Suchergebnisse

The article shows social indicators of the level of socio-economic inequality prevailing in Russia in recent decades; specific poverty lines and categories of the poor in Russian society are revealed; the regional nature of poverty is highlighted. It is concluded that the main causes of Russian poverty lie in the organization of the economic sphere of society and the activities of political institutions.

Статья посвящена исследованию причин, сущности и социальных последствий социально-экономического неравенства в современном мире. На основе экономико-социологического подхода автор исследует эволюцию данного феномена с начала реализации неолиберальных реформ до настоящего времени. В статье доказывается, что ключевой причиной усиления поляризации доходов и богатства в последние десятилетия стали коренные трансформации сферы труда и занятости, а также иные экономические и политические меры, реализуемые в рамках внедрения принципов неолиберализма в хозяйственную практику. Снижение доли трудовых доходов в национальном доходе, размывание связи между ростом производительности труда и заработной платы, демонтаж государства благосостояния и ослабление профсоюзов являются результатом неолиберализации глобальной экономической системы и ключевыми причинами дифференциации доходов и богатства и расширения неравенства в сфере труда.Особое внимание в статье отведено исследованию неравенства в условиях пандемии COVID-19 и текущего корона-кризиса. Автор приходит к заключению, что рост неравенства и иных социальных проблем в результате пандемии определялся преимущественно социально-экономической политикой государств допандемийного периода. Пандемия COVID-19 выступила социальным рентгеном, обнажившим народонаселению мира реальное состояние современных общественных институтов. ; The article is devoted to the study of the causes, essence and social consequences of socio-economic inequality in the modern world. On the basis of an economic-sociological approach, the author investigates the evolution of this phenomenon from the beginning of the implementation of neoliberal reforms to the present. The article proves that the key reason for the intensification of the polarization of income and wealth in recent decades has been the fundamental transformations of the sphere of labor and employment, as well as other economic and political measures implemented within the framework of introducing the principles of neoliberalism into economic practice. The declining share of the labor income within the national income, the blurring of the link between productivity and wage growth, the dismantling of the welfare state and weakening trade unions are the result of the neoliberalization of the global economic system and key drivers of income and wealth differentiation and our modernity of labor inequality.The article focuses on the study of inequality in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic and the current COVID-crisis. The author comes to the conclusion that the growth of inequality and other social problems as a result of the pandemic was determined mainly by the socio-economic policies of the states of the pre-pandemic period. The COVID-19 pandemic acted as a social x-ray that revealed to the worlds population the real state of modern social institutions.

Long-term trends of inequality in leading countries of the world have been analysed. Country features of economic inequality development related to the socio-economic structure of the country and social mentality, which have a significant impact on the adjustment of the financial mechanism of redistribution of income and wealth, have been identified. The current income tax rates of 42 countries, including social insurance payments have been analysed. As a result, it has been concluded that Russia is one of the few countries with a lack ofprogressive income taxation system and very low tax rates. If our society really wants to create a strong economy similar to the European Union, China or the USA, then the first step, to introduce a progressive system of income taxation, planned in 2021 should be the basis for further accelerated implementation of an effective system of progressive taxation of income, wealth and inheritance in Russia. ; Проанализированы долгосрочные тренды изменения неравенства в ведущих странах мира. Выявлены страновые особенности развития экономического неравенства, связанные с социоэкономическим укладом страны и общественным менталитетом, и оказывающими существенное влияние на настройку финансового механизма перераспределения доходов и богатства. Проанализированы действующие налоговые ставки на доходы 42 стран, включая страховые взносы в социальные фонды. В результате получен вывод, что Россия является одной из немногих стран с отсутствующей системой прогрессивного налогообложения доходов и очень низкими налоговыми ставками. Если наше общество действительно хочет создать сильную экономику по аналогу Европейского союза, Китая или США, то первый шаг по введению прогрессивной системы налогообложения доходов, планируемый в 2021 г., должен стать основой для дальнейшего ускоренного внедрения эффективной системы прогрессивного налогообложения доходов, богатства и наследства в России.

