* Данный текст распознан в автоматическом режиме, поэтому может содержать ошибки

There are a lot o f separate researches, recommendations and ideas, including very good recommendations and ideas in the statistical science, but there are just a few (or even no) fundamental results, i.e. the results which can radically change the economic life, make the production cheaper and remove poverty. A n d the problem is not only in the ideology and methodology o f statistical developments. M a n y things in the existing unsuccessful position are explained not by the lowering rupture between theoretical assumptions and unobserved facts, but by the peculiar abstractionism o f many theoretical doctrines and schemes. The prime reason is difficult situation in economics and statistics; which is based on the absence or limit o f facts and publications and, therefore, a big difference in interpretation and low efficiency. I n general the present day situation can be characterized as declining. There are a lot o f facts and publications, information with different bases and indications, but nearly all o f them contradict one another and cannot be summarized. I n a word, there are a lot o f figures, facts and conclusions, but there are no (or they are very poor) summaries, and, therefore, demonstrative valuations o f the true position, proved by figures and facts. Anyway it is even less than in pre-reform history o f development o f economic and statistical science. A n d may be because o f this socio-economic summaries are not what scientists (as well as ordinary population) can rely on. Nowadays it is not possible to change the situation, to make the collected and published economic data and parameters be similar (when the ways o f calculations as well as prices, exchange rates and ways o f applications are not the same), in a word, to overcome a huge difference, which from the beginning has been introduced to the statistical publications as databases. As a result, in a number o f cases (nowadays in too many cases) the same estimated and published parameters contradict not only one another but also to itself and reduce any in possibility o f their reasonable application. I n reality all the collected and published not only separately taken socio-economic parameters, but also the whole publications do not characterize the real situation in the country, they characterize themselves and often less than that—effect o f calculation method or even less—result o f statistical errors. The divergence in evaluation are usually (sometimes beforehand) taken as accidental error and errors o f statistical calculations. Nowadays juggling and distortion, numerous cases o f data manipulation, custom-made valuations (e.g. ratings) are attributes o f normal life rather than exceptions. The same phenomena, parameters, taking into account calculation methods, dominant point o f view and social order, are represented in different ways and sometimes as opposite valuations. A n d it is so not only when the researcher meets the difficulties, unobserved facts or absence o f basic data (for example, data on unordinary environments, data on shadow economy or data on services offered by the population), i.e. cannot change anything, but when the necessary information is available and can easily be used to get authentic valuations (for example, in case o f falsification or default o f data). A n d people in different spheres like economics and politics use it, speculating on difficulties when they appear in statistics like in any other experimental science for objective reasons and often when those reasons have a subjective character. 24