keep that success going by passing it on to the next generation. however, the dream of taking over the family business can quickly turn into a nightmare. while having to cope with the loss of a loved one, relatives are forced to make tough decisions just to make the estate tax obligations under the law. it could mean selling off critical assets. it could mean closing down the business and being forced to sell the entire business just to pay the taxes alone. the truth is average americans can be negatively affected by this tax. not only our businesses not being passed down, they are be also be enforced to lay off other employees. when a small business shuts its doors and lets those employees go, it can have a profound effect. farmers can be impacted by the federal tax simply based on the value of the farmland alone. that does not take into account the buildings, and other

nonliquid assets. i took -- i spoke to a family business that was forced to spend 20% of their net income on expensive life insurance just to fund their future death -- death tax obligations. we have to after cells, for a country -- we have to to ask ourselves, does it make sense to penalize success? i asked for support for this legislation. i yield back. pro tempore: the gentleman from washington is recognized. >> i yield two minutes to mr. davis.

mr. davis: thank you. i rise in opposition to this bill that would add hundreds of billions of dollars to our deficit to deliver windfall to the heirs of the wealthiest in the country. the republican budget poses that we must make for coney and cuts to programs. it cuts to the infirmed middle-class, the republican leadership laws are bills that would provide inequality in our nation and give a $3 million tax break to the most wealthy. in my district the median income is $48,000. the unemployment rate for african americans is 24.5%. the poverty level for children is 38.3%.

over 63,000 households receive food stamps. in the state of illinois, over 13,000 children are homeless. at the end of last year, chicago had the highest foreclosure rate -- fifth highest foreclosure rate in the nation. this bill reflects a misplaced priorities for our nation. we can make improvements for small businesses and family farms, current law is inadequate. the fiscal recklessness of the republican approach that balloons our deficit by hundreds of billions of dollars, the dozens of tax cuts reminds me of the adage that says death by a thousand cuts, only this time it is debt by a thousand tax cuts.

it is bad for our economy, citizens, and nation. i will vote no. pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. >> i am proud to introduce a speaker from the ways and means committee. mrs. noem: in 1994, my dad was killed in an accident on our family farm. i came home and try to figure out how we would get by without him. all i could hear during that time was the words i got had said for years, it was not long after he was killed that we got a bill from the irs. it said we own the money because we had a tragedy. one of the things my dad said was, christie, do not sell land, god is not making more land.

that was her option, we can sell land, or take out a loan. i took out a loan, it took 10 years to pay off the loan. it is one of the main reasons i got involved in government and politics. i did not understand how bureaucrats and politicians could make a law that says when a tragedy hits, the family owns the irs -- owes the irs. it is unfair because at the most vulnerable time, the government says they need to take what your family has worked for. a lot of the conversation has been about the rich, the rich can afford that. it hits families like mine harder than ever. i will also say that some of the discussions involving the deficit, the government is not

earn money, they take other people's money. it is certainly not going to earn more money by this policy. the previous administration and the members of the other party talk about the people who have struggled, we have more in poverty under your policies than we had before you are in charge. one in five children are on food stamps because of the policies. 50% of our college students cannot find work or are underemployed because of the policies. we talk about income inequality and we are seeing it because of those previous policies. this is double taxation. please do not put any more families in a situation where they lose their family operation because of a tragedy. pro tempore: the gentleman from washington is recognized. the gentleman from texas is recognized.

brady: you understand how fragile these family-owned businesses are. pro tempore: the gentleman from missouri is recognized. >> growing up on my farm i learned values. i learned a comparison in, when you are out there working with hogs you learned there is little value in hogwash. i would compare fax we have heard equivalent to hogwash. i say that under the stipulation i have heard fax stating that farms of 15,000 acres, the average family farm is less than 500 acres.

if you look at missouri, where i represent, every farm in that area if you would consider a 500 acre farm, and the price times that by how many acres they have, say 5000 -- i've hundred acres time 5000. you have to put the price of a combine and tractor, guess what? they are in that top 2% the other side says is the wealthiest. guess what, less than 2% of americans are farmers. this legislation, this tax is directly after farmers. our tax code, what is wrong with it is it is disadvantaging rural america. the death tax is part of that disadvantage.

you are seeing people leave rural america because of the tax code. 85% of family farmers investment is in land and equipment. it is not liquid assets. when they get a tax bill, they have to either sell their land, or they have to take out a loan so they can keep their family business. this is a tax on the american dream. the folks on the other side of the aisle have never found a tax that they like. we have to stop this. >> we are out of time. pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from washington is recognized. >> i yield. >> i yield.

pro tempore: the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. reichert: i appreciate the opportunity to speak today in support of this bill. proud to be a cosponsor. the story is the same across this country and all of our districts. business owners and farmers work hard for their entire lives with the goal of passing on the first fruits of their labor. they face the insurmountable hurdle of the death tax. the death tax and poses difficulties. regardless of whether these people end up a weighing it is

another challenge. last year when i was in a committee on this bill, we heard from three witnesses, a rancher, farmer, and product t distributor. they said this created hours and hours, and months of work by attorneys and employees trying to figure out how they can keep the business in their family. when business owner said for the first 26 years working in the family business, 26 years he spent trying to figure out how to meet the death tax. when one relative was about to pass away, they had another death tax issue. another relative is about to pass away and did pass away, again they have to address the tax. this is a tax -- this is an issue the other side wants to make between the rich and the poor. this is about average american men and women, business owners

trying to keep the family owned business. pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from washington is recognized. the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. brady: i yield to mr. bishop. pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. bishop: i am pleased to join representative brady on this bipartisan legislation to repeal the death tax once and for all. i have always believed it is morally unjustified and downright un-american. it is a tax on success. the assets on what the people want to pass on have already been taxed. if it is a business or a farm

the individuals who have earned it and started the business, they paid income taxes. it was a corporation, the corporation paid taxes also. why should it be tax a third time just to keep the business together? they sacrifice life savings in georgia and all across the nation. we have heard the statistics, the united states has the fourth highest estate tax. 13 countries have repealed the taxes since 2000. it has a disproportionate impact on african americans. a study by boston college several years ago estimated between 2001 and 2005, the death tax will erase between 11% and 13% of all african-american

