分配和谐的均衡理论、效应分析与制度安排
|
摘要
收入分配问题是一个被经济学家、社会学家长期关注的问题,同时它也是很多政治家施政纲领中经常涉及的问题。由于收入分配总是和公平与效率这一对经济学中永恒的矛盾联系在一起,因此不同的理论流派对它的论述往往旨趣各异。在我国建设和谐社会的背景下,分配关系和谐被看作是人与人之间关系和谐的核心部分。如何通过政策手段与市场机制缓解过大的收入分配差距、创造分配和谐的制度环境,是我国理论界与政策层面所关注的热点问题。
经济学中具有代表性的收入分配形式主要有克拉克的边际生产力分配形式、马歇尔的均衡价格分配形式、马克思主义的按劳分配形式以及按劳分配与按生产要素分配相结合的分配形式,不同的分配形式形成不同的分配关系。边际生产力分配形式与均衡价格分配形式属于要素价值理论的范畴,它们是以市场交换作为前提而展开的。现实经济活动中,由于生产要素占有中的差别、市场不完善、非均衡等问题存在,边际生产力分配形式与均衡价格分配形式难以实现分配关系和谐。按劳分配形式则只在集中的计划经济体制中实行过,在这种经济体制下,价格只是一种计量工具。从理论上来说,按劳分配形式下只要劳动者付出等量劳动就能得到等量收入,因此这种分配形式下的分配关系也就应该是和谐的。但是集中的计划经济体制下,没有一个将等量劳动转化为简单劳动的机制,等量劳动也无法获得等量的收入,因而也就难以实现分配关系和谐。按劳分配与按生产要素相结合的分配形式是我国在社会主义市场经济体制下实行的一种分配形式,它也是以市场交换作为前提条件的,但是在我国转轨期间市场经济体制不完善、市场非均衡的条件下难以保证市场主体的交换行为是等价交换,这种分配形式也难以避免出现分配关系不和谐的现象。
在市场经济条件下,市场主体通过交换活动来实现自己生产要素的价值。在交换活动中,不同的市场格局以及不同的供给与需求条件往往导致不同的交换结果。在商品交换过程中,如果商品供不应求,则商品价格较高,从而导致商品生产者占有商品消费者的剩余;相反,如果商品供过于求,则商品价格较低,从而导致商品消费者占有商品生产者的剩余。这两种非均衡的市场状态下交换导致的财富分配关系都不是和谐的分配关系。而如果交换的市场条件不完善,如垄断、腐败等,也会出现人为导致的供给与需要的不对称,从而破坏市场的均衡。只有在等价交换的条件下财富的分配才是和谐的,即生产者不占有消费者剩余,消费者不占有生产者剩余。进一步,也只有在市场是均衡与完善的条件下进行的交换才是等价的交换。因此,市场均衡与完善是实现收入分配和谐的必要条件。
我国要实现收入分配和谐,不仅仅需要通过加强财政转移支付政策、社会保障体系建设这些二次分配手段以及发展慈善事业等三次分配手段来缓解分配差距的扩大的状况,更需要从初次分配着手,加强法制、构建完善的市场体系,并且通过宏观经济政策来促进市场向均衡的状态趋近。二次分配与三次分配手段是实现分配和谐的治标之策,以完善市场体系、促进市场趋向于均衡状态以构建分配和谐的市场环境为主要内容的初次分配手段是治本之策。只有标本兼治,才能保证我国收入分配关系的和谐。
Income distribution is a problem which has concerned by economist and sociologist for a long time and it is also be found in the policy program of many politics. Because income distribution is always related to the contradiction of fairness and efficiency in economic, there are many different opinions about it among these schools of theory. It is believed that harmonious income distribution relationship is the core of harmonious relationship between people in the background of harmonious society construction. How to narrow the gap of income distribution and create the institution conditions for harmonious distribution relationship by policy measure and market mechanism, it is a hot problem which concerned by both theory circle and policy makers.
There are four representative income distribution forms: Clark’s marginal productivity income distribution form, Marshall’s equilibrium price income distribution form, Marx’s distribution according to one's performance form and distribution according to one's performance and production factors form. Different distribution forms lead to different distribution relationship. Marginal productivity distribution form and equilibrium price distribution belong to factor value theory and they are based on market exchange institution. In real economy life, these two distribution forms can’t achieve the harmonious income distribution relationship because of the differences in possession production factor, market disequilibrium and imperfect. Distribution according to one’s performance form was just implemented in centralized planning economy and price was just a measure instrument in this economy. Theoretically, one person will get the equate income if he or she do equate work, so the income distribution relationship will be harmonious. But there is not an institution which can translate complex works into simple work in centralize planning economy and equate works can’t obtain equate income. So income distribution relationship can’t be harmonious. Distribution according to one's performance and production factors form is implemented in China’s Socialism market economy and it is also based on market exchange. But market imperfect and disequilibrium can’t carry out equal value exchange in the period of economy transition in China and this distribution form can’t get harmonious distribution relationship.
