporate economy and the harmonization of sociology and production technology, a fundamental disproportion inevitably arises in the factor structure of the rapidly growing aggregate product (Figure 3). Over a century of industrialization, from the mid-18th to the mid-19 th centuries, the share of costs for raw materials C, as well as the excess profits M in Q, increased exaggeratedly. Affected not only the deployment of machine technology, but also the redistribution of income in favor of capital, part of the absolutely growing incomes of workers turned into monopolistic excess profits of corporations. Wages became inadequate to labor productivity and technological achievements of society, turned out to be incomplete and not sufficient for the expanded reproduction of the labor force of a large mass of hired labor [22].  In Figure 4 shows the general historical and prospective dynamics of the indicator G. The trajectory has a wave damping character and reflects the gradual, post-step compensation of the ecological catastrophe -a sharp cooling in the next "ice age", which led to the appearance of the human community in the Earth's biota state. His production activity comes in the long term to stabilization of the disturbed "golden ratio" with the final formation of an integral system "nature -society". trajectory cycles characterize the historical sequence of economic criteria -the profitability of the agricultural, the profitability of the industrial, the "salary" of the information and "environmental friendliness" of the global society.
The design of these four criteria is the same and is such that all three elements of the value of the produced product, that is, C, V and M, become in turn the numerator of the total indicator of the profitability of production G as the residual target result, that is, C, V and M, and they are also included in the denominator of the fraction in as a cost element. So, since in primitive times the "golden proportion" began to decline, then in the criterion of profitability of management (GP) introduced in a practical way, a natural rent C (GP = C / (V + + M)) appeared, which allowed people not only successfully overcome the adverse consequences of environmental disaster, but also improve their well-being. The growth of C also allowed the reproduction of land as the main factor of production and the development of agriculture. In the conditions of an industrial economy, the first historical criterion of production turned out to be ineffective and was replaced by profitability (GP, GP = M / (C + V)). And in this construction the priority of profit was dictated by the task of growth and development of capital, that is, by the very machine technology.
The dynamics of GP, like the dynamics of GP, was cyclical (in Figure   4, its phases considered above fall on the second cycle of the graph), but the industrial cycle in terms of amplitude turned out to be less than the agrarian cycle and thus significantly brought society closer to indicator of absolute harmony GG.
With the completion of the formation of industrial capital and the transition to a social market economy, the salary V becomes the residual income, and the profit M should be attributed to costs.
The corresponding criterion of "wages" of production (GЗ, GЗ = V / (C + M)) is not the fruit of pure theory, it is predetermined by the entire course of the historical development of social production and is adequate to modern information technology, the task of development "Human capital", education and innovation economy.
It is important to note that the new criterion is designed to achieve not only economic, but also social goals, since for the first time  and other industries showed an explosive positive effect , but then it was subjected to harsh attacks from the bureaucratic system and was curtailed in the course of further profitable-market-night transformations in the country. It seems that the introduction of the salary criterion even under conditions of preservation state-owned resources, but their free lease, would bring much more benefit to society than the long-drawn-out transition to the classical market through the privatization of state property.
The so-called financial and economic crisis, in which the world community has been living since 2008, is associated with the transition to a new criterion of production. Experts, politicians and many ordinary people refer to it as a common cyclical phenomenon, which, as we found out above, is regularly observed in the market economy. Some experts note the seriousness of the situation and compare the current crisis with the Great Depression,which swept the Western world in the 20-30s. Despite the fact that a lot of time has passed since the appearance of negative processes in the financial sector, and then in the real sectors of the economy, summits, conferences were held, and even various systems of measures were announced to overcome the crisis and prevent its recurrence, surprising answers to questions about the causes, essence, duration of the crisis, as well as the nature of the functioning of the world economy in the post-crisis perspective did not appear. There is a widespread version about the mistakes made by the financiers, consisting in the so-called "refinancing" and artificial "overheating" of the stock markets.