wealth. this one tax will cost african-american households up to $270 billion. some argue it is no longer a problem since we have raised exemption to $5 million and $10 million for couples, nothing could be further from the truth. according to the georgia farm rule it is barely keeping pace with the values. the number of farms in georgia with this value rose from 654 to 667 from 2000 to 2012. i cannot stand by and allow this to punish families. it is not farmers, look at funeral homes and directors that have multiple locations with stocks, caskets, limousines

that amounts to a good bit of money. i have constituents who own radio stations, worked hard to have a family owned business that would be able to be into indications. -- be in communications. they started with one station, now they have five stations. it is a family business, the husband, wife, the kids are running the business. it is a shame they would have to sell the business and lay off employees to pay off the tax. it is clear the tax hurts the economy. pro tempore: i yield an additional 30 seconds. mr. bishop: it would boost gdp it would create 139,000 jobs

which eventually increases federal revenue. this is a tax on success, it is not a big contributor to the revenue of this country. it is a drop in the ocean. it is time to repeal it. i urge my colleagues to think realistically, not ideologically , and do the right thing. i urge you to join my colleagues and repeal the death tax. pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from washington is recognized. >> i yield to mr. wrangell. mr. rangel: having served on the ways and means committee for decades, it is embarrassing to see us debating a deal -- building goes nowhere.

this was taken by the majority to select provisions that are in the tax code, to have those of us that advocate tax reform to just select those parts that appeared to be popular with some parts of our constituencies. there is no one in this house that truly believes that this legislation, if passed, ever will become law. it is something to be using in political campaigns as to what you voted for, and why. the truth of the matter is, to listen to the other side talk, we have some very rich farmers and just because they are in the family, does not mean they are not wealthy. let's go to the facts and find out how many people are going to be affected. these statistics show that 99.2%

to 99.8% of the population does not pay taxes. what are we talking about? we are talking about a few rich people .02% of those people will be eligible for the tax, only after we estimate the value of their estate is $5 million for one person, and $10 million for two people. i am not going to say this is inconvenient, but when you think the -- think about the number of people that pay taxes and work hard and try to save money for their kid's education, this means that hundreds of billions of dollars are being set aside for those people. if we really want equity fairplay, why do we not take a look at the entire tax code. why are we just looking at the estate tax?

equity is how much money are you raising, and how much do you need. thank you. pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. brady: i ask i am proud to yield one minute to the gentleman from indiana. stutzman: i want to thank chairman rhein in their leadership that is so important in my district. in indiana, under the leadership of the governor, we officially repealed be the death tax.

as a fourth-generation farmer i see how family owned businesses already struggle each year with the destructive mess that is our tax code. the death tax, which is a double tax on hard work only adds to the problem. it stifles prosperity, and it prevents individuals and families from making be personal decision they want to make with their savings and property were generations. madam speaker, it is time to repeal the death tax. it only accounts for a fraction of a percent of and annual revenue for the government. i strongly urge my colleagues to support this common sense, i partisan legislation. pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. mcdermott: would you tell us

how much time? do you want a minute? i yield two minutes to the gentleman from oregon. pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon is recognized. mr. blumenauer: i appreciate this. this week we have had hundreds and hundreds of business people ,. organized labor, contractors coming to town and pleading with congress to get its act together and enact a six-year comprehensive transportation bill. we have been frozen in place for years. 23 short-term extensions because congress cannot figure out how

to provide the resources necessary to deal with a critical situation. america is falling apart and behind. we are caught here in an inability to provide resources to help rebuild america. that is part of the issue. today my republican friends have discovered that there is $270 billion of revenue that somehow the federal government no longer needs. they have decided to give an additional tax cut to people who need the help the least. ironically, for all of the talk about this being a death tax and double taxation, the vast majority of the wealth that will be untaxed has never been taxed in the first place.

you don't get to be a billionaire on w-2 income. it is appreciated capital. we are going to, in their judgment, give a windfall. we have had this tax for over a century from republican administration. we are going to turn our back on it because we no longer need to hundred $70 billion -- $270 billion. we are having construction projects stopped because the transportation bill money will expire. this is lunacy. it is not fair. pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. brady: i am proud to yield

to mr. gomer. pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. gohmert: it was amazing most of the millionaires built a business and farm, the number one most common vehicle was a ford f1 50 truck. they were workers. there was a time in america where we looked around and fall someone who works 16 hours a day my aunt and uncle did and build a farm. we were proud of them. my aunt lily died and the fdic dumped land out there before the land could be sold. the irs came in and eventually sold every acre of her land. the family was called in, let's try to at least by some assets from her modest home.

i bought this music box from her, it plays"amazing grace"they ran into the amazing greed of the congress. thank you. i yield back. pro tempore: the gentleman from washington is recognized. >> are you ready to close? mr. brady: we have one more. i am proud to yield one minute to my colleague from taxes. exas. mr. herd: i want to share the story of bobby mcknight for my district of fort davis texas.

he said many families like his might be asset rich, but cash poor. most of their asset is used to grow food and cattle. a lot of that food, my colleagues will enjoy today. he has had to make sacrifices to keep his business above water. as many small business owners can tell you, sometimes you run out of places to cut. that is what happens to his family after the death tax. he had to lose skilled labor. his land values continue to increase and many farmers are concerned this will trigger the death tax. the tax is devastating to the family farms, ranches, and small businesses in my district and throughout the nation. let's stop punishing families for achieving the american dream. i support the decision to repeal

the death tax and encourage my colleagues to support it as well. pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from washington is recognized. >> i will use the remainder of my time. they tried to scare you. they tried to turn the estate tax into able demand -- boogeym an. they have called the tax in moral. -- immoral may claim.that the estate tax affects startups and small businesses. these wild and inaccurate claims could not be further from the truth. the facts are, republicans have forgotten to mention, the estate tax will only affect the 400

estate out of an estimated 2.6 million this year. that means repealing the tax will amounts to a tax break for the top .2%. the hiltons, the koch those folks. s, according to the policy, only 20 small businesses and farm estates nationwide owed estate tax in 2013. 20. furthermore, of those, the old only 4%. america is a wonderful country. we all have a chance to make it. some make it better than others, that is because of luck, hard work, it isn't that everyone who does not have money is not working hard. some have more luck.