Market main bodies actualize their own economy value through exchange in market economy. Different market pattern and different supply- demand relation may lead to different result in exchange. If supply of goods fall short of demand, the price will be high and producer will have consumers’surplus. On the contrary, if supply of goods is in excess of the demand, the price will be low and consumer will have producers’surplus. The distribution relationship isn’t harmonious in these two disequilibrium market patterns. The imperfect market, such as monopoly, corruption, will artificially lead to unbalance between supply and demand and destroy market equilibrium. Distribution relationship will not harmonious unless exchange is equal, because producers can’t have consumers’surplus and consumers can’t have producers’surplus. Furthermore, exchange will be not equal unless market is equilibrium and perfect. So market equilibrium and perfect is the necessary condition of harmonious income distribution relationship.
To actualize harmonious income distribution relationship, China not only need to narrow income distribution gap through secondary distribution measures such as fiscal transfer payment, social security institution and third distribution measures such as charitable cause, but also need to begin at primary distribution measures such as improving the legal system, establishing perfect market system and pushing market to the state of equilibrium through macroeconomic policy. Secondary and third distribution measures are temporary solution of actualizing harmonious distribution relationship and primary distribution measures are permanent solution. China will actualize harmonious distribution relationship only if we take both temporary and permanent solutions.
经济学中具有代表性的收入分配形式主要有克拉克的边际生产力分配形式、马歇尔的均衡价格分配形式、马克思主义的按劳分配形式以及按劳分配与按生产要素分配相结合的分配形式,不同的分配形式形成不同的分配关系。边际生产力分配形式与均衡价格分配形式属于要素价值理论的范畴,它们是以市场交换作为前提而展开的。现实经济活动中,由于生产要素占有中的差别、市场不完善、非均衡等问题存在,边际生产力分配形式与均衡价格分配形式难以实现分配关系和谐。按劳分配形式则只在集中的计划经济体制中实行过,在这种经济体制下,价格只是一种计量工具。从理论上来说,按劳分配形式下只要劳动者付出等量劳动就能得到等量收入,因此这种分配形式下的分配关系也就应该是和谐的。但是集中的计划经济体制下,没有一个将等量劳动转化为简单劳动的机制,等量劳动也无法获得等量的收入,因而也就难以实现分配关系和谐。按劳分配与按生产要素相结合的分配形式是我国在社会主义市场经济体制下实行的一种分配形式,它也是以市场交换作为前提条件的,但是在我国转轨期间市场经济体制不完善、市场非均衡的条件下难以保证市场主体的交换行为是等价交换,这种分配形式也难以避免出现分配关系不和谐的现象。
在市场经济条件下,市场主体通过交换活动来实现自己生产要素的价值。在交换活动中,不同的市场格局以及不同的供给与需求条件往往导致不同的交换结果。在商品交换过程中,如果商品供不应求,则商品价格较高,从而导致商品生产者占有商品消费者的剩余;相反,如果商品供过于求,则商品价格较低,从而导致商品消费者占有商品生产者的剩余。这两种非均衡的市场状态下交换导致的财富分配关系都不是和谐的分配关系。而如果交换的市场条件不完善,如垄断、腐败等,也会出现人为导致的供给与需要的不对称,从而破坏市场的均衡。只有在等价交换的条件下财富的分配才是和谐的,即生产者不占有消费者剩余,消费者不占有生产者剩余。进一步,也只有在市场是均衡与完善的条件下进行的交换才是等价的交换。因此,市场均衡与完善是实现收入分配和谐的必要条件。
我国要实现收入分配和谐,不仅仅需要通过加强财政转移支付政策、社会保障体系建设这些二次分配手段以及发展慈善事业等三次分配手段来缓解分配差距的扩大的状况,更需要从初次分配着手,加强法制、构建完善的市场体系,并且通过宏观经济政策来促进市场向均衡的状态趋近。二次分配与三次分配手段是实现分配和谐的治标之策,以完善市场体系、促进市场趋向于均衡状态以构建分配和谐的市场环境为主要内容的初次分配手段是治本之策。只有标本兼治,才能保证我国收入分配关系的和谐。
Income distribution is a problem which has concerned by economist and sociologist for a long time and it is also be found in the policy program of many politics. Because income distribution is always related to the contradiction of fairness and efficiency in economic, there are many different opinions about it among these schools of theory. It is believed that harmonious income distribution relationship is the core of harmonious relationship between people in the background of harmonious society construction. How to narrow the gap of income distribution and create the institution conditions for harmonious distribution relationship by policy measure and market mechanism, it is a hot problem which concerned by both theory circle and policy makers.
