本文選題：收入分配 + 利益平衡��； 參考：《河北師范大學(xué)》2013年博士論文

【摘要】：收入分配制度是經(jīng)濟(jì)社會(huì)發(fā)展中帶有根本性、基礎(chǔ)性作用的制度安排。隨著市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)體制改革的不斷深化，我國(guó)自上世紀(jì)九十年代開(kāi)始出現(xiàn)的貧富差距，在進(jìn)入新世紀(jì)后持續(xù)拉大，曾經(jīng)對(duì)財(cái)富增長(zhǎng)與財(cái)富積累發(fā)揮重大作用的利益分配格局已逐漸失衡。收入分配引起的不公已經(jīng)影響到不同社會(huì)階層和群體的利益平衡，，進(jìn)而演變成一個(gè)較為嚴(yán)重的社會(huì)問(wèn)題，正在直接制約著中國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展與和諧社會(huì)的構(gòu)建，分配格局已經(jīng)到了必須調(diào)整的時(shí)刻。 利益平衡是國(guó)民收入分配制度的基本問(wèn)題。古今中外的思想家無(wú)不把收入分配的利益平衡作為維護(hù)社會(huì)公平正義、推動(dòng)社會(huì)全面發(fā)展的重要問(wèn)題。收入分配和利益平衡存在天然的內(nèi)在聯(lián)系，利益平衡是收入分配的價(jià)值追求、功能體現(xiàn)和改革動(dòng)力。收入分配是利益平衡的實(shí)現(xiàn)依據(jù)和途徑，二者相互融合交織在一起構(gòu)成不可分割的整體，成為本文立論的兩個(gè)基點(diǎn)。 瑞典收入分配制度在調(diào)節(jié)國(guó)內(nèi)利益關(guān)系方面起著關(guān)鍵作用。其分配制度是建立在混合經(jīng)濟(jì)基礎(chǔ)之上的，以收入公平分配為原則，尤其重視再分配的調(diào)節(jié)作用，帶有明顯的福利色彩。其分配制度形成與發(fā)展以福利制度的發(fā)展緊密相聯(lián)，以社會(huì)民主黨執(zhí)政為分水嶺，可劃分為萌芽、快速發(fā)展和改革調(diào)整三個(gè)階段�；究蚣転槌醮畏峙涞墓べY決定制、再分配的轉(zhuǎn)移支付和稅收制度、以及第三次分配的慈善救助和公民捐贈(zèng)。發(fā)達(dá)的經(jīng)濟(jì)基礎(chǔ)、工人運(yùn)動(dòng)的發(fā)展和社民黨的長(zhǎng)期執(zhí)政、積極地就業(yè)政策和完備的法律制度是瑞典收入分配制度的實(shí)踐路徑。 瑞典收入分配制度中最具特色的是再分配中的社會(huì)保障制度和稅收制度。再分配制度促進(jìn)利益平衡的原理為：再分配的資金籌集來(lái)源于有收入的全體社會(huì)成員，再分配的支出受益對(duì)象為低收入者和弱勢(shì)群體，即普遍征收與側(cè)重性支出相結(jié)合。以高稅收為基礎(chǔ)，在征稅過(guò)程中既調(diào)節(jié)高收入又為社會(huì)保障提供資金支持；再通過(guò)普享型的社會(huì)保障支出為社會(huì)成員提供生活保障，尤其重視對(duì)低收入者和弱勢(shì)群體的保護(hù)與救助，通過(guò)社會(huì)保障的補(bǔ)償機(jī)制縮小收入差距、促進(jìn)公平分配。高稅收與高福利密切配合共同承擔(dān)收入再分配縮小貧富差距、促進(jìn)社會(huì)利益平衡的重任。 利益表達(dá)是瑞典收入分配制度的重要保障機(jī)制。利益表達(dá)通過(guò)兩種途徑促進(jìn)利益平衡：在混合經(jīng)濟(jì)下利益表達(dá)的主要途徑是勞資集體協(xié)議制度，通過(guò)工資協(xié)議、勞資共管勞動(dòng)力市場(chǎng)、工人參與決策和勞資集體控股等四種方式調(diào)節(jié)和緩和勞資矛盾。在資本主義民主政治條件下，利益表達(dá)機(jī)制通過(guò)對(duì)公民基本分配權(quán)的維護(hù)，促進(jìn)利益平衡。利益表達(dá)的過(guò)程實(shí)質(zhì)是各利益群體相互妥協(xié)的過(guò)程，在不斷妥協(xié)中，瑞典社會(huì)的利益關(guān)系逐漸趨于平衡。 政府干預(yù)是瑞典收入分配制度的主導(dǎo)調(diào)節(jié)因素。市場(chǎng)機(jī)制對(duì)實(shí)現(xiàn)利益平衡的作用是非常有限的，而政府這只“無(wú)形的手”卻具有突出的重要和積極作用。瑞典政府將廉潔因子融入分配調(diào)節(jié)的各個(gè)環(huán)節(jié)，初次分配中減少政府尋租、規(guī)范市場(chǎng)秩序、完善勞資協(xié)調(diào)機(jī)制、提供公平的分配環(huán)境和相對(duì)合理的勞動(dòng)報(bào)酬，再分配中通過(guò)完善社會(huì)保障、稅收制度的征管制度以及完善法律制度加強(qiáng)對(duì)分配正義的維護(hù)。 關(guān)于瑞典收入分配制度，學(xué)界大多從公平和效率的關(guān)系角度研究，爭(zhēng)論重點(diǎn)是應(yīng)該效率優(yōu)先還是公平優(yōu)先。本文認(rèn)為，公平和效率固然是社會(huì)制度選擇的基點(diǎn)，但是公平和效率究竟何者優(yōu)先并不是制約社會(huì)發(fā)展的根本原因，利益的平衡才是社會(huì)發(fā)展的制約和推動(dòng)因素。公平和效率究竟何者為先，根本上是為了解決利益平衡問(wèn)題。瑞典分配模式的最大貢獻(xiàn)不在于解決公平和效率何者優(yōu)先，而在于使各種紛繁復(fù)雜的利益關(guān)系處于相對(duì)平衡和諧狀態(tài)，核心經(jīng)驗(yàn)就是在國(guó)家收入分配制度之中實(shí)現(xiàn)利益平衡，集中表現(xiàn)為經(jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展和社會(huì)公平之間的平衡、勞資兩大利益集團(tuán)間的利益平衡以及市場(chǎng)調(diào)節(jié)和政府調(diào)控之間的平衡。 從制度本質(zhì)來(lái)看，瑞典收入分配制度的調(diào)整和改革是一種資本主義秩序內(nèi)的制度調(diào)整。從社會(huì)實(shí)踐來(lái)看，瑞典社會(huì)化大生產(chǎn)和資本主義私有制之間的矛盾沒(méi)有得到根本解決，但是，卻在一定程度上得到了緩和。這些證明資本主義在現(xiàn)實(shí)統(tǒng)治中的合法性沒(méi)有受到根本的威脅和動(dòng)搖，資本主義經(jīng)過(guò)自我調(diào)整和完善仍具有進(jìn)一步促進(jìn)生產(chǎn)力發(fā)展的空間。這就決定了瑞典收入分配制度未來(lái)的改革也只能在資本主義秩序內(nèi)展開(kāi)，只能在資本主義的框架內(nèi)制定政策和開(kāi)展活動(dòng)。瑞典收入分配制度雖然沒(méi)有突破資本主義制度的框架，但其政策目標(biāo)、制度設(shè)計(jì)對(duì)民主平等的追求，以及對(duì)資本主義真誠(chéng)的批判,都對(duì)資本主義改良具有積極意義。 本文在馬克思主義唯物史觀的指導(dǎo)下，從利益平衡角度出發(fā)，以瑞典收入分配模式為研究對(duì)象，通過(guò)分析瑞典收入分配制度的形成過(guò)程、制度安排、實(shí)踐路徑，提煉瑞典收入分配模式處理利益平衡問(wèn)題中的經(jīng)驗(yàn)教訓(xùn)，聯(lián)系我國(guó)收入分配制度改革難點(diǎn)和存在的問(wèn)題，為我國(guó)建立科學(xué)高效公平合理的收入分配制度提出啟示和建議，
[Abstract]:The income distribution system is a fundamental and basic system arrangement in the economic and social development. With the deepening of the reform of the market economy system, the gap between the rich and the poor, which began in 90s of last century, has been widened continuously after entering the new century, and the distribution grid of interests which has played an important role in wealth growth and wealth accumulation has been played. The injustice caused by the distribution of income has affected the balance of interests of different social strata and groups, and then into a more serious social problem, which is directly restricting the construction of China's economic development and harmonious society, and the distribution pattern has already reached the time that must be adjusted.