The author examines long-term changes in economic inequality in the global economy. The aim of the article is to update, analyze and systematize the long-term causes of changes in economic inequality in the global economy and identify its country specifics. The author used the methods of analysis and synthesis, systematization, classification and categorization of information from various scientific and statistical sources and databases. To illustrate the trends in economic inequality, the author applied the indicator of the share of national income among different groups of the population. The study revealed the cyclical nature of economic inequality in accordance with Kondratieff innovation waves lasting 50-60 years. Based on the data analysis of economic inequality for the period 1900-2018, the author concluded that technological progress is the priority factor in changing economic inequality. Together with the country specifics of the financial mechanism for redistributing income and wealth and various regimes of international cooperation and trade, it affects the changes in cross-country and domestic economic inequality. Understanding the nature of changes in inequality will allow for effective long-term strategies for economic development and the corresponding state regulation policy in the context of faster digitalization and robotization of the global economy. ; Автор исследует долгосрочные изменения экономического неравенства в мировой экономике. Цель работы — актуализация, анализ и систематизация долгосрочных причин изменения экономического неравенства в мировой экономике и выявление страновых особенностей его развития. Использованы методы: анализа и синтеза, систематизации, классификации и категоризации информации из различных научных и статистических источников и баз данных. Для иллюстрации трендов изменения экономического неравенства автор использует показатель доли национального дохода у различных групп населения. В результате исследования выявлена циклическая природа развития экономического неравенства в соответствии с инновационными волнами Кондратьева продолжительностью 50-60 лет. На основании анализа данных об экономическом неравенстве за период 1900-2018 г. сделан вывод, что приоритетным фактором изменения экономического неравенства является технологический прогресс, который в комплексе со страновыми особенностями финансового механизма перераспределения доходов и богатства и различными режимами международной кооперации и торговли оказывает влияние на изменение межстранового и внутристранового экономического неравенства. Понимание природы изменения неравенства позволит разрабатывать эффективные долгосрочные стратегии экономического развития и проводить соответствующую им государственную политику регулирования в условиях ускорения цифровизации и роботизации мировой экономики.

The article is devoted to the analysis of contemporary problems and peculiarities of regulating socio-economic inequality during the crisis and describes the financial crises' impact mechanism on the state financial regulation evolution of economic inequality.In times of economic crises developed countries make unconditional distributions of money transfers to households to stimulate demand. New liquidity is distributed across the world economy, launching inflationary processes against the backdrop of significant problems with the supply of raw materials and materials due to the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. Public interest to the problem of growing socio-economic inequality is increasing along with the rise in the number of dollar millionaires and the financial assets prices. In many ways, this phenomenon is associated with the financial regulation specifics of the economy during times of crises.As a result of the study, the specifics and paradoxes of modern state financial regulation of economic inequality during times of crises have been substantiated, recommendations for state financial regulation of socio-economic inequality during the crisis have been formulated. Regulators should pay particular attention to the top 10 % of the population, for whom there are now many opportunities for tax optimisation and avoidance, with the result that even theoretically effective progressive tax systems do not work properly in practice. Developed countries should promote international tax cooperation to solve this problem, and developing countries should focus on improving their progressive tax systems. ; Cтатья посвящена анализу современных проблем и особенностей регулирования социально-экономического неравенства в условиях кризиса, описан механизм влияния финансовых кризисов на эволюцию государственного финансового регулирования экономического неравенства.В периоды экономических кризисов в развитых странах проводятся безусловные раздачи денег домохозяйствам для стимулирования спроса. Новая ликвидность распределяется по мировой экономике, запуская инфляционные процессы на фоне существенных проблем с предложением сырья и материалов, обусловленных последствиями пандемии COVID-19. Общественный интерес к проблеме роста социально-экономического неравенства возрастает вместе с ростом количества долларовых миллионеров и ценами на финансовые активы. Во многом это явление связано со спецификой финансового регулирования экономики в периоды кризисов.В результате исследования обоснованы специфика и парадоксы современного государственного финансового регулирования экономического неравенства в периоды кризисов; сформулированы рекомендации по государственному финансовому регулированию экономического неравенства в условиях кризиса. Особое внимание регуляторам следует уделить группе верхних 10 % населения, для которых сегодня существует множество возможностей по оптимизации и избеганию налогов, в результате чего даже теоретически эффективные прогрессивные налоговые системы не работают на практике как следует. Развитым странам следует развивать международное сотрудничество в налоговой сфере для решения этой проблемы, а развивающимся странам – сфокусироваться на совершенствовании прогрессивной системы налогообложения.