There are four representative income distribution forms: Clark’s marginal productivity income distribution form, Marshall’s equilibrium price income distribution form, Marx’s distribution according to one's performance form and distribution according to one's performance and production factors form. Different distribution forms lead to different distribution relationship. Marginal productivity distribution form and equilibrium price distribution belong to factor value theory and they are based on market exchange institution. In real economy life, these two distribution forms can’t achieve the harmonious income distribution relationship because of the differences in possession production factor, market disequilibrium and imperfect. Distribution according to one’s performance form was just implemented in centralized planning economy and price was just a measure instrument in this economy. Theoretically, one person will get the equate income if he or she do equate work, so the income distribution relationship will be harmonious. But there is not an institution which can translate complex works into simple work in centralize planning economy and equate works can’t obtain equate income. So income distribution relationship can’t be harmonious. Distribution according to one's performance and production factors form is implemented in China’s Socialism market economy and it is also based on market exchange. But market imperfect and disequilibrium can’t carry out equal value exchange in the period of economy transition in China and this distribution form can’t get harmonious distribution relationship.
Market main bodies actualize their own economy value through exchange in market economy. Different market pattern and different supply- demand relation may lead to different result in exchange. If supply of goods fall short of demand, the price will be high and producer will have consumers’surplus. On the contrary, if supply of goods is in excess of the demand, the price will be low and consumer will have producers’surplus. The distribution relationship isn’t harmonious in these two disequilibrium market patterns. The imperfect market, such as monopoly, corruption, will artificially lead to unbalance between supply and demand and destroy market equilibrium. Distribution relationship will not harmonious unless exchange is equal, because producers can’t have consumers’surplus and consumers can’t have producers’surplus. Furthermore, exchange will be not equal unless market is equilibrium and perfect. So market equilibrium and perfect is the necessary condition of harmonious income distribution relationship.
To actualize harmonious income distribution relationship, China not only need to narrow income distribution gap through secondary distribution measures such as fiscal transfer payment, social security institution and third distribution measures such as charitable cause, but also need to begin at primary distribution measures such as improving the legal system, establishing perfect market system and pushing market to the state of equilibrium through macroeconomic policy. Secondary and third distribution measures are temporary solution of actualizing harmonious distribution relationship and primary distribution measures are permanent solution. China will actualize harmonious distribution relationship only if we take both temporary and permanent solutions.
引文
[1]朱春燕.西方主流收入分配理论与马克思收入分配理论比较.山东社会科学, 2005,(2):8-10
[2]尹恒,龚六堂,邹恒甫.当代收入分配理论的新发展.经济研究, 2002,(8): 83-91
[3] Simon Kuznets. Economy Growth and Income Inequality. American Economic Review, 1955,45:1-28