the fact is that if you have a little luck, don't you oh a little something back to the country? here you have people who have $10 million and then they 04% of the value on money that has never been taxed before. it is all on capital appreciation. my republican friends conveniently forget to mention how much this wealth out to the rich will cost. $280 billion, that is as though every american today was given a $1 billion tax cut to the wealthy in the country.

if we all gave, there we would be. we are doing this to a group that has no problems whatsoever. their problem is how to keep their money, that is the only problem. i want people to dollars. and that the gentleman from oregon pointed out, we have a tremendous problem with infrastructure in this country but there is no money for that. we need to invest in the national institutes of health. used to do the nih were doing 20% of grant applications and now they are only doing 6%. we are not investing either in the physical infrastructure or the human infrastructure in this country. what has made a strong, about

99.99% are immigrants, they came here with nothing in this country gave us an opportunity to be rich or successful. the only way it will work is if we pay something back into the process. let sitting there, using money that you never have been taxed on. ironed my colleagues to vote no on this -- i urge my colleagues to vote no on this and think about all the americans that will get no benefit whatsoever. the gentleman from texas is recognized for 3 1/4 minutes. mr. brady: thank you, madam speaker. feel free to dismiss the woman in my district a widower, who now has been forced back to the bank for the third time to take out a loan just to be able to

keep the family farm they worked generations, worked generations to keep and hand down. dismiss her as a paris hiltons of the world, superrich. dismiss the 114 organizations who back the repeal, most are main street businesses, who support repeal this death tax, they are store owners they are loggers, loggers in the field. they are plumbers. there's a glamorous life. that's the superrich. that's who after people work weekends and nights to build up their business, these are the ones who when they pass away uncle sam swoops in and confiscates, takes nearly half what they built a lifetime earning. dismiss them if you will, but this is the american dream. the american dream is not a government that promises you welfare checks and food stamps. the american dream is a thought you can build yourself up, pull

yourself up through hard work and skills and dedication. you can build a better life for your family and then to give it to your children and grandchildren so maybe, just maybe they have a better chance of the american dream. they have opportunities maybe you didn't have that they can pass on to their children. you hear today, oh, this affects a few. those are the people that pay the tax. one out of three businesses. more than that of farmers. they're already paying money into tax planning. they're putting money aside. they're spending hours. they'd rather put that into their farm and their business. they'd rather hire young people and new people looking for jobs but instead they're trying to avoid this horrible tax. all for what? for a measly two days of federal spending. actually less than that. this government wastes so much money. it just pours it out of here. so instead of tightening our belt, we attack the american dream of hardworking families

and businesses many of them, by the way, women and minority-owned businesses, building wealth for the first time, believing the american dream is right for them. they're not paris hilton. they're not the barrons. they are not the ones dismissed on the floor today. at the end of the day this is a simple question -- whose money is it? whose hard work and years is it? is it government? is it the washington politicians who will take your money in time, force you to sell your business or family-owned farm and waste it on who knows what? or is it your money and your hard work and your american dream? are you allowed to keep that dream and help your family going forward or is it the government's dream, whatever that could be? at the end of the day, what i love the most about america, we don't resent success. we strive for it. whatever success is for each of us we strive for it.

we're absolutely convinced that we can achieve it for us and that we can maybe give our kids a chance going forward. so this is a simple question. if you stand with those who believe it's the government's rk money and hard work, vote no. if you stand with the family-owned farms and businesses and young people and >> that starts at 12:15 p.m. eastern time here on c-span. >> and a 25, she was one of the wealthiest widows in the colonies. and during the revolution, during her mid-40's, she was

considered an enemy by the british we threaten to take her hostage. later, she began our nation's first first lady. martha washington on c-span's original series "first ladies." examining the public and private lives of the women who filled the role of first lady. for martha washington to michelle obama, sundays on c-span3. as a comment to the series c-span's new book, "first ladies." providing lively stories of these fascinating women creating an illuminating entertaining, and inspiring read. it is now available as a hardcover or e-book favored bookstore or online bookseller. >> thursday, before a live student -- a live studio audience, russian president vladimir putin answered questions on his annual call-in

program. more than two million questions were submitted. he addressed relations with ukraine and the west as well as the recent iran nuclear agreement. this is courtesy of english language news channel "russia today." >> we are watching the russian president right now, getting ready for his q&a address. over 2 million question already posed to the russian president. he set records in the past by going on for more than four hours before. as the russian president it's -- president gets ready ready for his annual q&a address live, i will step aside and let the russian president man the helm from here. >> hello mr. president, our call center has been working for a week, and of course we will keep taking your calls and questions. right now, our operators are prepared for a peak load of

questions. you can call us at 8800 200 4040. use the number you can see on the screen right now. during the last seven days, we have set a record. as of now, we have received more questions than last year by the time the show was over. we have 2,486,000 calls and text messages. this year, we had an interesting novelty. you can send your mms, photo question to the president, demonstrating your problem instead of describing it in so many words. we also take video questions. you can upload them through the

website. again, we have sign language translation available. we will keep taking your questions until the end of the show. send your questions in, maybe the president will answer your question. here in the studio we have people of different professions from different segments of russian society, teachers, agricultural workers, rescue workers, military officers. they all have their questions. shall we start? good morning. mr. putin, this year you had to face a lot of challenges. this was a time for you to make executive decisions. you are the only person capable of doing that. you had to take counter sanctions, you had the situation with crimea, difficult economic situations, outside pressure and you had to personally get involved in these matters.

what is the outcome of this year? can you give us a list of successes and failures? president putin: that is a traditional question. i knew it would be coming, and i have to give you the results of the year. i jotted down some of the figures for myself. just to give you some fresh data, happy to share them with you and the whole country. you mentioned some of the results, we now have the reunification with crimea. we also worked on the difficult conditions. it was last year when we had the sochi olympic games. it was a very successful sports event.

that was what happened last year. also, we faced restrictive measures by our foreign partners and it had an impact on our pace of growth. but as you see, the ruble has been strengthening. the stock exchange is growing, inflation has stayed within certain limits. if you take last year, it grew -- the real gdp grew by 0.6%. slight growth, but still, the economy is growing. manufacturing has been up for us. the output was 1.7 percent. processing is 2.4%. oil production has been at a record high. it is 525 million pounds.