The balance of interests is the basic problem of the system of national income distribution. All the thinkers in the ancient and modern times and at home and abroad have taken the balance of income distribution as an important issue to maintain social fairness and justice and promote the overall development of the society. There is a natural internal relationship between the income distribution and the balance of interests, and the balance of interests is the value pursuit of income distribution, and the function embodies and is a manifestation of the income distribution. The motivation of reform. Income distribution is the basis and way of realizing the balance of interests. The two intermingled and interwoven together to form an inseparable whole, which becomes the two basis of the thesis.
The system of income distribution in Sweden plays a key role in regulating domestic interest relations. Its distribution system is based on a mixed economy and is based on the principle of fair distribution of income. It attaches great importance to the regulating role of redistribution with obvious welfare color. The Social Democratic Party is divided into a watershed, which can be divided into three stages: germination, rapid development and reform and adjustment. The basic framework is the wage decision for the initial distribution, the redistributive transfer payment and the tax system, the third distribution of charitable assistance and citizen donation. The developed economic basis, the development of the workers' movement and the long-term implementation of the Social Democratic Party. Government, active employment policy and complete legal system are the practice paths of Sweden's income distribution system.
The most characteristic of the Swedish income distribution system is the social security system and the tax system in the redistribution system. The principle that the redistribution system promotes the balance of interest is that the redistribution of funds is derived from all the members of the society with income, and the redistributive benefit of the redistribution is the low income and the disadvantaged, that is, the general levy and the emphasis of the redistribution. On the basis of high taxation, we can not only regulate high income but also provide financial support for social security in the process of Taxation, and then provide life security for the members of society through the social security expenditure of universal type, and pay special attention to the protection and rescue of low income and disadvantaged groups, and reduce the income gap through the compensation mechanism of social security, and promote the income gap, and promote the income gap by the social security compensation mechanism, and promote the income gap, and promote the income gap by reducing the social security compensation mechanism. We should enter into a fair distribution. High taxes and high welfare should work closely together to undertake the redistribution of income, narrow the gap between the rich and the poor, and promote the balance of social interests.
Interest expression is an important guarantee mechanism of the Swedish income distribution system. Interest expression promotes the balance of interests through two ways: the main way of interest expression in the mixed economy is the collective agreement system of labor and capital, through the wage agreement, the labor and capital market, the workers' participation in the decision and the collective holding of labor and capital. Under the conditions of capitalist democratic politics, the interest expression mechanism, through the maintenance of the basic distribution rights of citizens, promotes the balance of interests. The process of interest expression is essentially a process of compromise between the various interests groups. In the continuous compromise, the interests of the Swedish society are gradually balanced.