[4] S. Anand, R. M. Kanbur,. The Kuznets process and the inequality-development relationship. Journal of Development Economics, 1993,(40):25–72
[5] J. G. Williamson. British inequality during the industrial revolution: accounting for the Kuznets curve. In Y.S. Brenner, H. Kaelble, M. Thomas (Eds.), Income distribution in historical perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991,126
[6] P. Aghion, P. Bolton. A trickle-down theory of growth and development. Review of Economic Studies, 1997,(64):151–172
[7] Henry Tam. An economic or political Kuznets curve?. Public Choice. 2008,(134):367-389
[8] Grossmann, Volker. Inequality, Economic Growth and Technological Change. A Springer-Verlag Company, 2001
[9] Robert J Barro. Inequality and Growth in a Panel of Countries. Journal of Economic Growth, 2000,(5): 5-32
[10] A. Banerjee, E. Duflo. Inequality and Growth: What Can the Data Say?. Mimeo, MIT, 1999
[11] Laszlo Matyas, Laszlo Konya和Lachlan Macquarie. The Kuznets U-curve hypothesis: some panel data evidence. Applied Economics Letters, 1998,(5):693-697
[12] T. Persson, G. Tabelini. Is Inequality Harmful for Growth?[M]. American Economic Review, 1994,84:600-621
[13] Alesina,A. D. Rodrik.Distribution Politics and Economic Growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1994,109:465-490
[14] D. Acemoglu, J. A. Robinson,. Why did the West extend the franchise? Democracy, inequality and growth in historical perspective. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2000,(115):1167–1200
[15] F. Bourguignon, T. Verdier. Oligarchy, democracy, inequality and growth[J]. Journal of Development Economics, 2000,(62):285–313
[16] H. Tam. Democratization. in Taxation, appropriation and the State. Dissertation, Department of Economics, Harvard University, 1999,140–201
[17] N. Birdsall. Economic Approaches to Population Growth[M]. In H. Chenery, T. N. Srinivasan. Handbook of Development Economics. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers, 1988,477-542
[18] R. Perotti. Growth, income distribution and democracy: What the data say[J]. Journal of Economic growth, 1996,(1,2):149-187
[19] Michael Kremer, Daniel L. Chen. Income distribution dynamics with endogenous fertility. Journal of economic growth, 2002,(7): 227-258
[20] Gunther Rehme. Education, Economic Growth and Measured Income Inequality. Economica, 2007,(74): 493-514
[21] Priya Ranjan. Dynamic evolution of income distribution and credit-constrained human capital investment in open economies. Journal of international economics, 2001,(55): 329-358
[22] Amartya Sen. On the Weights and Measures: Informational Constraints in Social Welfare Analysis. Econometrica, 1977,(45,7): 1539-1572
[23]严桂林.劳动和劳动价值理论讨论综述.上海行政学院学报, 2002,(3):106-114
[24] Hongyi Li, Heng-fu Zou. Income Inequality is not Harmful for Growth: Theory and evidence. Review of Development Economics, 1998,(2,3):318-34
[25]尹恒,龚六堂,邹恒甫.收入分配不平等与经济增长:回到库兹涅茨假说.经济研究, 2005,(4):17-22
[26]钱敏泽.库兹涅茨倒U字形假说的形成与拓展.世界经济, 2007,(9):56-63
[27]李实,张平,魏众,仲济银.中国居民收入分配实证分析.北京:社会科学文献出版社, 2000,56-79
[28]陈宗胜,周云波.我国非法非正常收入对居民收入差别的影响及其经济学解释.经济研究, 2001,(4):14-22
[29]文娟,孙楚仁.国际贸易对我国收入分配的影响.国际贸易问题, 2008, (11): 15-23
[30]周华.外商直接投资对东道国收入分配影响的长期效应:以中国为例.南开经济研究, 2006, (5):37-45
[31]吴易风,钱敏泽.影响消费需求因素的实证分析.经济理论与经济管理, 2004, (2):13-16
[32]吴晓明,吴栋.我国城镇居民平均消费倾向与收入分配状况关系的实证研究.数量经济与技术经济研究, 2007, (5):22-32
[33]冯虹.收入分配与城市利益阶层分化的相关性研究.管理世界, 2006, (4): 142-143
[34]杨灿明,胡洪曙,俞杰.收入分配研究述评.中南财经政法大学学报, 2008, (1): 10-15
[35]常健.经济增长、收入不平等与政治稳定的结构关系及其政策启示.学海, 2007, (2):93-100
[36]杨圣明,郝梅瑞.当代中国史研究, 2006,(3):4-12
[37]朱其训.和谐经济论.北京:人民出版社, 2007,10
[38]朱子云.社会收入分配和谐度及其综合评判研究. http://www.studa.net/ shehuiqita/ 080630/ 17054814.html, 2008-06-30
[39]相如.分配和谐.中华工商联合出版社, 2006, 4-16
[40]马克思.资本论(第1卷).北京:人民出版社, 1975,48-58
