本文選題：國(guó)有壟斷行業(yè)　切入點(diǎn)：壟斷利潤(rùn)　出處：《河南師范大學(xué)》2014年碩士論文

【摘要】：經(jīng)濟(jì)體制的改革為經(jīng)濟(jì)高速增長(zhǎng)提供了有效的制度前提，帶來了經(jīng)濟(jì)社會(huì)的快速發(fā)展帶，居民收入整體水平的不斷提高。但繁榮的背后伴隨著矛盾的凸顯，與體制改革相伴隨的激勵(lì)機(jī)制和分配制度的變化必然導(dǎo)致收入分配格局的演變。我國(guó)基尼系數(shù)十多年來一直超過國(guó)際警戒水平,居民收入分配差距明顯,且有擴(kuò)大的趨勢(shì)。不同行業(yè)之間的收入差距日益明顯,而其中壟斷行業(yè)與其他低收入行業(yè)的收入差距尤其顯著。 通過對(duì)1978年-2012年行業(yè)收入差距演變的分析表明：行業(yè)收入絕對(duì)差距呈持續(xù)擴(kuò)大趨勢(shì)，但相對(duì)差距呈現(xiàn)出了先下降（1978-1991），后平穩(wěn)上升（1992-2001），進(jìn)而快速上升（2002-2012）的U型變化趨勢(shì)；根據(jù)對(duì)我國(guó)1978年以來行業(yè)收入排序的結(jié)果分析，具有高勞動(dòng)強(qiáng)度特征的職行業(yè)逐漸退出工資最高行業(yè)的行列,而一些原來職工工資并不太高,但具有比較高的國(guó)有化水平的行業(yè)(如金融保險(xiǎn)業(yè))和科技含量較高的行業(yè)（如科學(xué)研究和綜合技術(shù)服務(wù)業(yè)、信息傳輸、計(jì)算機(jī)和軟件業(yè)）則陸續(xù)進(jìn)入前三行列。分析認(rèn)為國(guó)有壟斷程度和人力資本含量的差異是導(dǎo)致行業(yè)收入差距的主要因素，但由人力資本差異所引致的行業(yè)收入差距是合理且被公眾認(rèn)可的，而由于行業(yè)壟斷所導(dǎo)致的收入差距則是導(dǎo)致我國(guó)行業(yè)收入差距不合理的最主要因素,行業(yè)壟斷在我國(guó)主要體現(xiàn)為通過行政力量導(dǎo)致的國(guó)有壟斷。 國(guó)有壟斷行業(yè)高收入高收入原因在于：國(guó)有壟斷行業(yè)通過市場(chǎng)壟斷地位得以獲取巨額壟斷資金，通過過低的稅后利潤(rùn)上繳比較得以使大部分壟斷租金得以保留在企業(yè)內(nèi)部，又依賴所有者缺位下的內(nèi)部利益共享分配機(jī)制，使壟斷租金在內(nèi)部共享，其高工資水平得以實(shí)現(xiàn)。其過高的收入違背了基本分配制度即以按勞分配為主并結(jié)合生產(chǎn)要素分配的原則，同時(shí)壟斷的低效高價(jià)造成了社會(huì)運(yùn)行成本的高企與效率的低下，導(dǎo)致巨大的社會(huì)福利損失。 公有制為主體的經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展模式?jīng)Q定了我國(guó)不可能對(duì)國(guó)有經(jīng)濟(jì)行業(yè)壟斷完全放開，其壟斷地位并非輕易能夠動(dòng)搖和改變�？紤]現(xiàn)實(shí)障礙，要改變壟斷行業(yè)的高收入，應(yīng)從以下兩個(gè)方面著手：一方面，通過一定的措施使其無法獲得高額利潤(rùn)。包括完善壟斷產(chǎn)品價(jià)格機(jī)制和完善市場(chǎng)，引入競(jìng)爭(zhēng)兩個(gè)主要方向，使壟斷產(chǎn)品價(jià)格與收入在市場(chǎng)之手的作用下合理化；另一方面，采取措施使高額利潤(rùn)無法轉(zhuǎn)化成行業(yè)收入：通過完善稅后利潤(rùn) 繳納減少高額利潤(rùn)的企業(yè)內(nèi)部留存，通過規(guī)范企業(yè)內(nèi)部分配，，強(qiáng)化外部監(jiān)督，對(duì)其利潤(rùn)內(nèi)部共享行為進(jìn)行治理和監(jiān)督，使其收入在監(jiān)管之手的作用下合理化。
[Abstract]:The reform of the economic system provides an effective institutional premise for the rapid economic growth, brings the rapid development of the economic and social zone, and the continuous improvement of the overall level of residents' income. The changes in incentive mechanism and distribution system accompanying with the reform of the system will inevitably lead to the evolution of the pattern of income distribution. The Gini coefficient of our country has been exceeding the international alert level for more than a decade, and the gap between the income distribution of the residents is obvious. The income gap between different industries is becoming more and more obvious, and the income gap between monopoly industries and other low-income industries is particularly significant. Through the analysis of the evolution of industry income gap from 1978 to 2012, it is shown that the absolute income gap of the industry continues to expand, but the relative gap shows a U-type trend of decreasing first from 1978 to 1991, then rising steadily from 1992 to 2001, and then rising rapidly from 2002 to 2012. According to the analysis of the results of the ranking of industry income since 1978, the vocational industries with high labor intensity characteristics have gradually withdrawn from the ranks of the highest wage industries, while some of the original workers' wages are not too high. But industries with relatively high levels of nationalization (such as finance and insurance) and industries with higher technological content (such as scientific research and integrated technology services, information transmission, The computer and software industries) have one after another entered the top three ranks. The analysis shows that the differences in the degree of state-owned monopoly and the content of human capital are the main factors leading to the income gap in the industry. However, the industry income gap caused by the difference of human capital is reasonable and recognized by the public, and the income gap caused by the industry monopoly is the most important factor leading to the unreasonable industry income gap in our country. The industrial monopoly in our country is mainly reflected in the state-owned monopoly caused by administrative power. The reasons for the high income and high income of the state-owned monopoly industry are that the state-owned monopoly industry can obtain a huge amount of monopoly funds through the market monopoly position, and the large proportion of monopoly rent can be retained in the enterprise through the comparison of the low after-tax profits. It also relies on the internal benefit-sharing distribution mechanism under the absence of the owner, so that the monopoly rent can be shared internally. Its high wage level can be realized. Its excessive income violates the basic distribution system, that is, distribution according to work and combining with the principle of distribution of factors of production. At the same time, the low efficiency and high price of monopoly result in the high operating cost and low efficiency of the society. Resulting in huge social welfare losses. The mode of economic development in which public ownership is the main body determines that it is impossible for our country to completely liberalize the monopoly of the state-owned economy, and its monopoly position cannot be easily shaken and changed. Considering the practical obstacles, we should change the high income of the monopoly industry. We should start from the following two aspects: on the one hand, through certain measures to make it unable to obtain high profits, including perfecting the price mechanism of monopoly products and improving the market, introducing the two main directions of competition, Rationalizing the prices and revenues of monopolistic products by the hands of the market; on the other hand, taking measures to prevent high profits from turning into industry income: by improving after-tax profits. By regulating the internal distribution, strengthening the external supervision, and managing and supervising the internal sharing behavior of the profits, the income of the enterprises can be rationalized under the action of supervision.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：河南師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2014
【分類號(hào)】：F124.7

