Abstract: This question has already been asked indirectly, in an article titled "The attempt to understand the nature of the development of China", published (in three parts) in the Journal of International Relations, 11, 18 and 23 February 2013. In this article we will try to take another look at the facts available to us and we will try to find out how justified are both positive and negative feelings about the observers originating in China tremendous changes. To such an attempt not to become a mere speculation, we will use comparative political analysis, and as a country for comparison with China and the dynamics of its motion take the USSR and the dynamics of its movement.The methodological basis of the study constitute a systemic, structural-functional, comparative-historical, comparative political, geopolitical, cultural and civilizational approaches, methods of analysis, synthesis, induction, deduction, modeling, observation. Major changes in national economic planning PRC occurred in the preparation of the 10th Five-Year Plan (2000-2005). In terms of accession of China to the WTO, speed up restructuring of the world economy, the development of information and new and high technology, computerization of society and the development of scientific and technical progress, a significant increase in the number of transnational corporations (TNCs) and scale up their activities. As a result, in China there have been significant changes in the economy, which largely contributed to changes in the system of drawing up economic plans. Major changes in the planning system associated with the transition from directive to indicative planning began in the preparation of the 10th Five-Year Plan (2001-2005.), Which marked the transition from the full establishment of quantitative to qualitative

Abstract: The land income is a form of income from land and subsoil resources. Just like any other form of income, the production of land income is different from its distribution.  The quantity of land is stable and limited, and it forms the conditions for the land income. The production factors do not include the owner of the plot of land or its user (not being it s owner). The limited quantity of land and the services provided with it is relative . It is relative in comparison with two other production factors: physical capital (means and instruments of production) and the workforce, as well as to the amount of services provided by these two production factors. The relative character of limitations of land and services guaranteed by it do not provide for the lack of unused opportunityу expenses, that is, alternative options for the use of a plot of land. Of course, there are such expenses and such options.  However, the amount of unused opportunity expenses or the amount of alternatives for the use of land are less when the physical capital and workforce used are not so limited and not so permanent at the current period of time.

Abstract: George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, and Franklin Roosevelt are usually recognized among the most outstanding leaders of the USA throughout the history of this state. Our goal is to attempt to find out whether these leaders of three American revolutions (each at his own time) define history of their state, or was it the history that defined their place in it.  For this purpose and in accordance with the historical periods, we shall start with President Washington. Discussion is separated into two parts: brief overview of social, economic and political environment, in which George Washington leived on one hand, and a description of his personal qualities on the other hand.  Our conclusion shall be based upon the comparison of the "input" of the environment, with the personal "input" of President Washington into his greatness.  There is a question: whether the North-American colonies of the Great Britain could achieve independency and formation of a sovereign state - the USA  without George Washington?