[41] Stanley L. Brue. The Evolution of Economic Thought(6th ed.). New York: Harcourt, Inc, 2000,195
[42] John Bates Clark. The distribution of Wealth: A Theory of Wages, Interest and Profits. London: The Macmillan Co., 1938, 48-50
[43] (美)斯坦利L.布鲁.经济思想史.北京:机械工业出版社, 2005,195-212
[44] (美)克拉克.财富的分配.北京:商务印书馆, 1983,10-11
[45]陈孟熙,郭建青.经济学说史教程.北京:中国人民大学出版社, 1992,266
[46]庞巴维克.资本实证论.商务印书馆, 1964,167
[47]马歇尔.经济学原理(下卷).北京:商务印书馆, 1965,208
[48]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯选集(第3卷).北京:北京人民出版社, 1972, 10-11
[49]王思中.按劳分配与按生产要素分配相结合.集团经济研究, 2005,(4): 116-118
[50]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯选集(第2卷).北京:人民出版社, 1995,1102
[51]江泽民.全面建设小康社会,开创中国特色社会主义事业新局面.北京:人民出版社, 2002, 28
[52]晏智杰.西方经济学说史教程.北京:北京大学出版社, 2002, 252-253
[53]巴斯夏.和谐经济论.中国社会科学出版社, 1995, 45-79
[54] MBA图书馆.经济和谐论. http://wiki.mbalib.com/wiki/%E7%BB%8F% E6%B5%8E%E5%92%8C% E8% B0%90%E8%AE%BA,2007-4-20
[55]陈万灵.试论和谐社会建设的社区机制. http://www.gdou.edu.cn/ xcb/source/info.asp?id=144,2005-12-1
[56]楚金桥,李俊.论和谐社会的本质及经济标志.统计与决策, 2008,(1):21-23
[57]李松龄.社会主义和谐社会研究.长沙:湖南人民出版社, 2006, 110-239
[58]许涤新.政治经济学辞典(下册).北京:人民出版社, 1980, 163-165
[59]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯全集(第16卷).北京:人民出版社, 1964,162
[60] Audrey Siew Kim LIM, Kam Ki TANG. Hunam capital inequality and the Kuznets curve. The developing economies, 2008,(3): 26-51
[61] Aghion, P., Howitt, P. Endogenous Growth Theory. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1998
[62] Yoshiaki Sugimoto. Inequality, growth and overtaking. Macroeconomic Dynamics, 2006,(10): 625-651
[63]郑秉文.经济理论中的福利国家.中国社会科学, 2003,(2):41-63
[64] C. Esping-Andersen, G. and Korpi, W.,Social policy as class politics in post-war capitalism: Scandinavia, Austria and Germany, in J. H. Goldthorpe (ed.), Order and Conflict in Contemporary Capitalism, Oxford University Press, New York.9, 1984
[65]周宏.福利国家向何处去.北京:社会科学文献出版社, 2006, 64-65
[66] Peter Flora(ed.).Growth to Limits: the Western European Welfare States Since World War II. Wlater de Gruter, Berlin, New York, 1986, 2:100
[67]梁怡.瑞典学派的理论贡献. http://finance.sina.com.cn/economist/ xuezhesuibi/20071126/01504213824.shtml, 2007-11-26
[68]张泽荣.当代资本主义分配关系研究.北京:经济科学出版社, 1994,26-28
[69]胡希宁.当代西方经济学流派.北京:中共中央学校出版社, 2004,117
[70]袁群,安晓敏.北欧福利国家的改革及对我国的启示.经济问题探索, 2006,(11):139-142
[71]张红霞.北欧国家的福利制度改革及其对中国的启示.中国石油大学学报, 2007,(12):48-52
[72]胡莹. 20世纪90年代美国美国分配理论的发展.理论月刊, 2007,(4): 161-164
[73] F.A.哈耶克.个人主义与经济秩序(中文版).北京经济学院出版社, 1989
[74]叶茂.布什经济理论与美国养老保险制度改革.理论月刊, 2008,(3):143-146
[75]傅殷才.新保守主义经济学.北京:中国经济出版社, 1994,16-17
[76]陈宝森.布什的经济政策和财政困境.地方财政研究, 2005,(3):50-54
[77]宋小川.论当前美国社会的收入分配不平等和两极分化.马克思主义研究, 2008,(6):77-84
[78]纪万师.个人消费支撑美国经济,高消费率下暗藏隐忧.中国经济导报, 2007-11-1
[79]陈才兴.新自由主义在拉美的发展变化及前景.经济学动态, 1999,(2): 55-59
[80]袁东振.对拉美国家经济与社会不协调发展的理论分析.拉丁美洲研究, 2005,(3): 17-22
[81] DB. Economic and Social Progress in Latin American 1998-1999 Report. Washington, D. C. Johns Hopkins University Press,1998,11
[82] ECLAC, Statistical Yearbook for Latin America and the Caribbean. 2006, 74-79
[83] ECLAC, Preliminary Overview of the Economies of Latin American and the Caribbean 2003,10
[84] UNDA, Ideas and Contributions: Democracy in Latin America, 2004,39
[85]陈平.制度、政策与收入分配.拉丁美洲研究, 2008,(2):15-22
[86] C. Furtado, Un Proyecto para o Brazil , Rio de Janeiro, Editorial Saga.转引自James L. Dietz (ed.), Latin America’s Economic Development: Confronting Crisis, Boulder , Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1995,156
[87] Bela Balassa, Gerardo Bruno, Pedro-Pablo Kuczynski and Mario Henrique Simonsen. Toward Renewed Economic Growth in Latin America, Washington , D. C., Institute for International Economics, 1986,160
[88]江时学.拉美国家的收入分配为何如此不公.拉丁美洲研究, 2005,(5):3-11
