First, the status quo of the income distribution gap of China residents
Since the reform and opening up, China's urban Gini coefficient has risen from 0. 16 of 1978 to 0.28 of 1995, which is still in a reasonable range, indicating that although some cities have become rich in recent years, the income gap of most residents is not significant. The Gini coefficient in rural areas rose from 0.2 1978 to 0.34 1995, indicating that the income distribution gap in rural areas is higher than that in cities, and the national Gini coefficient rose from 0.3 1978 to 0.34 1995. And far higher than the Gini coefficient of urban and rural areas, indicating that the gap between urban and rural areas is still large, and this gap has expanded since the reform and opening up. More importantly, the Gini coefficient in rural areas, cities and the whole country shows an expanding trend [1]. Welfare index table [2] The first stage of reform (taking 83 as an example), the second stage (taking 88 as an example), the third stage (taking 9 1 as an example) and the fourth stage (taking 95 as an example) Welfare index rural a 24540949 104 1 city B4729/kl. However, we should also see that due to the large proportion of rural population, the gap between urban and rural areas is obvious (rapidly expanding in the 1990 s) and the national welfare index is not high.
1997, the richest15 families in cities and towns accounted for 44.46% of the total income, and the poorest15 families only accounted for 6.04% of the income [3], indicating that the income distribution gap continues to widen under the current situation.
Second, the main factors affecting the income gap of residents
1, misunderstanding How to deal with the relationship between fairness and efficiency? Under the traditional system, we eat the same pot and engage in egalitarianism in order to achieve the ideal "fairness". As a result, it stifled the enthusiasm of workers, ruined efficiency and brought "* * * poverty". Therefore, the reform will start from breaking egalitarianism, such as the household contract system in rural areas and the system of linking wages and benefits in cities. With the improvement of efficiency, the income gap is widening. In the 1980s, it was still not strict. After the 1990s, this situation became obvious, causing people's concern again. The government's attitude is very clear, that is, "giving priority to efficiency and giving consideration to fairness". However, in practice, because "giving consideration to fairness" requires the government to pay a certain cost (such as improving the welfare level of low-income people) and even sacrificing economic growth to a certain extent, things that only pay attention to efficiency and ignore fairness occur from time to time in various places. Coupled with the disadvantages of eating from the same pot in the past, some people think that we are suspected of egalitarianism when we talk about fairness. In fact, although there are many understandings of fairness, one thing is clear, that is, the equalitarianism of distribution results and the disparity of income are not the embodiment of fairness. If some government departments are afraid of being accused of "egalitarianism" and dare not adjust the income gap, or even artificially widen the gap, it is a misunderstanding.
In the theoretical circle, faced with the widening income gap, many people look for evidence from development economics, mainly Kuznets' "inverted U" theory and Lewis' labor surplus model. Therefore, it is considered that the widening income gap is temporary. As long as our economy is developed and industrialized, this problem will naturally be solved. Therefore, the current task is to ensure economic growth, rather than doing too much on fairness. In fact, Kuznets' inverted U-shaped theory is only the result of empirical analysis based on some unreliable data [4]. Lewis model is a theory of labor transfer from agriculture to industrial sector on the premise of "labor surplus" [5]. For a big developing country like China, because of the huge rural population, the transfer process will be very long. If intra-departmental transfer is considered, it will not only take a long time but also have a large income gap in China. So there will be a problem of "stability". Without social stability, there will be no development. Of course, we don't advocate not talking about growth here, because the most "fairness" without growth is just "poverty", so it is more desirable for our country to take the road of "paying equal attention to growth and fairness" [6], that is, the government mainly bears the responsibility of fairness, the market pursues efficiency, and realizes the unity of growth and fairness.
