Search results

Brazil’s regional inequality is an important topic due to the large and persistent differences in development between states and the high levels of inequality in the country. These variations in development can potentially render survey data inaccurate since the significance of capital income varies across the states. Besides, previous studies incorporating tax and national accounts data globally have mainly focused on measuring the income distribution at the country-level. This approach can limit the understanding of inequality, especially when considering large countries such as Brazil.

The methodology used to construct these estimates follows the guidelines of the Distributional National Accounts, whose core goal is to provide income distribution measures consistent with macroeconomic aggregates and harmonized across countries and time. The procedure has three main steps: first, it corrects the survey’s underrepresentation of top incomes using tax data. Then, it accounts for national income items not included in the survey or tax data, such as imputed rents and undistributed profits. Finally, it ensures that all components match the national income.

Compared to survey-based estimations, the results reveal a new angle on the state-level inequality. This study indicates that Amazonas, Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo have a more concentrated income distribution. The top 1\% of earners in these states receives around 28\% of total pre-tax income, while the top 10\% receive nearly 60\%. On the other end, Amapá (AP), Acre (AC), Rondônia (RO) and Santa Catarina (SC) are the states where the income distribution is less concentrated. There were no significant changes in the income distribution across the states during the period analyzed.

This study combines survey, tax and national accounts data to construct new estimates of Brazil’s state-level income distribution from 2006 to 2019. Previous results only considered income captured in surveys, which usually misses a significant part of capital incomes. This limitation may bias comparisons as capital income has different importance across the states. The new estimates represent the income of top groups more accurately, account for the entire national income and enable to compare regional inequality levels consistently with other countries.

As an essential part of mainstream Western development economics, the trickle-down theory originates from the behavioral choices and iterations of thought on conflicts of interest in the evolution of remuneration structure in Western countries. The fundamental flaw of the logic of this theory is that it conceals the inherent implication of social systems and the essential characteristics of social structures.

This paper examines the relationships among economic growth, income distribution and poverty from the perspective of social relations of production – the nature of production relations determines the nature of distribution relations and further determines the essence of trickle-down development, and ownership is the core mechanism for realizing the trickle-down effect.

The stagnation or smoothness of the trickle-down effect in different economies is essentially subject to the logic of “development for whom”, which is determined by ownership relationship.

To be more specific, “development for capitalists” and “development for the people” indicate two distinctly different economic growth paths. The former starts with private ownership and follows a bottom-up negative trickle-down path that inevitably leads to polarization, while the latter starts with public ownership and follows a top-down positive trickle-down path that will lead to common prosperity in the end.

The neo-Kaleckian model follows the ideas of Marx, Keynes and Kalecki, that investment is a key influencing factor in the dynamics of the capitalist mode of production. Through the discussion of different forms of investment decision function, this paper constructs the analysis framework of wage-led and profit-led economic growth regimes.

The model has become an important theoretical paradigm for current Western heterodox economists regarding the research on the impact of functional income distribution on economic growth, and it has a very large impact on both theoretical and empirical research. Starting from Marx's reproduction theory, this article discusses the theoretical shortcomings of the neo-Kaleckian growth regime model.

This paper mainly focuses on three aspects: (1) the ideological legacy of “Smith's Dogma”; (2) neglecting the restrictions on income distribution from the organic composition of capital and the surplus value rate; (3) technological progress and the formation of a new long economic wave.

The authors believe that the neo-Kaleckian model unilaterally emphasizes the demand-side factors in the economy and, unconsciously or not, ignores the role of the supply-side, which makes it encounter certain limitations in explaining long-term growth. Even if some empirical conclusions are employed to bridge functional income distribution and technological progress, there is still a lack of a theoretical basis for accurately describing long-term economic changes using this model. In order to better promote high-quality economic development and accelerate the formation of a new pattern of economic development in which the domestic large-scale cycle is the mainstay and the domestic and international double cycles promote each other, the authors need to adopt a policy combination with the supply-side as the main and the demand-side as the supplement, and to work from both sides.

In the process of reform, although every landmark theoretical breakthrough is marked by the speech of the highest leadership of the Communist Party of China (CPC) or the decision of the CPC National Congress, each breakthrough is attributable to the theoretical contribution made by the academia of political economy. Notably, these theoretical breakthroughs invariably embrace innovations in the discourse system of political economy. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

The innovations and breakthroughs thereof have led to the political economy of socialism with Chinese characteristics.

The success of China’s economy highlights the superiority of the socialist economic system and development path with Chinese characteristics.

These major breakthroughs are accompanied by breakthroughs in relevant theories, which constitute a synthesis of a series of major theoretical innovations in political economics.

At present, the Chinese economy has entered the “new normal” phase with the transformation of development stages from the low-income to the middle-income ones. Accordingly, there appear a series of innovations in development theories. Innovations involve creative destructions. Therefore, innovative development theories at the present stage either deny the prevailing principles of development economics, or deny the theories that once effectively guided development at the low-income stage, or even sublate some of the development polices which were propelled and proved effective at the beginning of the reform and opening-up. The fundamental reason is that, as the development stages evolve, there occur new development tasks, new periodical characteristics and new laws of development. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Any development theory from abroad will find it difficult to correctly guide and clarify development problems in a socialist country, such as the huge population and the extreme imbalance between the urban and the rural and among regional developments.