[89] Inter-American Development Bank. Economic and Social Progress in Latin America, 1998-1999 Report, Washington, D. C., Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998,100-103
[90] Oscar Altimir, Luis Beccaria. Income Distribution in Argentina 1974– 2000[J]. CEPAL Review, 2002, 1(78):79
[91]美洲开发银行.经济发展与社会公正.北京:中国社会科学出版社, 2002,217-218
[92]袁东振.拉美国家收入再分配政策的局限性.拉丁美洲研究, 2003,(3):23-28
[93] Michael Bleaney, Akira Nishiyama. Income inequality and growth—does the relationship vary with the income level? . Economic Letters, 2004,(84): 349-355
[94]李闻.功能收入分配与规模收入分配.社会科学报,2000年10月5日第2版
[95] Alfredo Shclarek. Consumption and Keynesian Fiscal Policy. CESifo Working Paper Series, 2004, 1310
[96]林国勇,范建勇,严燕.中国的消费不振与与分配:理论和数据.经济研究, 2002,(5):72-95
[97]新浪网.世界银行:中国实际收入差距还要更高. http://finance.sina.com.cn/ g/20080222/10594536001.shtml, 2008-02-22
[98] Cecilia Garcia-Penalosa1, Stephen J. Turnovsky. Growth and income inequality: a canonical model. Economic theory, 2006,(28):25-49
[99]汪同三,蔡跃洲.改革开放以来收入分配对资本积累及投资结构的影响.中国社会科学, 2006,(1):4-14
[100]中共中央关于完善社会主义市场经济体制若干问题的决定.北京:人民出版社, 2003,12-21
[101]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯全集(第26卷第3册).北京:人民出版社, 1974,159
[102]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯选集(第3卷).北京:人民出版社, 1995,661
[103] Jonathan Weinhagen. Price transmission within the PPI for intermediate goods. Monthly Labor Review, 2005,(5):41-49
[104]高鸿业.西方经济学.北京:中国人民大学出版社, 2004,210-211
[105]文跃然.垄断行业高薪的合理与不合理. http://news.qq.com/a/20070605/ 001664_2.htm, 2007-06-05
[106]蒋德海.我国经济改革最本质的是打破行政垄断.上海市经济管理干部学院学报, 2008,(4):8-10
[107]姚洋.转轨中国:审视社会公正和平等.北京:中国人民大学出版社, 2004,77-83
[108]郭平,郑莉娜,杨明.对提高我国基尼系数测算结果准确性与可信度的思考.中央财经大学学报, 2006,(2):79-82
[109]安体富.现有税负明显偏重.瞭望新闻周刊, 2004,(8):58
[2]尹恒,龚六堂,邹恒甫.当代收入分配理论的新发展.经济研究, 2002,(8): 83-91
[3] Simon Kuznets. Economy Growth and Income Inequality. American Economic Review, 1955,45:1-28
[4] S. Anand, R. M. Kanbur,. The Kuznets process and the inequality-development relationship. Journal of Development Economics, 1993,(40):25–72
[5] J. G. Williamson. British inequality during the industrial revolution: accounting for the Kuznets curve. In Y.S. Brenner, H. Kaelble, M. Thomas (Eds.), Income distribution in historical perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991,126
[6] P. Aghion, P. Bolton. A trickle-down theory of growth and development. Review of Economic Studies, 1997,(64):151–172
[7] Henry Tam. An economic or political Kuznets curve?. Public Choice. 2008,(134):367-389
[8] Grossmann, Volker. Inequality, Economic Growth and Technological Change. A Springer-Verlag Company, 2001
[9] Robert J Barro. Inequality and Growth in a Panel of Countries. Journal of Economic Growth, 2000,(5): 5-32
[10] A. Banerjee, E. Duflo. Inequality and Growth: What Can the Data Say?. Mimeo, MIT, 1999
[11] Laszlo Matyas, Laszlo Konya和Lachlan Macquarie. The Kuznets U-curve hypothesis: some panel data evidence. Applied Economics Letters, 1998,(5):693-697
[12] T. Persson, G. Tabelini. Is Inequality Harmful for Growth?[M]. American Economic Review, 1994,84:600-621
[13] Alesina,A. D. Rodrik.Distribution Politics and Economic Growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1994,109:465-490
[14] D. Acemoglu, J. A. Robinson,. Why did the West extend the franchise? Democracy, inequality and growth in historical perspective. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2000,(115):1167–1200
[15] F. Bourguignon, T. Verdier. Oligarchy, democracy, inequality and growth[J]. Journal of Development Economics, 2000,(62):285–313
[16] H. Tam. Democratization. in Taxation, appropriation and the State. Dissertation, Department of Economics, Harvard University, 1999,140–201