-- 525 million tons. russia saw one of the biggest harvests in its history. 1.5 million tons. agriculture has been growing. 3.7% growth. this year, first quarter has demonstrated some good results. we also have good figures across other categories. petrochemicals, 4.1%. fertilizers, 4.2%. sure, we do have problems, and capital exchange was down and direct investment were down 2.5%. but we still have good results in housing construction. i would like to highlight the

record amount of construction. again, russia has never seen such figures. even the soviet union is wasn't able to match the figures. 81, or even 82 million square meters. these are stunning figures. also, unemployment was up. it was 5.3% in mid- 2014, now it is 5.8%. but still, we kept the growth of unemployment at a certain limit. inflation in the consumer sector was 11.4%. it is not good. of course it has an impact on

living standards for our people. inflation was down three fold. that is for the real income -- the real income was down 1% while wages grew 1.3%. as you know, we have indexed pensions. we adjusted them to inflation. but still, there is a lot of economic uncertainty. there has been a lot of capital outflow, we have to bear that in mind. for further questions on the issue, i will be happy to take them and reply in more detail. it's not a disaster. despite fluctuations in the stock market, demonstrating good growth. retail loans were up. and assets of the russian

banking system grew by 7 trillion rubles. for the first time they have a bypassed the gdp of the country. that is a good sign that the russian banking system has been very stable. it is great that both legal entities and now the individuals that take the currency that they purchased. the number of deposit has grown 9.4%. we see that the amount of deposits is still growing. this year it is 19.5 trillion rubles. legal entities now have 26

trillion rubles in deposits in russian banks. now, moving on to the budget. we have a 0.5% deficit. but nevertheless, it is still not very much. so i think we will stay within 3.7% at the maximum. one of the positive results of 2014 was a positive demographic trend. the birth rate was up, and mortality was down. life expectancy has been growing across russian regions. this is a very good sign. it means we have the upward trend and the sentiment of the people. that is the overview of 2014.

host: mr. president, the figures were mostly macroeconomic indicators and they have been quite positive. if we talk about the common person's experience, judging by the questions we have received and are still receiving on the hotline, it does not look as rosy. there is a great number of problems. let us talk about economics first. let us start with economic issues. i would like to start with the question that came after a recent article in a certain periodical. the person who was present at your meeting with businessmen said that you warned businessmen that sanctions would not be lifted anytime soon. first of all, did you actually say that, and if yes, what do you think of the situation? president putin: you did not listen carefully to what i said. you have missed some things i

said. i have said there were positive things. i talked about macroeconomic factors, it has critical importance for our growth. but i also said that income has shrunk. that was due to inflation, 11.4%. i mentioned that. that's the sanctions. indeed, we had that meeting with entrepreneurs, and i said it was highly unlikely that sanctions would be lifted anytime soon. it is a political issue. some of our partners -- it has a strategic character. they want to restrain our growth. i don't think it has any relation to the conflict in

ukraine. we are doing everything we can to implement the minsk agreements, but our partners have not caught up. the most important thing for us is to use more sophisticated ways of management. and of course, a lot depends on us domestically. we just mentioned inflation, we mentioned real wages. what is the reason for the decline? of course, there is a lot of pressure on the ruble. the ruble has depreciated. it depends on oil prices. it is well-known that unfortunately we have this economy that is too dependent on oil. it is difficult to change the

situation. but over the past years, we saw real wages growing at a higher pace than productivity gains. this is something very important. regardless of any sanctions, an adjustment was imminent. the central bank in the -- the central bank and the government took those sanctions as a helping hand, so to speak. they could have said, ok, these were the measures we need for adjustment, and it happened because of the sanctions. that adjustment took place. it is important, and the markets have responded to that. it means our economy is getting healthier. it means we have the basic

conditions for growth. of course, sanctions have an impact. we will talk further about that in questions. but it is not the most important thing. host: still, is it possible that the situation in russia will be similar to that in iran with decades of sanctions? president putin: russia is not iran. the russian economy is much bigger and more diversified than the iranian economy. we do not have the same policy in terms of energy that iran is conducting. we have the energy sector which is much more market-based. it is not a good comparison. in terms of how long we should wait for the sanctions to be lifted, i would like to rephrase the questions.

we have to take advantage of the situation to reach new levels of development. look at import substitution, we are now forced to implement measures. we have high-tech industries in our economy and we will achieve development faster then we projected earlier. look at agriculture, especially after joining wto. we have made this sector healthier. sure, the groceries are more expensive. we have to wait for sometime. you just have to be patient. the output of the agriculture sector will surely happen.

i know that agricultural producers are not very happy about the situation. the government still provides support. and of course, we make sure that we have agricultural and food safety. host: what about the food embargo? we did implement them because of sanctions. host: russia is a strong nation and we can tolerate a lot of things, but many farmers say that they do not leave sanctions as we are currently developing our own production, and it would be a real disaster. we can talk about this later. people talk about your big press conference six months ago. you said it will take two years to rebuild the economy. would you adjust your forecast? president putin: we see that the

ruble is strengthening the stock , market is growing. a number of other sectors have been growing. i think it will take about two years, maybe faster. this year the output will be , down given all the factors internal and external. even at the beginning of the year, we projected that the outputs will be significantly down. this has not happened. according to the latest data, if we take march data year to year, the output is 99% of all we had last march. so the production has been stable. of course, it depends on the

interest rates, it depends on the policies by the government, there has been flat growth. but we still need to do everything to kickstart the economy. now with the sanction --host: with the sanctions encounter sanctions, do you get a feeling you maybe should have done something differently? president putin: i think we have taken the right measures. host: this is a very important question. do we have enough strength and resources? president putin: we have enough resources, we have enough human capital. we are proud of our talented people, they want to work hard. i talked to people a lot, i know the sentiment.