One of the most dangerous risks of growing socio-economic inequality is the ability of the latter to that it can transform into political inequality, initiate the creation of extractive economic institutions and lead to the degradation of the country's development. The article provides a critical analysis of the modern classification of instruments of economic inequality regulation presented at the Peterson Institute conference in 2019. Based on this concept, an expanded and more universal classification of methods and tools is proposed, and the most relevant ones are discussed taking into account modern realities. In conclusion, we gave recommendations for the Governments of developed and developing countries concerning the priorities in choice of methods and instruments of socio-economic inequality regulation in order to avoid an increase in excessive economic inequality and subsequent socio-economic problems. ; Одним из опаснейших рисков роста социально-экономического неравенства является способность последнего трансформироваться в политическое неравенство, инициировать создание экстрактивных экономических институтов и приводить к деградации развития страны. В статье проводится критический анализ современной классификации инструментов государственного регулирования экономического неравенства, представленных на конференции института Петерсона в 2019 г. На основе этой концепции предлагается расширенная и более универсальная классификация методов и инструментов, а также обсуждаются наиболее актуальные из них с учетом современных реалий. В заключении сформулированы рекомендации о том, на какие методы и инструменты в первую очередь стоит опираться правительствам развитых и развивающихся стран для того, чтобы не допустить увеличения избыточного экономического неравенства и следующих за ним проблем социально-экономического характера.

The evolution of the socio-economic systems is a non-linear process and it contains periods with smooth changes and subsequent periods of sharp jump transformation. The general design of new prospects opens at a stage of the birth of evolutionary processes, their forecasting requires the analysis of the historical prerequisites and risks, which are closely integrated to the change of moods in society. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the newly independent states have passed the transformational and evolutional stage of development from the regional economy (they actually were the regions) to the economy of the state; the Central and Eastern European countries have experienced a dramatic "drift" to the European Union. In the article, the results of almost 25 years' transformation of these states are considered. New states, formed as a result of the collapse of the USSR, passed throughout three types of transformation. Firstly, it is the transformation at the ideological level. The transformation of the second type was purely economic. The third type can be characterized as the institutional (including structural and financial) transformation. It is shown that one of the important reasons for the modest economic performance in the post-Soviet space is that newly independent states ignore and do not use in the practice the principles of regional policy and regional modernization. One of the important characteristic of the social and economic evolution of the countries of Eastern Europe after 1990 became the process of stratification and social differentiation of society with an insufficiently strong middle class and the polarization in income levels between the different regions. The increasing polarization in the income levels of the various regions acts as the dominating trend of the growing economic inequality. ; Рассмотрена экономическая эволюция постсоветского пространства. Представлены положительные и отрицательные стороны постсоветского трансформационного периода. Проанализированы региональное развитие и экономическое неравенство регионов в странах с низким уровнем доходов и догоняющим типом развития. Выявлены причины и последствия расширения Европейского союза. ; The research has been supported by the Russian Science Foundation (Research project No 14-28-00065 "Structural and cyclical paradigm of economic and technological renovation of macro-systems (World and Russia in the first half of the XXI century)".

