Applying the personal income distribution relationship in a socialist-oriented market economy to Vietnam Electricity Group - 8

“labor” is a vague notion that Lassalles put forward in place of certain economic concepts. In a market economy, the expenditure of labor in the creation of wealth, is determined by two things: a , If that expenditure is not in accordance with the needs of xX

Maybe you are interested!

• Applying the personal income distribution relationship in a socialist-oriented market economy to Vietnam Electricity Group - 7
• Applying some statistical methods to study the situation of income distribution in enterprises in the Vietnamese industrial sector - 23
• Applying some statistical methods to study the situation of income distribution in enterprises in the Vietnamese industrial sector - 14
• Comparison of personal income tax management laws in Vietnam and some countries in the world - 15
• Personal income tax law from practice in Thai Binh province - 11

society, the use values ​​it creates do not become commodities, therefore,

non-exchangeable, that is, not accepted by society. Here , labor waste

that is useless, the more waste, the more production the more dangerous, because waste that is not compensated by realizing value through exchange, labor power will not have a source of income to restore, will collapse. b , If labor conducts production with backward production methods, therefore labor waste does not adapt to necessary social labor waste, therefore does not satisfy the law of value, therefore, according to the principle of parity of the market economy, those wastes will not be paid by social labor. Therefore, in a market economy, not any labor is useful labor, necessary social labor and therefore is the labor that participates in creating income and becomes the basis of distribution .

K.Marx spoke of the principle of distribution according to labor, referring to an economic society, that is, a society of scarcity, not yet communist, that is, a post-economic society. In an economic society, a society in which labor is a source of wealth creation and it creates wealth while it takes the form of two-sided labor, labor that produces goods and labor that creates value. He wrote: “ The society we are talking about here is not a communist society that has developed on its own basis, but a communist society that has just emerged from a capitalist society, and therefore is a society in all aspects - economic, moral, spiritual - that still bears the traces of the old society from which it emerged” [45,477] . The socialist society that K. Marx is talking about here is the socialist society whose “traces” of the old socialist society are the market economy, and therefore is the socialist society with the principles of “equal rights” or “bourgeois rights”, which are essentially the equal rights of the market economic system. It can be said that the “communist socialist society” that has not “developed on its foundations” is the communist socialist society whose foundation is still the market economy.

It is noteworthy that when the proletariat under the leadership of the Communist Party won power in the Soviet Union and former socialist countries,

If we build socialism, then in fact that socialism is socialism with a public economy, direct socialization, in kind, non-market.

This socialism is called Soviet real socialism with a planning, subsidy, bureaucratic (state) mechanism. Of course, a material economy, a direct socialized economy, a non-market economy, the category of distribution according to labor is the fundamental economic category. But direct socialized labor has no market, so it has no common and uniform form, so it is impossible to measure and determine the labor cost in terms of quantity and quality, so distribution according to labor

distribution according to labor becomes vague. Therefore, distribution according to labor is only nominal, in the sense that there is specific labor participation, while the necessary social labor expenditure cannot be measured and determined, so distribution according to labor is a way of distribution without real basis. In the end, such distribution according to labor is actually “unequal” distribution, and at the same time, in reality, distribution according to labor

Such a dynamic leads to egalitarian and equal distribution. The unequal and egalitarian nature of distribution in the real socialist model based on the principle of distribution according to labor destroys economic motivation and puts the real socialist regime in a state of stagnation, rigidity, and unadjustability, and eventually, collapses.

The collapse of Soviet realist socialism, one of the causes is distribution according to labor which is essentially an average distribution, high and equal, not equal. This is what caused realist socialism to be in crisis and socialist countries in different ways to switch to market economy. Now, after the collapse of Soviet realist socialism and the switch to market economy, we have the conditions to understand the economic essence of the principle of distribution according to labor and communism has not yet developed on its basis. That is communism at a low stage of development when its basis is the market economy with distribution "limited within the framework of the bourgeoisie", or within the framework of the market economy. Within the framework of the market economy, labor costs take the form of value and

measured, as well as implemented through the market mechanism, so distribution according to labor is not direct labor, but socially necessary labor and the distribution mechanism is the market mechanism .

Second , in the framework of “bourgeois rights” or the framework of the market economy, those who participate in labor are those whose labor capacity is not equal, therefore, “the right to distribution is an unequal right like any other right”. Moreover, here, considering distribution to individuals is considering individuals as “economic people”, which here are workers. People with individual characteristics are not only workers. Labor only includes direct workers, but therefore income according to labor is for the direct workers themselves.

However, for each direct worker there are differences in different social relations, therefore, in terms of social relations, those who have relations with the direct workers are different, or in common parlance, those who "live off" are different, so that, distribution, even if distributed according to labor, in the end the final income is not equal, one person earns more, therefore is richer than the other, and vice versa. Therefore, K. Marx had to confirm: "To avoid all these shortcomings, the right to speak properly must be unequal, not equal". But

That is to say within the framework of people who have the capacity to work, and therefore have income, that is, to consider income distribution as an economic category. But people and their lives do not only take place within the framework of the economic category. Indeed, in the population structure, people have the capacity to work, and therefore have the ability to work.

The labor force has not reached 50%, the rest are children, under working age; the elderly, over working age and the disabled, sick, and those with little ability to work. If the principle of distribution according to labor is applied to the whole society, then nearly 50% of the population will be placed outside the distribution framework, and the principle of distribution according to labor declaring "no work, no reward", "no work, no food" is it reasonable. Therefore, K. Marx pointed out in the income distribution structure: "before distributing to individuals, it must also be deducted.

First , the general management costs, which do not directly belong to production. Compared with the current society, this part will immediately be greatly reduced, and the more society develops, the more this part will decrease.

Second , funds used to jointly meet needs such as schools, health facilities, etc.