russians are very determined. the job of the president and the central bank is to past -- is to pass this difficult time with minimal costs. it is just about patients. we have to take advantage of this time and we can do it. host: a word on our -- on a new threat that could emerge this year. president putin: there are so many threats so that we cannot forecast. if we maintain the domestic political situation, if we still have the consolidation of our society, they are no threat. host: mr. president, i still want to ask about -- there is a set of measures taken

by the government, but at this point we don't see how it is supposed to work. it seems like the primary strategy is to wait for oil rices -- oil prices to rebound. when oil prices start to go up we will have more money and this will take care of all of our problems. president putin: well, this is an overly critical assessment. certainly, you must always criticize the government and the president and the governors of russian regions. when you have criticism, it makes you look at things with a fresh look. you need some outsider opinion. nevertheless the plan to stabilize the economic situation

is something that takes a lot of professionalism. we cannot waste our money. certainly, the government needed some time to understand what should be done and what kind of resources could be used. and what i'm mentioning, this plan, was adopted last september and it is now rolled out. nevertheless, the steps provided by this plan are well thought out and they reflect the state of our economy. on a large scale, this is a blueprint and we have 2.3 trillion rubles earmarked for this plan, 900 billion will

be channeled to support the russian banking system. that is the lifeblood of the economy. and of course everybody criticizes the central bank. these are the right steps. we need to look back at the 2009 crisis. we also have 250 billion rubles we will spend for the real sector of the economy. this will first go to the banks, then the banks will help. then we will send 100 billion rubles to support aviation aircraft construction. we will also have 82 billion to support employment. 200 billion as guarantees for loans, for certain projects.

the central bank has a number of steps that are being implemented. it is critical to kickstart the economic growth. we are adjusting pensions to inflation. and also we have steps to take in taxation. i'm sure we will talk about that during the session. in terms of agriculture, we have drafted a new plan in terms of logistics and transportation systems. we have a plan that is coming. the vat will be made zero for commuter traffic. and the vat will be cut 10% for passenger traffic. so a whole range of issues which are being implemented.

it is not fair to say that there are no results. prices are up. but not in all regions. the average prices are down. the ruble has strengthened. so you can't say that nothing is being done. that is not fair. maybe the expectations were higher, but that is why i am urging everyone to be patient. we have to find the right way forward and the government has taken the right way forward. host: but the ruble is strengthening for a different reason. president putin: what is the reason? host: oil stabilized and people convert their money to rubles because interest rates group. president putin: but why did you see the interest rates grow?

host: slightly. president putin: there is a link with oil prices. the ruble has strengthened so much, there must be other factors. i mentioned the most important we have survived the peak of the problems, also the russian banks and russian corporations have paid off debts. we are also adjusting the russian ruble. the central bank does not control the exchange rates. unemployment is still 5.8%, it is not that much in europe. in europe it is 11%. >> mr. president, we have people

representing businesses. we will take a question from a businessman. >> mr. putin, hello to all of russia. i have the first question, so -- sme's are effective and we launched our firm two years ago and this year we are now the best young business project this year. but we have our problems with human capital. when young people graduate from university, they do not know what kind of talent they have, so they don't know how they can help russia. so maybe the government can help us. can help young people to understand what type of session

-- what type of profsession they want to work. we are ready to share our expertise. president putin: what do you manufacture? >> confections and we teach and help children. president putin: this is the best way we can do things. personal training, especially in productive segments, that is one of our priorities for the near future. production processes are getting complex and we need skilled workforce for that. we work a lot in this area with industries, representing the bigger companies, and we have agreed to take a number of measures, competencies and different areas, working together to organize internships and so on and so forth.

we can't proceed without that obviously. the government has a special program for that, but you are also right, it is better to start at an earlier stage when they are still in school. yesterday, i had a discussion with colleagues in moscow. almost 40% of young people want to go to university. it's good that they are hungry for knowledge, but it also indicates that we do not have this kind of vocational training in school, so we will keep working on that through the years. and so let's have another question. >> we will give the floor to alex, former finance minister. he has been recognized as the best finance minister in the world.

>> hello, mr. putin. my question will be on the economy. so your first presidential term saw a 7% growth annually. and oil prices were around 130. but if you take this presidential term, even if oil prices are 65, then our gdp will be around 1.5%. so it is lower than the world average, and the share of the russian economy and global economy will shrink, so we will not have enough investment in high-tech sectors, so we won't

-- so we will be lagging further and further behind. that might have an impact on the defense industry and of course the defense industry heavily depends on the state of the economy. and the state of technology at home. so the figures i mentioned, we will have these until 2018. it means we will lag behind from the world average within these next three years. you said that the government is making adjustments, but i think adjustments are not enough. the old development model is now -- it has matured and it is insufficient, but we do not have a new development model, so what is needed for you to develop a new development model? president putin: well, we worked together for a large number of

years and we are good friends, you might say, and i know your position very well. i know your forecast, it is accurate, very close to what is likely to happen in a reality. first of all, you were one of the authors of the development program for our country until 2020. this is well-known, the 2020 program. basically, we have not changed radically. so if we could not foresee certain things in the program together with you, then part of the blame is yours. of course we have to consider the current situation of what is happening with the economy today. we know what we need to do. we have to build and create better conditions for businesses. we need to create better

conditions for private investment. we need to improve our monetary policy. we need to significiantly improve for the system as a whole. i mean in the government and various sectors, we need to improve our law enforcement and the judicial systems. it is a multi-dimensional task. of course it is easier said than done, but we have to do it. so even though it may look scary, somebody has to deal with this. and definitely there are certain things which are well known to everybody, like you know it requires political will.

as you know, in spite of our difficult conditions, we still take certain efforts in the direction recommended by you and other people who share your views. for example, this year the government froze some of the social benefits, did not index them. i know that your colleagues that share your views say this is insufficient, we should lower the social benefits, further cutting back salaries. they say we should raise the retirement age as soon as possible, otherwise we will not be able to balance the pension system where we have to take money out of the ledger. a lot of money.