Government intervention is the leading factor in the adjustment of the Swedish income distribution system. The role of the market mechanism in realizing the balance of interest is very limited, while the government's "invisible hand" has a prominent and active role. The Swedish government integrates the integrity factors into the various sections of the distribution regulation, and reduces the government rent-seeking and standardizing the city in the initial distribution. The field order, the perfect labor and capital coordination mechanism, the fair distribution environment and the relatively reasonable labor remuneration, the redistribution through the improvement of social security, the tax collection and management system and the improvement of the legal system to strengthen the maintenance of distribution justice.
With regard to the Swedish income distribution system, most of the academic circles have studied the relationship between fairness and efficiency. The focus of the debate is on the priority of efficiency or fairness. This paper holds that fairness and efficiency are the basis of social system selection, but the priority of fairness and efficiency is not the fundamental reason for restricting social development and the balance of interests. The best contribution of fairness and efficiency is to solve the problem of balance of interests. The largest contribution of the Swedish distribution model is not to solve the priority of fairness and efficiency, but to make various complicated interests in a balanced and harmonious state, and the core experience is in the country. In the income distribution system, the balance of interests is realized, which is concentrated on the balance between economic development and social equity, the balance of interests among the two major interest groups and the balance between market regulation and government regulation.
From the essence of the system, the adjustment and reform of the Swedish income distribution system is a kind of institutional adjustment within the capitalist order. From the social practice, the contradiction between the Swedish social production and the capitalist private ownership has not been fundamentally solved, but it has been eased to a certain extent. These prove that capitalism is in reality. The legitimacy of the rule has not been threatened and shaken, and the self adjustment and perfection of capitalism still have space to further promote the development of the productive forces. This determines that the future reform of the Swedish income distribution system can only be carried out in the capitalist order, and can only formulate policies and live within the framework of capitalism. Although the Swedish income distribution system has not broken through the framework of the capitalist system, its policy objectives, the pursuit of democratic equality in the system design and the sincere criticism of capitalism have positive significance to the improvement of capitalism.
Under the guidance of the materialist historical materialism of Marx, this paper takes the Swedish income distribution pattern as the research object from the angle of balance of interests and analyzes the forming process of the Swedish income distribution system, the system arrangement, the practice path, the refining Swedish income distribution model to deal with the experience and lessons of the Li Yiping scale problem and the income distribution system in China. The difficulties and problems of reform will provide enlightenment and suggestions for China to establish a scientific, efficient, fair and reasonable income distribution system.

【學(xué)位授予單位】：河北師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：F124.7;F153.2

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 王云斌;;殘疾人福利補(bǔ)貼制度的國(guó)際經(jīng)驗(yàn)與啟示[J];社會(huì)福利(理論版);2015年09期

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 曲夏夏;和諧社會(huì)構(gòu)建中的生活質(zhì)量問(wèn)題研究[D];山東大學(xué);2014年

本文編號(hào)：1824750