Цель – отразить рост социально-экономического неравенства как фактора деконсолидации общества в депрессивном регионе.Методы исследования – сравнительно-сопоставительный анализ, статистические методы, массовый опрос населения.Результаты – изучены особенности риска развития социальной структуры в регионе; представлены новые материалы, свидетельствующие о нарастании социально-экономического неравенства и социального напряжения в обществе: высокие разрывы в дифференциации доходов, уровне и качестве жизни обеспеченного и бедного населения; обозначены социальные слои, наиболее подверженные современным угрозам; отражены последствия социального неравенства, ведущие к дезинтеграции общества.Выводы – у социума региона имеется определенный запас прочности для выживания, но угроза его деконсолидации постепенно нарастает вследствие низкой эффективности системы управления, отчуждения власти от общества, сокращения «поля деятельности» населения из-за стагнации экономики региона, «бегства капитала» и др. ; The article's aim is a study the aspects of social inequality as a factor of society's consolidation in the depressed region.In the article has been used the statistical method and mass surveys.The main results – features of risk of development of social structure in the region are studied; the new materials demonstrating increase of a social and economic inequality and social tension in society are presented: deep gaps in differentiation of the income, level and quality of life of the rich and poor population; social groups, which are mostly subjected to modern threats, are defined; the consequences of a social inequality, which conduct to disintegration of society are reflected.The main conclusions – the region's society has a certain underlying strength for a survival, but the threat of the society deconsolidation gradually increases as a consequence of the poor effectiveness of the governmental system, the estrangement of the authorities from the society, the reduction of the population "field of activity" because of the economic stagnation in the region, "capital flight" and other reasons.

The article analyzes the long-term impact of democratic institutions on socio-economic and political development of modern society. The author proves that the transitions to democracy in the twentieth century accelerated not only the pace of economic development, but also the processes of social polarization in society. Despite the positive impact of democratic institutions on economic development and political stability, democracy as a form of political rule cannot solve the problem of social inequality. The history of modern democracy shows that it reduces inequality levels only in certain cases, and in most cases social inequality increases both at the national and global levels. ; Анализируется долгосрочное влияние демократических институтов на социально-экономическое и политическое развитие современного общества. Автор доказывает, что переход к демократии в ХХ в. ускорил не только темпы экономического развития, но и процессы социального расслоения общества. Несмотря на положительное влияние демократических институтов на экономическое развитие и политическую стабильность, демократия как форма политического господства неспособна решить проблему социального неравенства. История современной демократии свидетельствует о том, что она только в отдельных случаях снижает уровень социального неравенства, а в большинстве случаев повышает его.

This article examines the specifics of the income inequality structure in modern Russian society, as well as the tendencies for its change during the country's post-Soviet period of development. It is shown that, compared to other countries, the traditional economic indexes which measure income inequality (decile ratio, Gini coefficient) position the Russian Federation as a country with a high degree of inequality within the mass layers of the population, especially when compared to Europe, albeit the level of inequality is slightly lower compared to BRICS member states. When using equivalence scales, which adjust the people's income after factoring in economies of scale in consumption, Russia's inequality figures improve even more. Based on quintile income distribution and the concentration of income within the highest quintile, Russia also occupies an intermediate position, surpassing most European countries, though not BRICS member states. However, the highest quintile is characterized by a high degree of differentiation. When transitioning from the wealthiest 20% of the population to the 1–5%, Russia's place among other countries of the world changes significantly: when it comes to the gap between the "upper crust" and the masses, Russia can be considered one of the leading countries in the world.

It has also been revealed that on the other end of the income distribution spectrum, at the population's lower strata, there has been a noticeable "rise" of low-income groups in the last few years, with them somewhat approaching the middle. It was manifested in a more rapid increase in prosperity among the lower 40% of the population when compared to the population in general, as well as in a noticeable decrease in poverty levels during the 2000's. Those citizens who were left in the lower strata of income distribution created a clearer image of poverty, which differs from the "average Russian" and emphasizes the importance of gauging not only low income level, but also an array of non-monetary inequality dimensions. Such a process of "homogenization" has lead to an increase in the size of groups with median and average income, with them being the most numerous groups in the current structure of Russian society. However, the increase in the number of people in said groups was not only caused by their shifts from low-income groups of the population, but also because of some members from the more prosperous strata experiencing an "averaging" of their level of income as well.