and it stands in the way of development. theoretically, all of those things sound right. but to have a healthy economic policy, you definitely need the brain. but if we want people to trust us, we also have to have the heart. you have to be able to feel how people live, how an ordinary person lives. if we have people's trust, people will support everything we do. and sometimes they will be able to suffer, like he said. but if we disregard how people feel and what happens in real life, i'm afraid that very soon we will end up in a situation that we had in the early 1990's. that was where the government

lost the trust of the people and we will have to spend much more money then we can do now. when we modestly move afford but make progress. when we monetize the benefits, we took a step, eventually we had to spend a lot of resources to take care of this problem. so to avoid this situation, we will take the plan described. as the government recommends this is sufficient at this point. will this cause the country to lag behind others? let's wait and see, because the public debt of the u.s. is actually higher than the country's gdp. this is alarming, not just for the u.s., but for the economy in general. what will happen for the situation there?

we do not know. in the eurozone, the situation is very bad. what will happen to countries which have their public debt at 174% of their gdp? will they be able to tackle the situation? we do not know that. so we will certainly be guided by the considerations of higher growth rates, but we will do this in a way that will not put too much burden on our people. you all know, i don't know if you all know this, he is a member of the expert counsel working with the president of the russian federation and you know that we always respect your opinion, including me. and i mean it. we always listen to your recommendations.

>> a follow-up question -- one of the reforms is a reform of the social sector, but you know we don't propose to stop the growth of real wages, no, we just want to start to make target payments, maybe some categories might need a higher salary. while some of the categories do not need their salaries to be adjusted so high. so we believe this targeted approach is more efficient especially in a crisis situation like we are facing today. also, our proposals are meant to tackle inflation.

currently, 17% in april. so we could avoid a jump if other measures were taken, then wages would not fall too much. so as i said earlier, we cannot have real wages growing higher than productivity gains. now we have seen the adjustment. of course the presidential council has been working not too hard. i think we need to step up our activities. and also the 2020 strategy was drafted, but not adopted. it is still on paper. and only 25% of its potential has been employed, has been leveraged.

so i think we need a quicker program with the targets that we can reach regardless of the sanctions. president putin: the 2020 program is a guideline for our development. we still use it. and i completely agree with you on the point of selective approach, offering social benefits. i have told the government to work on that. and you also mentioned salaries growing ahead of productivity. and i have presented my position to you. i agree with you to a certain extent, but in reality this is easier said than done. when you talk -- it is easy to talk about such things, even on hotline, because salaries, incomes, especially for school teachers, this is too low. you cannot expect to achieve real results.

of course this can create difficulties that you mentioned. on the whole, we should do our best for salaries to grow and come up to the productivity level. you are right about that. today iranians showed flexibility and we have reached a compromise on the iranian issue. stakeholders confirm that the deal has been reached and there are technicalities that just need to be finalized. that is why we have taken this decision. i did not see the statement by the chancellor of germany.

maybe our counterparts are not aware of the fact that the u.n. sanctions did not include military equipment like the s-300. that was our goodwill decision and i see positive trends, so there are no grounds to continue with this unilateral ban. as for the sanctions, the resolution of the council, it is a considered effort with partners and our contribution has been significant to the resolution of the iranian nuclear issue.

also, enterprises have produced this equipment. it is very expensive. the cost is $900 million and no one has compensated these losses. they indicated some time ago that they might buy from us, but nobody has bought it. so it is not part of the u.n. ban list. the situation is changing. maybe it is better to encourage our iranian counterparts. so that they continue to move along this path. you also mentioned the reports from israel. when we supply military equipment to a certain region, we take into account things, especially in the middle east. we are not the biggest supplier of equipment to the middle east.

the u.s. supplies far more equipment to these parts of the world. and just recently israel voiced their concerns about the supplies going to another region. they said it could lead to political changes in the region. some of my colleagues said no plane would be able to lift them in the air. we have consultations and one of the partners understood our concerns and we canceled the contract altogether. and we even paid back the advanced payment, the

installment for 400 million u.s. dollars. as for iran, totally different issue. it is not a threat for israel, again the s-300 is an offensive equipment. it is only used for defense. and even if you talk about situations unfolding in yemen, it can only be a deterrent. when we help, we help the people of ukraine first and foremost. number two, we want to see the ukrainian economy come out of the crisis. they are our neighbors, our partners and we are interested in having a stable situation at the borders and developing economic relations with our neighbors. the reason we offer them a lower

price on gas is because we know that their economy will not be able to pay the market price, but we are willing to do that. the same goes for electricity, coal, and so on. at the end of the year, before the last one, at the end of 2013 we made an agreement with ukrainian leadership that we would offer ukraine a loan. $15 billion a year. we would give them $15 billion a year, like a loan. and $5 billion more for road construction through banks. and what did ukraine get? $17.5 billion for four years. we offered them a reduced gas

price, as long as they pay regularly and they settle their debts. we reduced the price of natural gas, and now it is 300% higher. we would keep our cooperation ties, but now they are severed. of course our situation is not so good, but their situation is really bad. they have lost missile construction, shipbuilding, and so on. i think the consequences are severe and it is not clear why they had to do all of that. still, this is the situation we are in. we will do our best to rebuild relations with ukraine. this is in our interest. >> so more questions from guests in the studio.

