农民增收是"三个代表"的具体实践

增加农民收入是“三个代表”的必然要求 ,是实践“三个代表”最生动、最具体的体现 ,造成农民增收缓慢的原因是多方面的 ,但根本原因还是农村党的基层组织和干部队伍方面存在问题。要加强党的基层组织建设 ,提高农村干部队伍的素质 ;以结构调整为突破口 ;发展产业化经营 ,发挥企业家带动农户的作用 ;发育农村的市场体系 ;增加对农业基础设施的投入 ;尽快实施农村费改税 ,千方百计增加农民收入。     

转型期农民收入差距原因探源

20世纪90年代以来,农民收入差距问题突显出来。分析表明,引起农民收入差距既有工资性收入分配的不均等、农民负担的不合理性、劳动力素质的差异以及权力因素和非法经营因素等表面原因,也有产业结构、经营体制、人力资本以及国家政策等深层原因,诸多因素共同导致了农民的收入差距。国家应多管齐下,综合运用多项改革措施解决收入差距过大问题,努力实现农村社会的全面和谐发展。     

我国个人所得税对居民投资的影响与调整

个人所得税不仅对社会公平有影响 ,对经济效率也有影响。通过对我国现行的个人所得税制对居民投资能力、投资结构、预期收益和投资风险的影响分析 ,我们可以从纳税扣除、金融产品利息免税优惠、个人所得税内部协调及企业所得税衔接的角度提出调整建议     

中国房地产税制:存在问题与改革设想

在现代市场经济条件下,房地产税制具有十分重要的功能。现阶段中国房地产税制存在房地产税收功能分散,房地产税种设置交叉重叠现象突出,计税依据不符合国际惯例,房地产保有环节税负偏轻和房地产税权分布结构不合理等问题。中国房地产税制改革已进入基础性制度建设阶段,必须按照"宽税基、简税种、低税率"的原则,实现房地产开发流转环节税收为主向房地产保有环节税收为主的房地产税制转型,去土地财政化,这就要适时开征房产税。开征房产税可以分两步走,近期对居民新购商品房超免税标准部分征收房产税,中长期覆盖到居民已购存量房地产。     

对我国目前个人收入分配差距的分析与探讨

收入差距扩大、社会分配不公 ,是近些年来我国分配领域中出现的一个新问题 ,也是目前社会各界都非常关注的热点问题之一。我国要在 2 0 2 0年实现全面建设小康社会的奋斗目标 ,就必须深入研究并尽快解决我国目前居民收入差距过大问题。通过对我国居民个人收入分配变化轨迹的回顾 ,可以对我国居民个人收入分配差距的现状、原因及对策进行全面地深入研究和探讨     

低碳视角下的可再生能源政策——激励机制与模式选择

利用可再生能源是实现碳减排和能源安全的主要手段,是实现中国可持续发展的主要途径。然而,由于缺乏对可再生能源外部性的合理评估,现实的和潜在的风险阻碍了可再生能源技术的大规模应用。有效的激励政策是,通过价格、补贴和强制消费等手段刺激企业投资可再生能源,促进经济向低碳方向发展。纵观世界各国,不同的可再生能源政策模式在控制成本、创造需求、降低风险及稳定性等各方面存在差异性,而政策的激励效果是以上因素综合作用的结果。因此,政策制定者必须根据现实的能源要素禀赋和技术发展水平进行合理的政策模式选择。中国可再生能源开发潜力大,近年来利用增速快,但也存在着整体利用率低、地域和技术发展不平衡等问题。在现阶段,中国可再生能源激励政策应以固定上网电价制模式为主,将可再生能源利用数量作为基本目标,促进技术创新,建立合理的定价机制。这对中国建设低碳社会、加快转变经济发展方式具有关键性作用。     

试论现阶段私营企业主的收入

私营企业主的收入由劳动收入和非劳动收入两部分构成 ,他们已形成我国现阶段的主要高收入阶层。私营企业主的高收入符合市场经济的效率原则 ,也符合“先富与后富”的经济发展原则。因此 ,既不能忽视它剥削的一面 ,也不能夸大它的剥削性。宏观上政府可以利用国家税收政策对其进行调节 ,微观上引导他们将其收入用于投资和发展生产     

中国收入优先增长中的结构优化

在中国进入中等收入国家行列后,实施收入优先增长是避免中等收入陷阱和实现经济可持续发展的一个重要发展战略。这个战略既要从总量增长角度进行考虑,还要从结构优化方面进行分析,即中国的收入优先增长主要是应该通过工资性收入的增加来实现,还是应该通过提高财产性收入或经营性收入来实现。考察典型的高收入国家美国的居民收入结构,其长期运行规律和发展趋势应能对中国从中等收入国家迈向高收入国家提供某些参考和借鉴。从中国居民工资性收入、财产性收入和经营性收入的自身特征和运行规律来看,在中国实施收入优先增长的过程中,大幅度提高工资收入在短期是应该的,但难以作为长期举措。财产性收入增加是收入优先的重要组成部分,但不能放任财产性收入过度膨胀,而经营性收入的提高应该成为中国收入优先战略实施的重要举措。     

Why is the gender revolution uneven and stalled? Gender essentialism and men's movement into ‘women's work'

Men's limited movement into female occupations has been identified as a key barrier to future declines in occupational sex segregation and achieving greater gender equality. So why are men so reticent to enter jobs normatively regarded as female? Drawing from qualitative interviews with multiple stakeholders in four female‐dominated occupations in Australia, this article documents the processes that influence men's employment in gender‐atypical jobs. Gender essentialism is central to many processes that generate and/or stall changes in men's representation in female‐dominated occupations. While gender essentialism's role in producing and reproducing occupation sex segregation is well known, its role in reducing occupational sex segregation is a critical process which has previously received limited attention. The article details gender essentialism's integrative function.     

Explaining Italian “exceptionalism” and its end: Minimum income from neglect to hyper-politicization

Traditionally at the margins of the political debate, minimum income protection has recently become a key issue in Italian politics. After decades of social and political “neglect” letting Italy the only European country (with Greece) still lacking an anti-poverty minimum income safety net in the 2010s, finally a national programme called Inclusion Income was introduced in 2018, then replaced by a more robustly financed scheme, the Citizenship Income in 2019. The introduction of these new programmes was the object of an intense political debate, which raises two main puzzles. Why a policy field characterized by the low political resources of would be beneficiaries and low incidence on the overall welfare budget has become so important in the political debate? How did it occur in Italy, where minimum income protection had been absent in political discourses for at least five decades after World War II? To answer these questions, this article first elaborates a novel theoretical framework which combines the main properties of socio-political demand and political supply in order to explain the scope and direction of minimum income reforms. Second, it provides an analytically oriented reconstruction of MIS policy trajectory in Italy in the three different phases: the phase of MIS “neglect” (1948–1992) characterized by inertia; the period of political “contentiousness” (1993–2012), marked by attempts of path departure followed by policy reversals; the more recent phase leading to the introduction and institutionalization of a MIS. Third, the article provides a theoretically framed interpretation of the overall MIS trajectory in Italy.