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 范合君;;放松規(guī)制對(duì)壟斷產(chǎn)業(yè)收入影響的理論與實(shí)證研究[J];財(cái)經(jīng)問題研究;2010年08期

2 王忠;李彩燕;;中國(guó)行業(yè)間工資差距變化及趨勢(shì)研究——基于微觀數(shù)據(jù)的分析視角[J];財(cái)經(jīng)問題研究;2011年08期

3 金玉國(guó);崔友平;;行業(yè)屬性對(duì)勞動(dòng)報(bào)酬的邊際效應(yīng)及其細(xì)部特征——基于分位數(shù)回歸模型的實(shí)證研究[J];財(cái)經(jīng)研究;2008年07期

4 宋晶;丁璐穎;王蕊;;壟斷行業(yè)收入畸高的形成機(jī)理與規(guī)制對(duì)策[J];東北財(cái)經(jīng)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2007年05期

5 郭慶;;價(jià)格規(guī)制在規(guī)范壟斷行業(yè)收入中的作用[J];東岳論叢;2006年02期

6 武鵬;;行業(yè)壟斷對(duì)中國(guó)行業(yè)收入差距的影響[J];中國(guó)工業(yè)經(jīng)濟(jì);2011年10期

7 于良春;門琦;;我國(guó)行業(yè)壟斷與收入差距的實(shí)證分析——以石油業(yè)和紡織業(yè)為例[J];財(cái)經(jīng)論叢;2013年01期

8 張?jiān)?;中國(guó)行業(yè)壟斷的收入分配效應(yīng)[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)評(píng)論;2011年04期

9 李曉寧;;國(guó)有壟斷與所有者缺位:壟斷行業(yè)高收入的成因與改革思路[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)體制改革;2008年01期

10 潘勝文;曹陽;;解決壟斷行業(yè)高收入問題的現(xiàn)實(shí)路徑[J];經(jīng)濟(jì)問題探索;2010年04期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 于華陽;中國(guó)自然壟斷性行業(yè)收入規(guī)范與規(guī)制改革研究[D];山東大學(xué);2008年

本文編號(hào)：1691131