In conclusion, China, as a large world economy, has made innovations in its economic development theory, which indicates that it intends to perfect itself rather than seek hegemony. As the world’s second largest economy, China should adapt to the transformation and further free people’s minds instead of adhering to the old patterns of thinking. It should think over the path of development for a great world economy from the historical starting point of a large world economy and find development strategies to transform itself from a large economy to a great economy, so as to realize the dream of the Chinese nation to build a powerful country.

Only political economy studies both the relations of production and the productive forces, and only a theory combining both can correctly guide China’s economic development, which especially needs to be promoted by taking advantage of socialist economic system. Therefore, the first and foremost principle for a socialist political economy with Chinese characteristics is to insist on liberating and developing productive forces.

In the current literature, there is little systematic research on the relationship among adjustment of the income distribution, change in economic structure and improvement of macroeconomic efficiency.

This paper expands Marx's reproduction schema into the “Marx–Sraffa” three-department structure table comprising fixed capital, general means of production and means of consumption and employs China's input–output table from 1987 to 2015 to portray the relationship between income distribution and macroeconomic efficiency under investment-driven growth.

This paper calculates the wage–profit curve of China's economy and evaluates the space of macroeconomic efficiency improvement in China based on the deviation between actual and potential income distribution structure.

The results show that there is a downward trend of the profit rate, which meets Marx's theoretical prediction, and the decline in the profit rate is mainly attributed to an increase in the organic composition of capital arising from the rapid growth of fixed capital investment under extended growth. The analysis of macroeconomic efficiency shows that the space for improving macroeconomic efficiency is extremely limited under traditional growth pattern and that China must transform its economic development pattern and foster new economic growth drivers.

The shared development concept is crucial for the construction of a socialist political economy with Chinese characteristics. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

This is because shared development constitutes the logic thread of the socialist political economy with Chinese characteristics and the core for the formation and development of its whole system.

China’s modernization is well underway and is following a unique path with its own characteristics, whereby shared development is undoubtedly one of its core values.

In the new era, the development path under the concept of shared development of socialism with Chinese characteristics must adhere to the all-round development of human beings, promote social equity and justice via development, and embrace inclusive growth, specifically, pro-poor growth.

The proportional distribution of social labor is a general law governing human social and economic activities, also a law discovered by Marxist political economy that governs socialist economic operations and development based on public ownership.

This law draws on Marx's vision of future society, but how it is adopted is not only subject to the way a country's economy interacts but also to the influence of a country's historical and cultural traditions. Generations of the CPC and state leaders since Mao Zedong have made unremitting explorations for its application.

As socialism with Chinese characteristics enters a new era, the Party Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping at the core adheres to the standpoints, viewpoints and methods of Marxist political economy, draws from the splendid Chinese traditional culture that values integrity, peace and harmony of all, builds on the reality of China's socialist market economy development, has summed up the features of socialist economy development with Chinese characteristics, and has proposed the five-sphere integrated plan, the four-pronged comprehensive strategy.

The new development concept of “innovation, coordination, green development, openness, and sharing” for socialism with Chinese characteristics, all reflecting the Party's deepening understanding of coordinated development, the gradual formation of the general thought and policy methods of the country's economic regulations based on the coordination and balance of economic structure, the continuous explorations to open a new chapter of contemporary Marxist political economy, China's experience and wisdom, and the Party's confidence in the theories it applies, the road it takes, its system and its culture. The coordination and balance of economic structure are a major theoretical innovation of socialist political economy with Chinese characteristics in the new era.

During the Communist Party of China's endeavors over the past century, China has created “two miracles,” namely, large-scale and rapid economic development and long-term social stability.

The causes for China's achieving the “two miracles” lie in the adherence to the Party's leadership as the political guarantee, the scientific theoretical guidance as the ideological guarantee, the socialist system as well as the national governance system as the institutional guarantee and giving full play of people's creativity under the Party's leadership as the driving force guarantee.

From a political economy point of view, the theoretical logic behind the creation of the “two miracles” is that the combination of the state capacity and the scaling up of markets under the Party's leadership contributes to the rapid economic development and further the long-term social stability based on the financial foundation laid by rapid economic development. The historical experience of the “Two Miracles” can be summed up as the cultivation of state capacity under the leadership of the Party, the synergy and complementarity between the central government and local governments, the combination of development planning and market mechanisms, and the coordination of selective, functional and inclusive industrial policies.

It is necessary to judge future development trends from a medium and long-term development perspective, further promote the co-evolution of the state and the market, reshape the growth regime for high-quality development, fully tap the potential of domestic demand and create a “people-centered” economic development model so as to continue the “two miracles” and achieve a miracle of high-quality development in the second century.

China’s economic development in the past 40 years has an array of distinctive features that have attracted the attention of the world. The paper aims to discuss this issue.

The analysis logic is as follows: with regard to the mechanism, the above factors were met in a timely manner and jointly contributed positive energy to China’s economic growth, with the increase in the savings rate as the necessary condition and foundation, and the increase in the savings rate is attributed to the explosive expansion of the financial system at the beginning of reform and the formation of positive incentives for residents, enterprises and governments at all levels, and the expansion of the financial system and the formation of positive incentives are clearly the crystallization of the wisdom of Chinese-style progressive reform.

Therefore, we have every reason to believe that the growth prospects of the Chinese economy remain bright. The author is nonetheless confident that the new two-step strategy for economic development will be realized, proposed by the 19th CPC National Congress.

Moreover, the growth of China’s economy has long been accompanied by the “double surplus” of current accounts and capital and financial accounts in the international balance of payments, which is not completely consistent with the traditional paradigm of development economics. These phenomena are so unique that the international community calls it the “Mystery of China” or “China’s Development Path.”