This part immediately increased quite a lot compared to the current xX society, and the more the new xX society developed, the more that part increased.

Third , the funds necessary to support the disabled, etc., in short, those things which belong to what is today called state social relief.

Moreover, not everyone who has the ability to work can work to earn income. Unemployment and joblessness are not the fault of the workers. As modern economics has shown, employment, wages and prices are closely related to each other and are determined by the market as well as macroeconomic relations, or are outside the scope of business of the enterprise. During recessions, employment decreases and unemployment increases. If only labor is distributed, how will workers overcome unemployment?

Thus, distribution according to labor is only a content, a principle of distribution for individuals, not the only principle of distribution. Distributions outside of labor as K.Marx mentioned above are associated with human development, associated with social welfare. In today's modern society, economic development, on the one hand, provides the foundations for a harmonious distribution, improving welfare and aiming at human development, but on the other hand, development finds new motivations and resources in such a distribution method. Distribution aimed at human development, improving welfare is a characteristic of modern development, which K.Marx predicted 130 years ago. In the period of free market economy, capitalism is very effective, at higher profit levels, but also more ruthless. It is a system in which those who do not work do not work.

to eat. Without food stamps and unemployment insurance, parents and children had to sell their labor for a dime—working from dawn to dusk for a loaf of bread, walking miles a day for a

cheap wages. Wages fell during the 19th century depression because of the

A family without a job can hardly survive.

Therefore, income distribution to determine wages, land rents and profits is decided by economic laws, not by political power and human ethics, but it aims at economic, social and human development, so improving welfare and economic and social stability is an inevitable part of income distribution in a market economy, a developed social economy.

V. Lenin .

- In terms of economics, his central idea in transforming an agricultural economy to socialism was electrification and the use of the new economic policy. In essence, the new economic policy was through the market economy and state capitalism.

to move towards socialism. According to him, it is impossible to abolish the commodity economy, abolish the commodity-money relationship and the commodity-money relationship is the basis for implementing the distribution of personal income.

- He believed that developing a commodity economy was the central issue of the Soviet Government, because it was the “link” in the chain of historical transitions to socialism. If it grasped this link, the Soviet Government would grasp

The entire chain of economic transformation - socialism to socialism.

- He believes that in the economy, state-owned enterprises must also apply economic accounting to collect profits.

Implementing commodity economy as a stage in the transition to socialism, Lenin emphasized personal interests as the driving force of production.

At the same time, we must overcome the egalitarian tendency in distribution.

1.4. China's experience in implementing distribution in enterprises.

1.4.1. Reforming business methods and adjusting distribution relations between enterprises and the state.

Previously, in the planned and subsidized economic model, the business method of enterprises was basically a single form of "state-owned, state-owned"; following the administrative management system, using administrative orders to directly manage and do business. This rigid business method in production made enterprises lack the powers that, as an economic entity,

independence is necessary, lacking the motivation and vitality to self-reform and self-develop. In distribution, there is a situation of "enterprises eating the big rice pot of the state; cadres, workers and employees eating the big rice pot of the enterprise". Through practice, this unified and mechanical business method has clearly shown its limitations and bad consequences. Since the Third Conference of the 9th Party Central Committee, the Communist Party of China has resolutely and cautiously led the whole Party and the whole people to explore and experiment with the reality of the reform, especially the "Decision of the Central Committee"

The Central Committee of the Communist Party of China on Economic Institutional Reform pointed out: Socialism with Chinese characteristics must first of all be a socialism in which enterprises have full vitality. Therefore, after strengthening the vitality of state-owned enterprises, which is the central link of the entire economic institutional reform, many enterprises reformed their existing business forms, creating many business forms such as the contract system, the leasing system, the

The level of shares, etc., breaks the unified distribution relationship, the subsidized revenue and expenditure between the state and enterprises, and creates a new distribution relationship.

The responsibility contracting system is to establish the relationship of responsibility and interests between the state and enterprises in the form of a contract, so that enterprises can implement a new business method and conduct business autonomously. In the current practice of economic institutional reform in China, many forms of "two contracts and one connection" contracting have appeared, with the contract gradually increasing the profit paid on top.

The profit quota of low-profit enterprises is fixed, the loss reduction (or subsidy) is fixed for loss-making enterprises, etc. Through the contract, the profit distribution ratio between enterprises and the state is determined. The state's income is expanded to a certain extent under the premise of "guaranteeing payment to the top", while the income of enterprises in unstable conditions is capable of expanding fully, which

The contract within the enterprise makes the authority and responsibility, makes the staff and workers link production and business with their own interests, highly motivates their positivity.

However, in the process of implementing the contracting system, because the profits that enterprises are allocated are a variable amount, and at the same time, because of the different asset situations that enterprises occupy and the restraint of the overall market, the state has no way to implement a unified profit sharing level, leading to bargaining on the basis of the contracted amount of enterprises with the state, easily leading to a situation where enterprises compare the rates they enjoy, without trying to improve their business level, they write off business losses that should be erased but do not report them, inventories that should be handled but do not handle them, equipment and machinery that should be renewed or eliminated are put aside, as a result, the problems accumulated by short-term business increase day by day, and many contracting enterprises shoulder burdens beyond their capabilities. Therefore, the contracting system as a form of transitional business needs to be urgently improved, especially the relationship in terms of benefit distribution between enterprises and the state must also be urgently cleared.

In recent years, the business of leasing enterprises as a form of business " two separate rights ", from the circulation sector to the production sector, from small enterprises to medium enterprises. This leasing business is a type of business in which the parent industry and the financial industry

authorized by the state, as a representative of the owner of state assets, to transfer the business rights of the enterprise to the lessee. The distribution of the interests of the enterprise in the leasing business must first be handled properly.