[17] N. Birdsall. Economic Approaches to Population Growth[M]. In H. Chenery, T. N. Srinivasan. Handbook of Development Economics. Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Publishers, 1988,477-542
[18] R. Perotti. Growth, income distribution and democracy: What the data say[J]. Journal of Economic growth, 1996,(1,2):149-187
[19] Michael Kremer, Daniel L. Chen. Income distribution dynamics with endogenous fertility. Journal of economic growth, 2002,(7): 227-258
[20] Gunther Rehme. Education, Economic Growth and Measured Income Inequality. Economica, 2007,(74): 493-514
[21] Priya Ranjan. Dynamic evolution of income distribution and credit-constrained human capital investment in open economies. Journal of international economics, 2001,(55): 329-358
[22] Amartya Sen. On the Weights and Measures: Informational Constraints in Social Welfare Analysis. Econometrica, 1977,(45,7): 1539-1572
[23]严桂林.劳动和劳动价值理论讨论综述.上海行政学院学报, 2002,(3):106-114
[24] Hongyi Li, Heng-fu Zou. Income Inequality is not Harmful for Growth: Theory and evidence. Review of Development Economics, 1998,(2,3):318-34
[25]尹恒,龚六堂,邹恒甫.收入分配不平等与经济增长:回到库兹涅茨假说.经济研究, 2005,(4):17-22
[26]钱敏泽.库兹涅茨倒U字形假说的形成与拓展.世界经济, 2007,(9):56-63
[27]李实,张平,魏众,仲济银.中国居民收入分配实证分析.北京:社会科学文献出版社, 2000,56-79
[28]陈宗胜,周云波.我国非法非正常收入对居民收入差别的影响及其经济学解释.经济研究, 2001,(4):14-22
[29]文娟,孙楚仁.国际贸易对我国收入分配的影响.国际贸易问题, 2008, (11): 15-23
[30]周华.外商直接投资对东道国收入分配影响的长期效应:以中国为例.南开经济研究, 2006, (5):37-45
[31]吴易风,钱敏泽.影响消费需求因素的实证分析.经济理论与经济管理, 2004, (2):13-16
[32]吴晓明,吴栋.我国城镇居民平均消费倾向与收入分配状况关系的实证研究.数量经济与技术经济研究, 2007, (5):22-32
[33]冯虹.收入分配与城市利益阶层分化的相关性研究.管理世界, 2006, (4): 142-143
[34]杨灿明,胡洪曙,俞杰.收入分配研究述评.中南财经政法大学学报, 2008, (1): 10-15
[35]常健.经济增长、收入不平等与政治稳定的结构关系及其政策启示.学海, 2007, (2):93-100
[36]杨圣明,郝梅瑞.当代中国史研究, 2006,(3):4-12
[37]朱其训.和谐经济论.北京:人民出版社, 2007,10
[38]朱子云.社会收入分配和谐度及其综合评判研究. http://www.studa.net/ shehuiqita/ 080630/ 17054814.html, 2008-06-30
[39]相如.分配和谐.中华工商联合出版社, 2006, 4-16
[40]马克思.资本论(第1卷).北京:人民出版社, 1975,48-58
[41] Stanley L. Brue. The Evolution of Economic Thought(6th ed.). New York: Harcourt, Inc, 2000,195
[42] John Bates Clark. The distribution of Wealth: A Theory of Wages, Interest and Profits. London: The Macmillan Co., 1938, 48-50
[43] (美)斯坦利L.布鲁.经济思想史.北京:机械工业出版社, 2005,195-212
[44] (美)克拉克.财富的分配.北京:商务印书馆, 1983,10-11
[45]陈孟熙,郭建青.经济学说史教程.北京:中国人民大学出版社, 1992,266
[46]庞巴维克.资本实证论.商务印书馆, 1964,167
[47]马歇尔.经济学原理(下卷).北京:商务印书馆, 1965,208
[48]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯选集(第3卷).北京:北京人民出版社, 1972, 10-11
[49]王思中.按劳分配与按生产要素分配相结合.集团经济研究, 2005,(4): 116-118
[50]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯选集(第2卷).北京:人民出版社, 1995,1102
[51]江泽民.全面建设小康社会,开创中国特色社会主义事业新局面.北京:人民出版社, 2002, 28
[52]晏智杰.西方经济学说史教程.北京:北京大学出版社, 2002, 252-253
[53]巴斯夏.和谐经济论.中国社会科学出版社, 1995, 45-79
[54] MBA图书馆.经济和谐论. http://wiki.mbalib.com/wiki/%E7%BB%8F% E6%B5%8E%E5%92%8C% E8% B0%90%E8%AE%BA,2007-4-20
[55]陈万灵.试论和谐社会建设的社区机制. http://www.gdou.edu.cn/ xcb/source/info.asp?id=144,2005-12-1
[56]楚金桥,李俊.论和谐社会的本质及经济标志.统计与决策, 2008,(1):21-23
[57]李松龄.社会主义和谐社会研究.长沙:湖南人民出版社, 2006, 110-239
[58]许涤新.政治经济学辞典(下册).北京:人民出版社, 1980, 163-165
[59]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯全集(第16卷).北京:人民出版社, 1964,162
[60] Audrey Siew Kim LIM, Kam Ki TANG. Hunam capital inequality and the Kuznets curve. The developing economies, 2008,(3): 26-51
[61] Aghion, P., Howitt, P. Endogenous Growth Theory. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1998
[62] Yoshiaki Sugimoto. Inequality, growth and overtaking. Macroeconomic Dynamics, 2006,(10): 625-651
[63]郑秉文.经济理论中的福利国家.中国社会科学, 2003,(2):41-63
[64] C. Esping-Andersen, G. and Korpi, W.,Social policy as class politics in post-war capitalism: Scandinavia, Austria and Germany, in J. H. Goldthorpe (ed.), Order and Conflict in Contemporary Capitalism, Oxford University Press, New York.9, 1984