The gap between urban and rural areas in China is obvious, which has a lot to do with the government's long-term understanding and policies. For a long time, in order to support the development of industry, the state has artificially transferred resources from agriculture to industry. At the same time, the government does not allow farmers to "enter the city", thinking that if farmers are allowed to "enter the city", it may lead to the rapid expansion of the existing city scale and cause many social problems. Moreover, the government will give various subsidies to urban residents, and a large number of farmers will "go to the city", which the government cannot afford. This policy is actually the division of urban and rural areas, which leads to a large number of laborers squeezing on the land to make a living, which makes agricultural production inefficient and further restricts industrial development. The current failure to start the rural consumer market illustrates this problem. The development practice of other countries tells us that the process of modernization is also the process of urbanization. If the government restricts urbanization, the economy will stay in the dual structure forever.
2. Unreasonable income in system transformation. The government's policy of encouraging some people to get rich first is correct, and it also greatly stimulates the development of productive forces. The problem is that many people seem to forget that the premise of getting rich first is "honest labor and legal operation". From 65438 to 0984, China began the reform of state-owned enterprises, but at the same time it was accompanied by the loss of state-owned assets, which damaged the country and made a few "insiders" rich, especially the shareholding system reform, which became the last "free lunch" of socialist public ownership in some places [7]. In recent years, due to the lack of supervision mechanism and even the intervention of power, a large amount of black income has been generated, which has led some people to become rich and hated by the broad masses of the people. In addition, there are some "gray income" between legal and illegal. In the west, this phenomenon of gaining extra benefits by enjoying privileges is called rent-seeking behavior. Rent-seeking is rampant, and many people have serious inequality. These unreasonable incomes have made some people stand at a higher starting point and further widened the gap between the rich and the poor in the new round of competition.
3. Some normal factors in the reform have also accelerated the widening of the income gap. In the reform of distribution system, egalitarianism must be broken first, which will inevitably bring about changes in income gap. In particular, to establish a market economy, every economic entity will get corresponding remuneration according to its contribution in the market. Whether it is distribution according to work or distribution according to production factors, each subject has different ability to participate in the market, and the income obtained is of course different. When measuring the efficiency of resource allocation, there are Pareto optimal state and Pareto suboptimal state. If the reform that everyone can benefit from is called Pareto optimal reform; Some people can make profits, others will suffer, but the reform that the whole society gains more than loses is called Pareto suboptimal reform. Then, the early household contract system and the city's decentralization and profit-making measures are Pareto's best reforms, which generally increase everyone's income and cause small changes in the income gap; The current education system reform and laid-off workers from state-owned enterprises are Pareto suboptimal reforms. Although reform is necessary for the whole society, it harms the interests of some people (even if it benefits for a long time, it will inevitably be damaged at present), that is to say, some people share the cost of reform. In the Pareto suboptimal reform, the income of the beneficiaries increased, while the income of the injured was affected.
Three, some suggestions to narrow the income distribution gap of residents
1, accelerate the process of urbanization
Economic development, in addition to the increase in per capita income, should also include fundamental changes in economic structure, of which the two most important structural changes are the national output value, the decline in the proportion of agriculture, and the increase in the proportion of residents in urban population. (8) The proportion of urban population in China did not reach 29.37% until 1996 [9], which is related to the government's policy of restricting urbanization, such as dividing household registration into agriculture and non-agriculture, and taking measures to artificially prevent agricultural population from becoming urban residents. In the past, the placement of rural surplus labor force was "far away from the land", relying on township enterprises and emphasizing on-site transfer, which actually ruled out "urbanization" because many township enterprises did not have urban functions. Since township enterprises occupy several times or even dozens of times more land than cities to produce the same product, China has transferred about1200,000 rural surplus labor force on the spot since 1978, but the loss of cultivated land is also 78 million mu, that is, every labor force transferred takes away about 0.65 mu of cultivated land [10], which is more for people and less for people. If we can expand the urban area or establish satellite cities around qualified cities, or expand existing counties and towns, it will greatly promote the current depressed social demand; On the other hand, it can gradually narrow the gap between urban and rural areas. Because a very important reason for the low per capita income in rural areas is that a large number of surplus labor forces are tied to the land, resulting in hidden unemployment and low productivity. If a part of the surplus labor force can be squeezed out, the rural productivity will increase and the per capita income of farmers will also rise.