However, the explanation of the crisis by purely market, opportunistic, reasons cannot be considered sufficient. It is known that the financial sphere primarily reacts to ongoing social and political events, but it also quickly and stabilizes with appropriate measures of business entities and the state. This  Each of the three indicated historical criteria ensured the predominant growth and development of the corresponding factor of production, although it made the economy homogeneous, but at the same time introduced resource disharmony into it, which is eliminated only with the complete attenuation of the nonequilibrium process of interformational transitions. In Figure 5 shows the proportions of the historical joint dynamics of agrarian (N), industrial (K) and informational (L) production factors. The growth line of industrial capital goods is associated with the dynamics (dashed line) of financial capital (Kf), which, although it has its own market, is constantly adjusting to the volume of capital goods. In the conditions of modern stabilization of the world production apparatus, there is a separation from it that grows by inertia, that is, in the mode of not ordinary investment activity, but a monetary "pyramid", financial "fictitious" capital. The restoration of normal operation of the financial sector will occur if it begins to invest in the growth of not the industry, but the service sector of "human capital", which is still relatively undeveloped. In the long-term historical perspective, after solving the main social problems of our time using the criterion of production wages and in the conditions of the need to overcome the inevitable problems of environmental management, society will have to introduce another, fourth, criterion of production -the criterion of its environmental friendliness (GE, GE = C / (V + M)), which outwardly, in its construction, coincides with the historically initial criterion of land profitability, but at a new level of economic culture of the general society will allow the residual formation of the "income of nature" C and thereby finally stabilize the indicator of the general efficiency of human civilization G, equating it to the "golden ratio" GG.

Conclusions
The digital economy should correspond not only to information technology, but also to global sociology, which is a universal system of social institutions that formalizes the operation of the salary criterion, which does not depend on the form of ownership of material factors of production, for priority development is human capital transforms natural rent and profits into social costs.
Accordingly, to this fundamental conclusion, discussions about planned economic management, the height of which was in the 20-30s of the last century, that is, the times when there were still two economic systems in the world, are again gaining significance market and planned -and there were not only ideological, but also scientific disputes between their supporters and opponents. The controversy was widespread, and in the Western economy too. Equilibrium market and non-market economic theory, rejected by the Austrian school, can develop the old and create new concepts of "planometrics" on its own principles. Analysis and proposals for the development of the basic ideas of economic theory [23] show, in contrast to the postulates of "Austrian antisocialism", that: 1) the plan requires not primary comprehensive microeconomic information, but only one macroeconomic indicator ("national dividend", G), which optimally combines both extensive and extensive opportunities for the development of the economy; 2) this indicator expresses not the diversity of interests of the entire mass of economic entities, but, on the contrary, their monotonous and universal interests -employment and growth of well-being; 3) this indicator reflects not the statics, but the dynamics of the economy. of profitability according to the criteria of employment and innovation, with the subsequent differentiation of the indicator by industry. In a "country-a single firm", all of its production units can be the recipients of such "parametric prices", which include not only different costs based on input-output balances, but also different profits, in total equal to the value of the optimal national dividend. profitability for a long historical time increased land wealth, and then profitability provided the outstripping growth of capital goods, then with the wages institute, conditions will be created for the free and full development of the employee. Therefore, the sectoral investment allocation of the national optimal dividend, in fact, turns it into an element of costs, and all kinds of savings in the production of goods are allowed, according to the residual principle, to be attributed to wages as a financial source of human development. When an economic reform was being prepared in the USSR at the beginning of the 90s, it was possible to radically change the nature of a state-controlled and centralized economy by the widespread introduction of a system of leasing enterprises and a new criterion of production, which is local and spontaneous, as we are shown above, has already been applied and gave excellent results.
However, then circumstances developed in such a way that the reform applied methods of "shock therapy", which doomed the country to dishonest privatization of state property, hyperinflation and its subsequent existence with a corrupt "pseudo-market". But such a stupid economic situation should serve as an incentive for the early introduction of institutional innovations in Russia.
In this case, the "digitalization" of the economy is becoming very important.