新疆农村维吾尔族青壮年对外出务工的认同及动因分析

了解新疆农村维吾尔族富余劳动力对外出务工的认同及动因,有助于解决维吾尔族农村富余劳动力外出务工的瓶颈问题。该文根据新疆南疆三地州调查问卷数据,并结合访谈资料,对新疆农村维吾尔族青壮年的外出务工认同度及动因进行了分析。研究发现:87%的留守田园农民有外出务工意愿,但外出务工意愿并不强烈;在外出务工转移动因上,转出地内在动力是决定性因素,而转入地动力差强人意。为此,提高转入地动力是深化转移工作的重点。     

对亚当·斯密价值论的理性分析

亚当·斯密是英国工场手工业时期的资产阶级古典政治经济学的集大成者,他在前人研究的基础上,成功地将英国资产阶级政治经济学推向了一个新的阶段,尤其是他的价值理论,在今天看来,都还有些合理的成份。而马克思劳动价值理论正是他对亚当·斯密价值论研究基础上创新而发展起来的科学理论。本文将阐述亚当·斯密价值论的合理内核和缺陷。     

劳动创造了美

马克思在《1844年经济学哲学手稿》中提出了“劳动创造了美”的命题,这个“劳动”主要是指异化劳动。异化劳动是异化人的本质的劳动,它对人的美的创造具有消解和破坏作用,但劳动本身的规律及其创造能力,仍能使劳动者保持某种非异化,从而能在对象化的创造中,“理智地、能动地、现实地复现自己”,因而也能创造出美来。异化劳动的消除是人的解放的基础,也是美的创造力的解放。     

“一般价值”是马克思否定的概念——评晏智杰教授的新价值概念

"一般价值"是马克思否定的概念.把商品的价值归结为商品的效用同人的需要之间的关系,即商品满足人的需要或欲望的能力,在理论上不能成立,也不符合实际.     

全面理解马克思主义的自由理论

马克思主义对自由的理解是一个完整统一的体系 ,具体体现为三个层次的统一 :自由是人类存在的理想状态 ;自由是人的生命活动的内在本质规定 ;自由是肯定人自身的劳动活动。马克思的自由理论为我们把握人类现实的实践活动提供了理论支持。     

Remaking the labour movement in Italy: the revival of strikes at Fiat-Chrysler Automobiles in 2015–17

ABSTRACT

After the Fiat-Chrysler merger in 2009, CEO Sergio Marchionne imposed a drastic reorganization of labour relations in Italy’s plants, precipitating a profound crisis of the system of industrial relations in the country. But between 2015 and 2017 a significant section of workers at Melfi, Atessa and Termoli plants went on strike against compulsory overtime and labour intensification, establishing links with grassroots unions that successfully organized in logistics. The metalworkers’ union FIOM-CGIL, however, delegitimized the union representatives who resisted Marchionne’s plans. In this article, we trace the context and development of these still little-known strikes. Because of their growing institutionalization, we argue, the confederal unions (CGIL, CISL, UIL) have both failed to mobilize workers and repressed workers’ attempts to resist the deterioration of their conditions. The strikes at FCA and in logistics, however, show that new forms of radical unionism are emerging, pointing to new possibilities for working-class organizing.     

How far merit selection? Social stratification and the labour market1

The question of how societies allocate occupational positions and subsequent rewards has long been of interest to sociologists. According to one influential theory, the needs of modern industrial societies and economies demand that high-level and functionally important occupational positions are allocated according to meritocratic principles. I argue that, ultimately, employers get the final say about which characteristics are rewarded in the labour market. In order to examine which skills and attributes are required by employers for particular occupations I analyse data drawn from a content analysis of c.5000 British newspaper job advertisements. The results show that both merit and non-merit characteristics are requested by employers in job advertisements, even for occupations falling within the higher classes. I also find evidence that employers have similar requirements for similar occupations, cross-cutting class boundaries.     

Reinvigorating the social contract and strengthening social cohesion: Social protection responses to COVID-19

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the vulnerability of those who are inadequately covered by social protection in more and less developed countries alike, and has exacerbated the fragility of a social contract that was already under strain in many countries. A weak social contract in the context of an exceptional crisis poses a very real risk to social cohesion. Nevertheless, many States have reasserted themselves as the guarantor of rights by protecting public health and incomes. By sustaining these measures, economic recovery will be supported which will help minimize risks that may weaken social cohesion. However, this is a fast-moving, inherently unstable and protracted crisis. Social protection stands at a critical juncture. Decisive policy action will be required to strengthen social protection systems, including floors, as one of the cornerstones of a reinvigorated social contract.     

Evaluating social investment in disability policy

Disability policy in European countries is displaying a shift towards social investment: increasing human capital and access to the labour market. The reasoning that underlies this transition is that disabled persons would benefit from mainstream employment, but are impeded in traditional policy by deficiencies in labour supply and demand. However, the shift towards more activating policies in many countries is accompanied by a decline in social protection. It is unclear whether social investment may effectively promote the employment chances of disabled persons within this context. The present research examines this question through a quantitative, cross-sectional, multilevel analysis on microdata from 22 EU countries. Our findings suggest greater activation to predict lower employment chances, while reducing passive support shows mixed effects. Conversely, measures for facilitation in daily life predict greater employment chances, as do measures for sheltered work. These findings raise questions over the value of social investment for disabled persons—and underline the need to overcome broader barriers in the labour market and in society.     

The 2015 welfare reform of the National Basic Livelihood Security System in South Korea: Effects on economic outcomes

In July 2015, South Korea’s National Basic Livelihood Security System (NBLSS) was reformed for the purposes of eliminating welfare blind spots and reducing poverty. The reform is expected to affect the recipients’ economic behaviours and choices. In this study, we used changes in benefits and eligibility for the NBLSS under the customised benefit system to identify the effects of the change in the NBLSS on a proposed set of economic outcomes – income, labour supply, consumption, savings, poverty reduction. To estimate the effects, we used data from the 10th–12th waves of the Korea Welfare Panel Study and employed a difference‐in‐differences framework integrated with the propensity scores. We found that the NBLSS helps the poor to reduce financial and material hardships through income and consumption increments, but that it does not provide disincentives to the recipients from participating in the labour market or from saving.