2. Establish a standardized financial transfer payment system.
Eliminating the "Matthew effect" of the market mainly depends on the government and financial transfer payment. At present, government financial transfer payments do not pay attention to regional differences, such as the tax system of 1994.
In the reform, the central government's tax rebate to local governments is determined according to the base of the previous year; The government's transfer payments to residents are mainly concentrated in cities, and the direction is not reasonable, such as a large number of enterprise loss subsidies. With the development of reform, it is urgent to improve the social security system, but the reality is that the government fails to shoulder its due responsibilities, and the capital investment is often insufficient. The vast number of rural residents are actually outside the scope of protection (except for the poverty alleviation funds that the state gives to the poor every year), which is also a reason why the income of many rural people is seriously unstable. Of course, it is a financial problem to increase the transfer payment to backward areas and adjust the direction of government transfer payment to individuals. At present, the purpose of "changing fees into taxes" is to strengthen the government's financial resources and reduce redundant construction. Is it helpful to establish a standardized transfer payment system?
3. Provide basic public services for residents and strengthen infrastructure construction in backward areas.
"Rejuvenating the country through science and education" is an important policy of our country, but for a long time, the government's investment in this area is actually insufficient. China's constitution clearly stipulates that receiving compulsory education is the right and obligation of citizens, but the government has failed to create favorable conditions, so that many residents cannot enjoy this right or fulfill this obligation. Theoretically, basic education should be provided by the government. Therefore, vigorously carrying out the project hope to help students actually shows that the government has not fulfilled its due responsibilities. As for higher education, it should be said that it is a quasi-public product. If the fee system is completely adopted, many low-income families will undoubtedly be unable to send their children to college. The feasible way is to combine public and private, and public universities are funded by the government, so that those excellent but poor students can continue their education. Otherwise, educational inequality will inevitably lead to further expansion of income inequality.
In China, the infrastructure in backward areas is very weak, especially in the vast rural areas. Most of the potholed dirt roads have outdated power supply facilities, high operating costs, poor communication ability and low acceptance of external influences. Can this not hinder economic growth? The key to improving the income level of people in these areas is to create conditions. Investing in infrastructure in backward areas may not bring much immediate benefits, but at present, there is a general overproduction and serious unemployment in China. If there are funds to combine labor and products and carry out large-scale infrastructure construction, it will undoubtedly be of great significance to the current and future economic development.
4. Standardize the market order, improve the tax system and govern the country according to law.
"The market is welcomed by officialdom, and officialdom is welcomed by market rules." It is an important portrayal of the current social situation. In the 1980s, China implemented the "dual-track system" of prices, which led to the prevalence of "official profiteering". Some people used their power to resell materials to earn the difference and make a fortune. In the 1990s, some "insiders" speculated on real estate and became very rich. This shows that if the market order is not perfect, the competition will be unequal and the gap will be artificially widened. The government now emphasizes the rule of law, reduces power intervention in the market and punishes corruption, which is correct in policy. The key lies in strict law enforcement. Over the years, the government has enacted many laws, but the implementation effect is obvious to all. Therefore, more efforts should be made in law enforcement.
The imperfect tax system is also a reason for the widening income gap at present. For example, inheritance tax and gift tax are not levied, and the income gap between those who enjoy a large amount of inheritance and those who do not enjoy it is of course obvious. Tax collection and management can not be ignored. For example, 1995, more than 80% of Beijing's personal income tax comes from wages and salaries, and the working class has become a big personal income tax, while the real high-income earners have become "fish escaping from the net".
/cgi-bin/view.cgi？ gid = 6 & ampfid= 1453。 Thread =17639 & Date =200505 16