The problem of income inequality is globally relevant, receiving the attention of both scientists and politicians. Lithuania as a small country has made significant progress in approaching the standard of living in Western Europe. However, there are still differences in economic growth between separate population groups. Thus, the problem of income inequality remains very acute. Currently, researchers are widely discussing the risk of income inequality to the country's society by analysing its causes and proposing various solutions. Although scientific debates address income inequality across regions, such studies are often limited to examples of large countries. Meanwhile, there is a lack of studies on regional income inequality in small countries, so the question of whether a small country is characterised by regional income inequality remains open. This research aims to examine the level of regional income inequality in Lithuania. We hypothesised that Lithuania has a high level of regional income inequality and this is one of the causes of the high income inequality in the whole country. To estimate regional income inequality, we used the most common measures: Gini coefficient, decile ratio, and the coefficient of variation. The analysis was performed at level 3 of the Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics (NUTS), according to which Lithuania is divided into 10 administrative counties. For this research, we chose the indicators illustrating income per capita on various levels, i.e., gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, average disposable household income per capita, and gross hourly wages, as the various types of income can be used. For the estimation of GDP per capita and average disposable household income, we analysed the data provided by the Lithuanian Department of Statistics (Statistics Lithuania) for 2014–2017. Due to a lack of data to estimate gross hourly wages, we examined the statistical data from the Lithuanian Department of Statistics for 2014. The results show that the hypothesis has not been confirmed. According to the research results, there is a small distribution of income between different regions of a small economy, although the level of economic development of different regions differs. The study findings are important not only from an academic perspective for identifying the causes of income inequality and raising questions for further research, but also for regional economic policy makers. The obtained results show that decisions related to a more equal distribution of income in Lithuania as a small country are determined not only by the specificity of its regions but also by the general trends of the country.

The problem of income inequality is globally relevant, receiving the attention of both scientists and politicians. Lithuania as a small country has made significant progress in approaching the standard of living in Western Europe. However, there are still differences in economic growth between separate population groups. Thus, the problem of income inequality remains very acute. Currently, researchers are widely discussing the risk of income inequality to the country's society by analysing its causes and proposing various solutions. Although scientific debates address income inequality across regions, such studies are often limited to examples of large countries. Meanwhile, there is a lack of studies on regional income inequality in small countries, so the question of whether a small country is characterised by regional income inequality remains open. This research aims to examine the level of regional income inequality in Lithuania. We hypothesised that Lithuania has a high level of regional income inequality and this is one of the causes of the high income inequality in the whole country. To estimate regional income inequality, we used the most common measures: Gini coefficient, decile ratio, and the coefficient of variation. The analysis was performed at level 3 of the Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics (NUTS), according to which Lithuania is divided into 10 administrative counties. For this research, we chose the indicators illustrating income per capita on various levels, i.e., gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, average disposable household income per capita, and gross hourly wages, as the various types of income can be used. For the estimation of GDP per capita and average disposable household income, we analysed the data provided by the Lithuanian Department of Statistics (Statistics Lithuania) for 2014–2017. Due to a lack of data to estimate gross hourly wages, we examined the statistical data from the Lithuanian Department of Statistics for 2014. The results show that the hypothesis has not been confirmed. According to the research results, there is a small distribution of income between different regions of a small economy, although the level of economic development of different regions differs. The study findings are important not only from an academic perspective for identifying the causes of income inequality and raising questions for further research, but also for regional economic policy makers. The obtained results show that decisions related to a more equal distribution of income in Lithuania as a small country are determined not only by the specificity of its regions but also by the general trends of the country.

