Experts Say The GDP Of Workers' Remuneration Increases Year By Year.

The seventeen session ended a week ago.

There are two core issues in this debate: is the proportion of workers' remuneration to GDP low? Has the income gap between urban and rural areas increased or narrowed?

The proportion of workers' remuneration in GDP is low?

"The so-called low proportion of laborers' remuneration for GDP is actually a misleading fact of statistical caliber and cognitive bias, which is a major misunderstanding in the field of income distribution."

Dong Fureng, director of the academic committee of the economic and scientific development foundation, Professor of Beijing Normal University

It is Wahson's two income distribution report that sparked the debate.

In one of the reports, Wahson reported that the proportion of workers' remuneration to GDP in our country is not as low as recognized by the society, but on the high level.

The result of this report is that farmers' income from farming, forestry, animal husbandry and fishery is excluded from the remuneration of laborers. The result of this adjustment is that although the proportion of China's purely laborers' remuneration has decreased as a share of GDP, according to Wahson, according to the international statistical caliber (household income is not recorded as laborers' remuneration and mixed income), as the net income of China's rural economy has accounted for a continuous decline in GDP, the proportion of Chinese workers' remuneration in GDP has not declined, but on the contrary, it has increased steadily from 40.12% in 1992 to 43.79% in 2007.

The results of the study have just been published, and immediately aroused many queries in the industry.

An anonymous income distribution expert said the conclusion was far from the truth.

He analyzed that one of the reasons for Wahson's conclusion is to eliminate the income from farming, forestry, animal husbandry and fishery in the income of farmers, which is unreasonable in itself.

And from its data statistics, mixed income has not been included in it.

In this regard, Wahson's explanation is that in the international statistical caliber, the proportion of workers' remuneration in GDP does not include mixed income.

"The conclusion based on these data can be said to be larger than the original statistics, and will be a great disturbance to the reform of income distribution."

The experts said.

{page_break}

Is the income gap between urban and rural areas widening or narrowing?

Another controversial conclusion of Wahson is that the income gap between urban and rural residents is not expanding, but narrowing.

Wahson believes that the widening income gap between urban and rural areas is still a misunderstanding based on statistical accuracy.

He believes that the National Bureau of statistics will take migrant workers for more than half a year into the urban resident population. Under the two yuan household registration system in urban and rural areas and the special conditions of more than 200 million migrant workers, it will distort the distribution relationship greatly.

After putting the migrant workers into the rural population for more than half a year, the adjusted urban-rural income gap began to fluctuate from 2.57 times in 1978 to 2.4 times in 2009.

Wahson told our reporter that the income gap between urban and rural areas will be further narrowed in 2010.

Many scholars also find it difficult to agree with the findings.

An expert who has studied the income gap for a long time says that it is not reasonable for the migrant workers to go back to the countryside in the income statistics for more than half a year.

As a matter of fact, the Census Bureau will record the number of migrant workers who live in cities for more than half a year as urban resident population.

In the survey of urban and rural households, the sample has already included households with migrant workers at home, and the income of migrant workers has also been calculated.

According to the expert analysis, about 1/3 of the migrant workers belong to the family relocation. These people should be counted as urban residents according to the principle of residence.

Their economic ties with the countryside have been very low, so they should not be counted on the rural population when calculating the income gap between urban and rural areas.

Despite the sharp questioning, many experts agree with another view of Wahson.

While pointing out the narrowing of the income gap between urban and rural areas, Wahson proposed that the rapid expansion of the property gap between urban and rural residents caused by the real estate bubble is a more serious problem and has become a major obstacle to China's economic development and urbanization pformation.

According to Wahson, the value of the property per capita owned by urban residents was more than 10 times the value of per capita property in rural areas until 2008 when the real estate price rose.

"To solve the problem of property gap between urban and rural areas, it is far from enough to increase only part of the income of the peasants every year. The key is to start with the only potential main property of the farmers, the land, and provide a reliable pformation ladder for the majority of the peasants' citizenization through the pformation of the land system."

Wahson said.