|
| 阅读上一个主题 :: 阅读下一个主题 |
| 作者 |
 两则有关中美贫富分化的小资料 |
 |
| 所跟贴 |
贫富分化的吉尼指数：中国40.3，美国40.8 （World Bank; Forbes.com） -- Anonymous - (458 Byte) 2003-7-09 周三, 下午11:54 (479 reads) |
多元
[博客]
[个人文集]
游客
|
|
|
作者：Anonymous 在 罕见奇谈 发贴, 来自 http://www.hjclub.org
世界银行的资料来自各国提供的官方资料，其中有些资料恐怕靠不住。
请看人民日报今年6月报导中国财政部政治司一个课题组发表的一篇报告：
中国2000年的吉尼指数已达到0.458!
Five Major Problems in China's Income Distribution
Along with the continuous and speedy development of the Chinese economy
the income of the Chinese people has witnessed a quicker increase too.
However a report recently issued by the subject group of the political
department of the Ministry of Finance holds that behind the normal
increase of income there do exist some problems which can not be
neglected.
1. A ceaseless widening of the gap in income distribution and the
aggravated division of the rich and the poor
This mainly manifests in the following ways: First, the difference of the
population income in general is getting wider and wider from year to year
as indicated in the Gini Index, which has already exceeded the standard
line as internationally acknowledged. The index rate has seen an increase
of 1.62 times within a span of 10 years with that for 1991 indicating
0.282, in 1998 0.456, in 1999 0.457 while the year of 2000 an index rate
of 0.458.
Second, incessant widening of the income differences between the urban
and rural population. 1990 saw an income proportion of 1: 2.2 between
the urban and rural population; 1995 a rate of 1: 2.71 and 2000 1: 2.79
while the year of 2001 it rose to a proportion of 1: 2.9;
Third, the income differences are expanding from region to region. In
2000, the average population income in China's east was 2.26 times that
of the west and it saw a three times difference between the highest and
the lowest;
Fourth, it saw a further aggravation of income difference among various
trades and walks of life. The income difference between different trades
began to show in the middle of 1980s, went on to 2.23:1 in the middle of
1990s and that of the year 2000 a rise again to 2.63:1;
Fifth, employee's income between different units of various economic
natures is widening up. As to the wage for employees in the units of
SOEs as against that of the collective economy, 1985 saw an average
difference of 1.25:1, widened to 1.63:1 in 2001. As for the wage
difference for the employees in collective economy in comparison to
those of other natures it saw a ratio of 1.49:1 in 1985 and it rose to
1.77:1 in 2oo1.
Sixth, it saw an obvious speeding-up of the difference of income among
various internal levels in towns and cities. Especially the recent two
years witnessed a big increase of difference between the higher income
as against that of the lower income. The statistics made in the first
quarter of 2002 indicated that the gross income of the 20 percent
population with higher income accounted for 46.2 percent of the total
volume of income. Instead, the gross income for 20 percent population
with lower income made up only 6 percent of the total volume of income,
the difference between the two being 7.66 times.
2.Concentration of amassed wealth is more and more increasing with the
difference of family fortunes tending to become bigger and bigger
The latest statistics indicates that the 10 percent of wealthy families
accounted for 45 percent of the total properties of the urban population.
That of the 10 percent families with the lowest income only came to 1.4
percent of the total properties and the rest 80 percent of the population
own 53.6 percent of the total family properties.
In the meantime, the financial property of the urban population tends to
concentrate among those families with higher incomes. The families of 20
percent of population owning the most financial properties accounted for
some 66.4 percent of the total financial properties of the urban
population while the lowest 20 percent owning only an average of some
1.3 percent of financial properties.
The Gini Index shows 0.51 for family properties among the city dwellers
at present in China, an index indicating a much higher of 0.32 than the
average income of urban population.
3. It indicates a coexistence of polarization between the "
equalitarianism in distribution" within the system and the "extra-large
difference of income" without the system.
There is no complete eradication of "equalitarianism", which is mainly
manifested in the distribution of salaries (not including incomes beside
the salary). The income distribution indicates a less difference in most
of the SOEs, government organs and institutions and among groups of the
people whereas at the same time, there is in existence a phenomenon of "
extra-large difference in income distribution" beyond the salary
distribution. The income aside from the salary, the monopolized income
and the unlawful abnormal income constitute the major reason for over-
large difference of income distribution.
4. Irregular distribution of incomes
First of all, the wage payment is irregular. The wage payment in arrears
does exist to a different extent in many places in the country. Second is
the irregular drawing of wages. The wage drawing outside the plan of
work and pay for enterprises and the drawing outside the base wages are
commonly practiced. Third, the establishment of complementary pension
among part of the enterprises has exceeded 4 percent for a standard
entry, an increase of income in an alternative way. Fourth, the
management personnel of enterprises take too casual an attitude towards
the "cancellation of posts" that is short of a reasonable mechanism of
restriction.
5. The income structure is on the whole not within a framework of
reasonability
This is mainly expressed in the following: First, the structure of wage
income is unreasonable with a low wage within the system while a higher
salary outside the system and it sees great variation of items that are
not included in the wage system. Second, the specific gravity for income
distribution as according to multi-factors hasn't been brought to show.
And there is still some differences to make up as required by the central
government for "allowing, encouraging the benefit distribution with the
participation of such factors as the capitals, technologies and
management capableness, etc. The income distribution pattern as according
to multiple major factors by city dwellers still falls far behind the
regular way. For other major factors to participate in the income
distribution still needs to be further improved.
People's Daily Online --- http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/
作者：Anonymous 在 罕见奇谈 发贴, 来自 http://www.hjclub.org |
|
|
| 返回顶端 |
|
 |
| |
|
|
您不能在本论坛发表新主题
您不能在本论坛回复主题
您不能在本论坛编辑自己的文章
您不能在本论坛删除自己的文章
您不能在本论坛发表投票
您不能在这个论坛添加附件
您不能在这个论坛下载文件
|
based on phpbb, All rights reserved.
|
