Reassessing the Cross-National Relationship Between Income Inequality and Homicide Rates: Implications of Data Quality Control in the Measurement of Income Distribution

A significant positive relationship between income inequality and homicide rates has been found in a large number of cross-sectional studies and a few longitudinal analyses; a theoretically interesting interaction effect between income inequality and social welfare has also been found. For the most part researchers have been willing to use generous quality criteria in collecting income-distribution data, to maximize sample size and thereby enhance statistical power and representativeness. In the present paper we use a recently developed data set with explicit quality ratings for the income-distribution data, which permits systematic assessment of the consequences of relying on income-distribution measures of varying quality in examining the inequality-homicide relationship. Our analyses reveal that the income inequality-homicide relationship is remarkably robust in cross-sectional analyses. Regardless of the quality of income-distribution data, we observe significant positive effects of the Gini coefficient on homicide rates in cross-sectional multivariate models. Consistent results are also observed when an interaction term for income inequality and decommodification is examined. The results of longitudinal analyses differ; we observe a significant positive effect of changes in inequality on changes in homicide rates only when income-distribution measures of low quality are used.     

New directions in social stratification and income distribution: Introduction

The contributors to this special issue address important problems in the area of social stratification and income distribution. More specifically, Van der Sar and Van Praag offer a solution to the problem of measuring the relative importance of a social position by referring to the individual utility function. Hermkens and Boerman test hypotheses derived from functionalist and marxist theory concerning the degree of value consensus associated with the differential allotment of income and prestige to social positions. Shepelak points to the effects of a prevailing system of norms and values — beliefs about meritocracy, fair shares and opportunity — on the equalization of incomes. Arts and Van Wijck study social constraints to income equalization and focus on the inadequacy of decision-making processes and imperfect implementation of decisions. In the final contribution to this issue, Jasso examines the behavioral and social consequences of the simultaneous operation of two distinct considerations on courses of action: the individual's own well-being and the societal common good.     

破解农业相对萎缩与农民持续增收二律背反的途径

随着产业结构的转换 ,农业在国民经济中的位置将相对下降 ,这就与农民要持续增收产生矛盾。文章认为解决这一矛盾的根本途径就是推进城市化战略。     

劳动力市场分割:收入分配差距扩大的一个新解

劳动力市场分割是我国当前收入分配差距扩大的一个重要原因:主要劳动力市场的"垄断"以及"高教育程度"等因素导致高工资向上"刚性";次要劳动力市场"劳动力供给长期相对过剩"决定了工资的市场定价,必然导致低工资持续"粘性"。缩小收入分配差距,既要打破主要劳动力市场所属垄断行业的"垄断"地位,又要制定工资增长指导线政策,以确保次要劳动力市场工资增长。     

我国转轨经济中垄断性行业收入分配制度改革研究

我国改革开放以来,对电力、电信、铁路等垄断性行业进行了一定程度的改革并取得了一定成效。但是,上述行业垄断经营的基本格局并未根本改变,而垄断行业与其它行业的收入差距却在不断扩大。这类垄断性行业往往具有自然垄断的性质,即便是在引入竞争后仍有较高的垄断程度,而且上述行业普遍受到政府规制,规制政策直接影响到行业的经济效率以及收入分配问题。本文在综述国内外已有相关文献的基础上提出了将规制经济学分析框架以及"X非效率"理论引入到该问题的研究当中,构建了我国垄断性行业垄断形成的经济学模型以及"X非效率"的测量模型,提出了我国转轨经济中垄断性行业收入分配制度改革研究的整体研究思路。     

缩小收入差距 促进社会和谐

收入差距的不合理扩大,会引发严重的社会问题和政治问题,直接影响社会和谐。为此必须采取相应的对策,使收入差距保持在一个可以接受的范围,以避免不必要的社会矛盾激化。     

增加农民收入是建设社会主义新农村的关键

增加农民收入,使农民尽快富裕起来,是建设社会主义新农村的基本出发点和归宿。没有农民的增收富裕,就会制约农村经济的发展,就会制约整个国民经济的增长,就不可能实现全面建设小康社会的目标。为此,要借鉴发达国家增加农民收入的经验,尽快提高我国农民的收入;要加快小城镇化建设,转移农村富余劳动力;同时,还要解决农民融资难等问题。     

西安市低收入群体的现状分析

随着居民的收入不断扩大,使低收入群体问题表现得越来越突出。加强对低收入群体保护,不仅是现阶段建立和完善社会主义市场经济体制、促进经济发展的重要基础,也是保持社会稳定的根本保证和实现共同富裕的社会主义本质要求。只有正确分析和了解低收入群体的现状,才能找到解决问题的正确方法。     

陕西农村金融发展与农民收入增长实证分析

农村金融发展是推动农村经济增长、提高农民收入的重要因素。数据表明:陕西农村金融发展,没有支持现行农村金融发展促进农民收入增长的假设,现行经济发展战略和金融制度导致的陕西金融发展在结构和功能上与我省农村经济发展和农民收入增长实际需求间不协调。优化农村金融制度安排,促进农村正规金融的适应性改革,引导农村民间金融的规范成长,健全农村金融组织体系,重塑农村金融市场主体,方可实现农村金融和农村经济的协调发展。     

解决"三农"问题与深化体制改革

"三农"问题说到底是农民收入问题.农民收入增加难,源于体制性障碍.为了实现农民增收减负的目标,必须深化体制改革,包括城乡二元制度改革、农村税制改革、财政投资体制改革、粮食流通体制改革、土地征用制度改革.