>> mr. president, joseph gretzky is the famous poet, he once said i heard a poem on ukraine independence and he wrote about the nationalists in ukraine. but apart from nationalists, there are millions of simple and ordinary ukrainians living there. they are now under threat. there are many examples, we have people, the locals, the security agencies ask people to frame other people. one of the former m.p.'s was killed, gunned down. there were also lots of threats from nationalists.

and all of those laws that taken by the ukrainian parliament on a victory day, so i think they are trying to impose the opportunity -- against russian speaking populations. ukraine says that russia is an enemy. but they are asking for a discount for natural gas. if you look at it realistically, how and under what conditions can we normalize the relationship? president putin: this is not a simple question even though we could talk about russians and ukrainians being one nation. actually, it is quite simple.

today, russia does not accept anything from the kiev authorities except one thing -- treat us as equal partners in every way. of course it is important for that they respect the legitimate rights of russians living in ukraine and people who consider themselves russians regardless of what it says in their passport. people who consider the russian language their mother tongue and who think they belong to the russian culture. any country is interested in people like that, including russia. there is nothing extraordinary about that. i repeat, we are interested in

normalizing our relations with ukraine entirely and we will do all we can from our side. of course, the situation is a big problem. we expect the ukrainian authorities will abide by all agreements. first and foremost, they have to set up a working group as part of the process. they have to start working on several areas -- political reform, constitutional reform, the economy, border issues, and so on. they have to start doing those things. not talk about these things, but start doing them practically. at this point, unfortunately, we only see attempts to continue to exert pressure, and it is my

understanding there is no other solution except for a political one. i hope that everybody will come to the same realization. >> another question from the studio. she is well-known in russia. she has a question on ukraine. >> mr. president, my question is about the tragic death of boris nemtsov. it shook me as a person. we have operated with him. it's really a painful event. what is your take on the investigation?

will we know who ordered that contract killing? it looks more like a terrorist act. and what about political competition? will your political opponents be ready? will there be conditions for them to take part in parliamentary elections? maybe that will stabilize the situation and stimulate the private sector and draw in a private investment. during the funeral, journalists came up to me. there were also online reports that boris nemtsov got information on the presence of russian troops southeast of ukraine and also during the

funeral, western journalists asked me about it. can you clarify -- can you give us more details? >> let's start with the opposition which passed the right and the possibility to participate officially and legally in politics. number one, of course they can and should. number two, if they make it into parliament, they help people support their activity will have an official status and they will certainly be responsible to a degree. it is one thing to be in the

opposition and to criticize everything, there is no responsibility, not too much responsibility -- it brings you to the forefront and out of the shadows, something positive i think. in the long run, the bottom line is it is up to the people who should be in parliament. on your second question regarding his friends, he was in the opposition, he criticized me and the government even though i used to have a pretty close relationship with him in the past. like i said, in the past, this is a tragic and shameful event. this assassination. about the investigation, i can tell you that one day or maybe

36 hours after police investigators knew the names of perpetrators, the only question they had was how to arrest them. let's give credit to our law enforcement agencies. they have many different technical capabilities available. i don't want to they bulge there advanced messages but on the whole, it was neither taking care of within a few hours.

they did a very professional job eric quickly. they used different simultaneous agencies, achieving the same results. whether they will find a mastermind behind this, and whether there is such a person i don't know. it will become clear what time. finally, you asked whether our troops are present in ukraine, i can tell you there are no russian troops in ukraine. >> actually during the recent conflict they -- the head of the army openly and publicly said, when meeting with foreign colleagues, our work is not against the russian army, what else can you add to that? as a follow-up question, the

reason why russian foreign policy failed in the ukraine up to 33 billion u.s. dollars. that was the confession by victoria nuland. >> it is not our failure. it is the failure of ukraine domestic policies. yes we helped ukraine, although it was a difficult time for us we supplied them at a lower price. the price was much lower than international market price. it was a real economic aid that ran into billions of dollars.

we had very close cooperation and i hope it may be recovered somehow in the future. >> we also had all sorts of trade relations so what happened? >> what is happening is people were tired of poverty fraud embezzlement greedy government officials, corruption, oligarchs in the government. people that tired of all of that. when a nation is in this kind of condition, they start looking for a way out of the situation unfortunately sometimes the turn -- they turned to people who

take advantage of difficulties and offer simple solutions including nationalist. this happens in the 1990's -- this happened in the 1990's, we have a sovereignty parade and nationalism. we had a similar situation in russia. this is how it happens in other countries as well. all of these forces took advantage of the situation and as a result you have a situation . it is not our failure, it is the failure of ukraine itself. >> there is a threat to armenia and other soviet -- post-soviet countries, now if you look at the number of nonprofits, they

are financed by the u.s.. how much does russia's been on activities? >> you heard -- you had a freudian slip there was no alienation in ukraine. it is a sovereign country. you should respect that. in the 1990's we did this alienation when we declared sovereignty of the russian federation. this was our decision. since we made that decision, we have to respect their independence now. this is the choice of the people of ukraine have made. it is up to them how did this -- how to build his relationship. how did this happen, they had

this third round of elections. it was totally unconstitutional. we turned a blind eye and tapped working with them. now it is the crew, we cannot put up with that. we see the earth -- upsurge of nationalism, this is an acceptable. we have to build our relationships. other than that, it is beyond our control. these are independent nations and we cannot interfere. we build our relations for example as part of the economic union. it is not to make those nations

-- it is to create better conditions for all of the people in our countries. we don't care of a russian person lives here or across the border if they can travel freely to visit relatives and their living standards of improve -- standards improve they are allowed to speak their mothers of song, if that is the case, we do not care. if people have a good life in those countries and they are treated fairly, this is the kind of relationship we have a kazakhstan and you mentioned armenia. we would like to develop this is the main thing. it is not that we want to keep those countries in our influence. this is a natural integration

process. the whole world is taking this way of integration, latin america in north america we see the u.s. and canada, europe asia everywhere. when we do the same thing they tell us we are building an empire. why? it is not our goal to build an empire. we don't have imperial aspirations. we want ethnic russians living in neighboring countries have decent lives by developing cooperation with them. >> russia is a country where ukrainian sounds refuge. we have a reporter working there.

>> we are at a hotel. refugees from the ukraine live here most of them came to weeks ago now they decide where to go. there are 19 people in the hotel. all of the children go to school . the children have therapy sessions. we got to know and introduce them. we have a guy -- four years old.

can you tell us about your town. now our town has been destroyed. let's go to the living room. could i asked you, where do you come from? do you have any relatives left there. my grandmother. what about your friends and classmates? when was the last time you talk to them? >> it has been a wild. i said -- it has been a while. you can address them directly. the camera is there. i want you to say hi.