The problem of income inequality is globally relevant, receiving the attention of both scientists and politicians. Lithuania as a small country has made significant progress in approaching the standard of living in Western Europe. However, there are still differences in economic growth between separate population groups. Thus, the problem of income inequality remains very acute. Currently, researchers are widely discussing the risk of income inequality to the country's society by analysing its causes and proposing various solutions. Although scientific debates address income inequality across regions, such studies are often limited to examples of large countries. Meanwhile, there is a lack of studies on regional income inequality in small countries, so the question of whether a small country is characterised by regional income inequality remains open. This research aims to examine the level of regional income inequality in Lithuania. We hypothesised that Lithuania has a high level of regional income inequality and this is one of the causes of the high income inequality in the whole country. To estimate regional income inequality, we used the most common measures: Gini coefficient, decile ratio, and the coefficient of variation. The analysis was performed at level 3 of the Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics (NUTS), according to which Lithuania is divided into 10 administrative counties. For this research, we chose the indicators illustrating income per capita on various levels, i.e., gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, average disposable household income per capita, and gross hourly wages, as the various types of income can be used. For the estimation of GDP per capita and average disposable household income, we analysed the data provided by the Lithuanian Department of Statistics (Statistics Lithuania) for 2014–2017. Due to a lack of data to estimate gross hourly wages, we examined the statistical data from the Lithuanian Department of Statistics for 2014. The results show that the hypothesis has not been confirmed. According to the research results, there is a small distribution of income between different regions of a small economy, although the level of economic development of different regions differs. The study findings are important not only from an academic perspective for identifying the causes of income inequality and raising questions for further research, but also for regional economic policy makers. The obtained results show that decisions related to a more equal distribution of income in Lithuania as a small country are determined not only by the specificity of its regions but also by the general trends of the country.

The problem of income inequality is globally relevant, receiving the attention of both scientists and politicians. Lithuania as a small country has made significant progress in approaching the standard of living in Western Europe. However, there are still differences in economic growth between separate population groups. Thus, the problem of income inequality remains very acute. Currently, researchers are widely discussing the risk of income inequality to the country's society by analysing its causes and proposing various solutions. Although scientific debates address income inequality across regions, such studies are often limited to examples of large countries. Meanwhile, there is a lack of studies on regional income inequality in small countries, so the question of whether a small country is characterised by regional income inequality remains open. This research aims to examine the level of regional income inequality in Lithuania. We hypothesised that Lithuania has a high level of regional income inequality and this is one of the causes of the high income inequality in the whole country. To estimate regional income inequality, we used the most common measures: Gini coefficient, decile ratio, and the coefficient of variation. The analysis was performed at level 3 of the Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics (NUTS), according to which Lithuania is divided into 10 administrative counties. For this research, we chose the indicators illustrating income per capita on various levels, i.e., gross domestic product (GDP) per capita, average disposable household income per capita, and gross hourly wages, as the various types of income can be used. For the estimation of GDP per capita and average disposable household income, we analysed the data provided by the Lithuanian Department of Statistics (Statistics Lithuania) for 2014–2017. Due to a lack of data to estimate gross hourly wages, we examined the statistical data from the Lithuanian Department of Statistics for 2014. The results show that the hypothesis has not been confirmed. According to the research results, there is a small distribution of income between different regions of a small economy, although the level of economic development of different regions differs. The study findings are important not only from an academic perspective for identifying the causes of income inequality and raising questions for further research, but also for regional economic policy makers. The obtained results show that decisions related to a more equal distribution of income in Lithuania as a small country are determined not only by the specificity of its regions but also by the general trends of the country.

This article singles out the theoretical and methodological principles involved in the analysis of class inequality in the distribution of incomes, as substantiated and applied by Karl Marx in Capital. In the view of the author, this is indispensable for revealing the reasons behind the excessive deepening of the abyss that exists at present between rich and poor, together with the causes of the growth of social tensions on a world level. The "mainstream" provides only a quantitative (that is, superficial) assessment of inequality by means of the familiar coefficients. This information is of value for analytical purposes, but does not reveal the reasons why inequality is growing worse. The article traces the effects of the economic transformations of the post-Soviet period in destroying Russia's industrial potential and polarising its society. The author reiterates Marx's demonstration of the cause of deepening inequality: the intensification of the exploitation of labour by capital; the growth in the oppressiveness of capital, and the expansion of the boundaries and mass of exploited labour as a result of the thirst for enrichment.