[65]周宏.福利国家向何处去.北京:社会科学文献出版社, 2006, 64-65
[66] Peter Flora(ed.).Growth to Limits: the Western European Welfare States Since World War II. Wlater de Gruter, Berlin, New York, 1986, 2:100
[67]梁怡.瑞典学派的理论贡献. http://finance.sina.com.cn/economist/ xuezhesuibi/20071126/01504213824.shtml, 2007-11-26
[68]张泽荣.当代资本主义分配关系研究.北京:经济科学出版社, 1994,26-28
[69]胡希宁.当代西方经济学流派.北京:中共中央学校出版社, 2004,117
[70]袁群,安晓敏.北欧福利国家的改革及对我国的启示.经济问题探索, 2006,(11):139-142
[71]张红霞.北欧国家的福利制度改革及其对中国的启示.中国石油大学学报, 2007,(12):48-52
[72]胡莹. 20世纪90年代美国美国分配理论的发展.理论月刊, 2007,(4): 161-164
[73] F.A.哈耶克.个人主义与经济秩序(中文版).北京经济学院出版社, 1989
[74]叶茂.布什经济理论与美国养老保险制度改革.理论月刊, 2008,(3):143-146
[75]傅殷才.新保守主义经济学.北京:中国经济出版社, 1994,16-17
[76]陈宝森.布什的经济政策和财政困境.地方财政研究, 2005,(3):50-54
[77]宋小川.论当前美国社会的收入分配不平等和两极分化.马克思主义研究, 2008,(6):77-84
[78]纪万师.个人消费支撑美国经济,高消费率下暗藏隐忧.中国经济导报, 2007-11-1
[79]陈才兴.新自由主义在拉美的发展变化及前景.经济学动态, 1999,(2): 55-59
[80]袁东振.对拉美国家经济与社会不协调发展的理论分析.拉丁美洲研究, 2005,(3): 17-22
[81] DB. Economic and Social Progress in Latin American 1998-1999 Report. Washington, D. C. Johns Hopkins University Press,1998,11
[82] ECLAC, Statistical Yearbook for Latin America and the Caribbean. 2006, 74-79
[83] ECLAC, Preliminary Overview of the Economies of Latin American and the Caribbean 2003,10
[84] UNDA, Ideas and Contributions: Democracy in Latin America, 2004,39
[85]陈平.制度、政策与收入分配.拉丁美洲研究, 2008,(2):15-22
[86] C. Furtado, Un Proyecto para o Brazil , Rio de Janeiro, Editorial Saga.转引自James L. Dietz (ed.), Latin America’s Economic Development: Confronting Crisis, Boulder , Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1995,156
[87] Bela Balassa, Gerardo Bruno, Pedro-Pablo Kuczynski and Mario Henrique Simonsen. Toward Renewed Economic Growth in Latin America, Washington , D. C., Institute for International Economics, 1986,160
[88]江时学.拉美国家的收入分配为何如此不公.拉丁美洲研究, 2005,(5):3-11
[89] Inter-American Development Bank. Economic and Social Progress in Latin America, 1998-1999 Report, Washington, D. C., Johns Hopkins University Press, 1998,100-103
[90] Oscar Altimir, Luis Beccaria. Income Distribution in Argentina 1974– 2000[J]. CEPAL Review, 2002, 1(78):79
[91]美洲开发银行.经济发展与社会公正.北京:中国社会科学出版社, 2002,217-218
[92]袁东振.拉美国家收入再分配政策的局限性.拉丁美洲研究, 2003,(3):23-28
[93] Michael Bleaney, Akira Nishiyama. Income inequality and growth—does the relationship vary with the income level? . Economic Letters, 2004,(84): 349-355
[94]李闻.功能收入分配与规模收入分配.社会科学报,2000年10月5日第2版
[95] Alfredo Shclarek. Consumption and Keynesian Fiscal Policy. CESifo Working Paper Series, 2004, 1310
[96]林国勇,范建勇,严燕.中国的消费不振与与分配:理论和数据.经济研究, 2002,(5):72-95
[97]新浪网.世界银行:中国实际收入差距还要更高. http://finance.sina.com.cn/ g/20080222/10594536001.shtml, 2008-02-22
[98] Cecilia Garcia-Penalosa1, Stephen J. Turnovsky. Growth and income inequality: a canonical model. Economic theory, 2006,(28):25-49
[99]汪同三,蔡跃洲.改革开放以来收入分配对资本积累及投资结构的影响.中国社会科学, 2006,(1):4-14
[100]中共中央关于完善社会主义市场经济体制若干问题的决定.北京:人民出版社, 2003,12-21
[101]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯全集(第26卷第3册).北京:人民出版社, 1974,159
[102]马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯选集(第3卷).北京:人民出版社, 1995,661
[103] Jonathan Weinhagen. Price transmission within the PPI for intermediate goods. Monthly Labor Review, 2005,(5):41-49
[104]高鸿业.西方经济学.北京:中国人民大学出版社, 2004,210-211
[105]文跃然.垄断行业高薪的合理与不合理. http://news.qq.com/a/20070605/ 001664_2.htm, 2007-06-05
[106]蒋德海.我国经济改革最本质的是打破行政垄断.上海市经济管理干部学院学报, 2008,(4):8-10
[107]姚洋.转轨中国:审视社会公正和平等.北京:中国人民大学出版社, 2004,77-83
[108]郭平,郑莉娜,杨明.对提高我国基尼系数测算结果准确性与可信度的思考.中央财经大学学报, 2006,(2):79-82
[109]安体富.现有税负明显偏重.瞭望新闻周刊, 2004,(8):58
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |