MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Consumer Prices, Surplus Cash, and the Struggle to Raise Living Standards in the Postwar Soviet Union

2024· book-chapter· en· W4404520190 on OpenAlexaff
Kristy Ironside

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2024
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPost-Communist Economic and Political Transition
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCashSoviet unionStandard of livingEconomicsBusinessMarket economyPolitical scienceMacroeconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This chapter surveys the Soviet government’s attempts to use consumer price policy to balance the population’s income and expenses, and thus raise living standards, after the Second World War. Consumer prices were already highly politicized under Stalin before the war, but this became especially true after 1949, when his government launched a policy of annual consecutive price cuts. Though these cuts were portrayed as the main driver of real wages, in fact, they were based not on increased supply but on heavy subsidies, and therefore only exacerbated shortages. Even after the policy was abandoned, and as discussions emerged among both leaders and economists about how to rationalize price policy and put an end to subsidies, prices remained highly politicized up until the Soviet collapse, limiting their use as a tool to balance income and expenses. In the meantime, artificially low prices contributed to a growing glut of unspendable cash in the economy, much of which ended up in savings accounts. The Soviet government, in sum, never managed to effectively use consumer prices to balance the population’s income and expenses, imposing a long-term constraint on living standards in the postwar period.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooksSame topicPost-Communist Economic and Political TransitionFrench-language works237,207