DISAGREES ON STATE OF SOVIET ECONOMY

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP75-00149R000600360013-6
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: November 11, 2016
• Document Release Date: January 20, 1999
• Sequence Number: 13
• Publication Date: February 27, 1964
• Content Type: NSPR

Sanitized - Approved For Release: - C
WA;S}IIINGTON srAIR FEB 2 7 1964
CPYRGHT
P RGHT Disagrees ? on State of Soviet Economy
G
ball, Unclersecre- whether the gap is widening:;
c o r r e s p o n d e n t ' Bernard tart' of State and the Cents it or not
Gwertzman, who, referring to "Intelligence A g e n c y y both The USSR smelted some 38
`certain United States officials, declared that the Soviet rate - million tons of steel in 1953
claims in his article of Jana- of economic growth fell to (or equal to 37 per cent of
art' 10, 1964 that the Soviet loss than 2.5 per cent in 1962 United States output), and j
economy has reached the and 1063. This is false: The 80.2 million tons in 1963 '(or,
point of stagnation. As far as rate has always been and equal to 80 per cent of United
I know, stagnation means a continues to be high. Indus- States output). Our country
total decline in production and trial production in the USSR manufactured 15.9 m 111 i o n ?
employment, stockpiling of shot up by 9.2 per cent in tons of cement in 1953 (or'
unsold commodities, closing- :19Q1, 9.5 per cent, in 1962, and equal to 35 per cent of United"
down of factories, etc. 8.5 per cent' in 1963. Mate- tates manufacture), and 61
Nothing of the kind is hap- rially, each per cent comes to illion tons in 1963 (or equal
pening in the USSR. There. mean more and more ,.every o 104 per cent of United
has not been the a single postwar year: 8.5 per' cent today far . tates production). The Soviet-'
showing any curtailment surpasses in this respect the 9 nion in 1953 put out .about',
year of production a~d occupation.. lme or 10 per cent Increase of five 2,000 metal-cutting machine,
p years ago. ools (230,000 in the United.'
On, the contrary, if we take Taking the rate of economic.. tates or 2.5 times more than
the volume of industrial pro- growth as a whole (increase n the USSR), while in 196
duction for 1953 as 100, it, by of the gross national product' a made 183,000 machine
the beginning of 1964, added in the last two years), we see ools, compared to only 145,-
up to 270. In. the period 1953-.that the index for 1963 equals 00 in the United States (sta-;
1962 gross agricultural pro- 15 per cent, which, at least, Is istics for 1962).
duction rose by 70 per cent (I double the figure given by the, I could quote other facts.'
have omitted 1963 as being an CIA. nd figures showing that the'
untypical year with a severe Mr. Ball claims that in the ap between the output vol-'.
drought and crop failure). past 12 years the gap between me of the USA and USSR is.
Lastly, the number of produc- the output volume of the USA arrowing, and not widenin
tion and office workers en- and USSR has widened in On thewhole g
gaged in the national econ- favor` of the former. He ? ustrial production grofs the'`.
omy increased by 28.3 million makes use of the indices -of SSR in 1963 amounted to 65
since 1952, aggregating 70,5 the cost of production, which . er cent of that of the United
million by the beginning; of include the cost of services, . ates, as compared to 33 per,
this year, and this, mind you, which is an instance of re- nt in 1953 and 47 per cent in
in conditions; of intensive ?eafe,: fi
,. ,
gure
_..W
of more exact figures, you have Mark Postolovsk
tion . production and ab- to turn to the physical output' .,
x
i C
m
om a
Sanitized - Approved For Release : CIA-RDP75-00149R000600360013-6