>> hello to my grandmother and granddad and all of my friends and my brother. >> they will see you. take your seat now. apparently in this region alone there are 38,000 refugees from ukraine. what is your first question? >> i am alexander. the people want to know what will happen to our region in the future. >> what will happen to those territories? >> what are the prospects of becoming separated? many people there like ukraine but because of this conflict there is no way for us to live together with them. >> teaming the status of those territories?

>> yes. the future. >> first of all, we need to go back to normal, to these territories which you call the republics and all of the people must go back to their homes. i know that people who live in dunbar's that is the don-esque region of the whole, i know that you are patriots. people stay there because they love their homeland you must create conditions for leaving.

you must earn money and raise children. you have to have conditions for that. the authority seems to be interested in it as well. you need to revive economic ties. our generation in the ukraine is based on coal supplied by dunbar's. it is ridiculous to buy gold from south africa, it is embezzlement. or to buy coal from australia that is silly. there are other types of attempts the first step to revive economic times and we have seen this happening the first steps.

spots of the minsk agreements we might find some provisions that will help to restore the single political space. of course it is the people of done boss that have the ultimate right to decide. it will depend on the flexibility and wisdom of ukrainian leadership. >> you can asked one more question. we have people working at this hotel with us, people who live here and they have many difficult questions as well. my name is tatyana, we are

afraid for our children and grandchildren during the hostilities. we had our suitcases packed, do you think a war will start? >> i think it is impossible. so don't worry. there were instances, so the shelves ended up in russian territory, i still think it is just an accident. it is not an intended attempt to attack russia or to damage russian infrastructure. mr. president we've rescued

people from keys. iev. this was one of the most bright and well-known that ukrainian journalists, he participated in talk shows on the russian channels. this tragedy just happened hours ago just the other day colostrum is was killedr day. >> there was a series of accusations. the law enforcement is doing everything to find those who executed. for those who ordered it, and the ukraine wants to be a democratic state, it has to do

the same. nothing like that is happening. they are the killers. europe and the u.s. turn a blind eye to it. first and foremost we would like to express condolences to the family. >> i also offer my condolences. regardless of political convictions, there is one subject upon which we agree this is a victory. in every family, every family has its own hero. any attempt to rewrite history gets rejected in our country. now the red army is no longer regarded as liberators is on the same board as not to germany.

what do you think about that as the son of a person who was in the war? >> i have mixed feelings. it is a difficult issue. i will try to be brief. certainly you cannot compare not seize and stalin he is. because nazis openly and publicly said that they are going to destroy jews, gypsies and slavs. stalin was not an angel, hold nations were exiled. stalin never wanted to destroy whole ethnicities. it does not make sense to

compare these two figures. secondly, maybe not that pleasant for that -- of us, there were still some grounds for these allegations. after world war ii, we tried to make many eastern european countries like we left. it was done by force. it is not good. the same with the u.s., they tried to impose their model of development around the world and they are doomed to fail. >> mr. president, i have a question on isis. we know that there are russians who fight alongside isis, and we have special camps where they

dropped people in central asia and there are russian citizens so how serious is this threat in your opinion and is russia capable of extending this organization. are we taking preventive measures. >> first of all i would like to say that isis first in iraq and in syria, i like to point out that in iraq there was this undemocratic regime but there was no terrorism there the time. that was after they kill saddam hussein.

they actually supported saddam hussein and his war with iran. anyway, after they destroyed the country and after some of the people there, a smaller part of the population feel part of the former leader was sidelined lost their jobs and offices and had no way to survive they joined extremist organizations and set up isis. a large number of military former offices joined them, this is what makes them effective

they are professionals. they begin to attract other radicals and extremists of all sorts to this region. of course there is no direct threat for us from isis. the thing we are concerned about is that there are people appearing as well. they get training and they can come back to russia. there are people who get their military training at an experience there and come back. we are aware of that. we are taking necessary steps. i cannot tell you we know all of their names. we know the approximate number and places where they get the training. we do know certain names. our security agency is working well in that area.

they cooperate with colleagues from other countries on this issue. >> here is somebody from this radio station. >> i would like to go back to political destinations. we just mentioned the killing in the ukraine, i am surprised when sometimes investigators cannot question someone. someone might hide in one of the russian regions and they cannot get it. if person is killed 200 meters away from the kremlin so he is first to kill just walking with

a girl. investigators know who killed with the cannot find the person who ordered the killing. also you have people who lay flowers, they just hundreds. they put up russian flags and they want to have memorials. no, they are not allowed to do it. it is a waste. then they are in plastic bags and thrown away. maybe your opinion was not taken into account. i would like you to make a statement on that. my question number two you are from st. petersburg and i am from moscow. we know that we do not have streets named after us. but the president might make a

proposal and then the government might rename streets. maybe we might have a different name. >> i have already said what i think about it and i don't think there is a need for me to repeat myself. regarding flowers and the names the street, you know it is up to local authorities and regional authorities in this case to decide there is a law, according to which, flags can be -- set up at a place where someone was killed after 10 years since his death, but i repeat, moscow

authorities can and should make an appropriate decision. as for flowers and other things of similar nature, i don't know why there is the need for such restrictions. on the contrary, i think there is nothing wrong with people laying flowers if it does not interfere with other people's activities. i will definitely talk to the moscow mayor and make sure they don't interfere with that. you mentioned a certain street, it is also strange, i never paid attention to that, but i definitely think he deserves considering all he did, he deserves to have a street named after him. i will also talk to the moscow malware -- mayor about that.

>> i studied the laws and it said the russian president has the right to propose that and the decision will be taken very soon. please, introduce the proposal. >> i don't mind. and maybe i will use it. there are other ways to do this. i can talk to the mayor and we can sort this out, don't worry. >> another question from the audience. mr. president i have a question on messed -- mistrials helicopter carriers, the second helicopter carrier was tested this week, will we demand a

handover? a compensation or what? what about military cooperation with europe and france, what is the future cooperation? >> the decision not to deliver under an existing contract is certainly a bad sign. to us, in terms of our defense capabilities, frankly, this is absolutely significant. we signed the contracts in the first place in order to support support our partners. we make sure they are building shipyards